> Only if you consider making it easier to break the law to be solving a problem rather than creating one. The question at hand, raised by Schneier, is if the

> Only if you consider making it easier to break the law to be solving a problem rather than creating one. The question at hand, raised by Schneier, is if the technology has the capability to solve any problems. This seems objectively true: that it has the capacity to help solve the very specific problem of transacting in spite of unjust laws and tyrannical governments. This is a problem we aren't used to having in the West as of late, but certainly it's a common problem for many in history. What you're asking here is if, on net, we ought to consider it a harmful or beneficial technology, to the point where we ought to promote its development or stifle it. That is a separate, more complex question than the one raised of if the technology can solve any real problems.