3 ms·
Do you forsee any sort of positive impact from destroying the ability to transact online?
by shwouchk 3y ago
Do you forsee any sort of positive impact from destroying the ability to transact online?
- echelon 3y agoIf it's shown to be fundamentally unsound, then we shouldn't be doing it. Society will adapt, as it always does. For some time, I'm sure state actors will derive incredible utility from limited access to the tools.
- shwouchk 3y agoLet’s apply that same argument to global thermonuclear war.
- echelon 3y agoWithout a global government or geopolitically stable world, there's no way to unwind it. All countries have different resources and needs and views, so nobody will disarm. Only MAD. I'd like to double down on my previous statement: if cryptography becomes impossible due to some fundamental property of the universe, then there's nothing to be done. We're where we are today because of a fluke, and that's it. Once the dam bursts, it's over. Maybe that happens, maybe that doesn't. Maybe there's something else we can base our secrets on.
- shwouchk 3y agoNot sure I follow your point re global government, so I’ll return to your double down. If there’s a fundamental property of the universe that disallows public cryptography then it’s a fact of life. What baffles me is someone’s desire to reach that state sooner rather later, given how much current global civilization depends on it. In the same vein, global warming is a fact of life since in a few million years the sun will engulf the earth. Yet I’ve yet to hear a sentiment describing it as a desirable state of affairs, because “the free energy alone would be worth its weight in gold”.
- skywhopper 3y agoSometimes, emergency adaptation does not go particularly well for the individuals involved.
- n4r9 3y agoI can see a positive impact in doing so publicly and in advance of malicious or government actors doing it in secret.