4 ms·

What's the vector you think a super power would use to kill it?

smallmancontrov 3y ago
1. Just ban it. Kick it off the app stores, prevent financial services companies from dealing with it, and maybe make an example of a renegade bitcoin ATM company to stop nerds like us from getting ideas. 2. Attack the blockchain itself. It can stand bozo-scale hacks, but NSA scale? They control the internet backbone. They can just drop the packets. They have hardware backdoors all over the place and have been known to successfully hack completely airgapped setups. Maybe they even bring clever math/chips to the fight. That's more speculative than necessary, but again, not actually very speculative next to their historical accomplishments. 3. Deploy police to server room. Or special ops, if they played the non-extradition-country game correctly. We aren't talking about Goldfinger levels of infrastructure. No secret island nuclear program is necessary... but even if it were, remember that superpowers are absolutely capable of that sort of thing.
- crq-yml 3y ago
  What's actually happened in practice: A huge number of politicians became entangled in SBF's operation, and the direct attacks made to date could be construed as attempts to get in at lower prices or control local onramps. Government officials that seek crypto bans end up with conflicts of interest. This is a recurring theme across the various countries that have announced such things. They don't deploy the secret taxpayer dollars to combat it, because they quickly get an angry phone call from a so-and-so on the inside. The superpower system works within an imaginary of imperial expansion, where everyone's motives converge on putting more assets on their balance sheet even if it means lying about how the books got that way. During the rise of the modern nations that meant supporting a stronger state and a bigger bureaucracy. If we define the quality of the accounting at scale as the goal, then blockchains are just a next progression in technology. That's still compatible with governance and power-seeking, it just changes the landscape of power in a way that shifts around the motives. The number of middlemen involved isn't zero, it doesn't stop corrupt dealing, but it has some substance, particularly in the largest scale of international finance, where you really can't "look to an authority".
  - smallmancontrov 3y ago
    Remember how people thought WWI couldn't possibly happen because the powerful people were incentivized through their business dealings to keep the peace? It's all fun and games until it becomes an actual threat, and unfortunately we have a pretty good idea from history about how commodity money can turn into a threat.
- cupcakecommons 3y ago
  I agree that bitcoin is definitely in trouble if there's a powerful totalitarian world government that can unilaterally hack anything, stop any internet service via backdoors and packet manipulation, potentially break double SHA-256 encryption and send invincible commandos into any location without any kind of repercussions.
  - smallmancontrov 3y ago
    The US has done most of the things you are laughing off, lol. It's not common for a superpower to deploy its strength. Most of the time you would be right to laugh off the suggestion that it would. Most issues are pretty minor on this scale and internet tough guy rhetoric tends to overestimate the importance of every stupid thing. However, the BTC maximalist scenario is not minor on this scale. It's up there with oil. If it comes for the USD, there will be a fight. I would bet on BTC today (and have). I would not bet on it to win this fight.
    - cupcakecommons 3y ago
      What about my post suggests I'm laughing anything off? I'm agreeing with you.
ChainOfFools 3y ago
"See that mining farm over there? it's officially outside the protection of our police force. Come have at it, anyone who wishes to douse it with a few jerry cans of gss or ram it with an excavator, it's fine with us." There, done. The blockchain is secured by proof of work, but proof of work is secured by proof of lead.

1. Just ban it. Kick it off the app stores, prevent financial services companies from dealing with it, and maybe make an example of a renegade bitcoin ATM company to stop nerds like us from getting ideas. 2. Attack the blockchain itself. It can stand bozo-scale hacks, but NSA scale? They control the internet backbone. They can just drop the packets. They have hardware backdoors all over the place and have been known to successfully hack completely airgapped setups. Maybe they even bring clever math/chips to the fight. That's more speculative than necessary, but again, not actually very speculative next to their historical accomplishments. 3. Deploy police to server room. Or special ops, if they played the non-extradition-country game correctly. We aren't talking about Goldfinger levels of infrastructure. No secret island nuclear program is necessary... but even if it were, remember that superpowers are absolutely capable of that sort of thing.

crq-yml 3y ago
What's actually happened in practice: A huge number of politicians became entangled in SBF's operation, and the direct attacks made to date could be construed as attempts to get in at lower prices or control local onramps. Government officials that seek crypto bans end up with conflicts of interest. This is a recurring theme across the various countries that have announced such things. They don't deploy the secret taxpayer dollars to combat it, because they quickly get an angry phone call from a so-and-so on the inside. The superpower system works within an imaginary of imperial expansion, where everyone's motives converge on putting more assets on their balance sheet even if it means lying about how the books got that way. During the rise of the modern nations that meant supporting a stronger state and a bigger bureaucracy. If we define the quality of the accounting at scale as the goal, then blockchains are just a next progression in technology. That's still compatible with governance and power-seeking, it just changes the landscape of power in a way that shifts around the motives. The number of middlemen involved isn't zero, it doesn't stop corrupt dealing, but it has some substance, particularly in the largest scale of international finance, where you really can't "look to an authority".
- smallmancontrov 3y ago
  Remember how people thought WWI couldn't possibly happen because the powerful people were incentivized through their business dealings to keep the peace? It's all fun and games until it becomes an actual threat, and unfortunately we have a pretty good idea from history about how commodity money can turn into a threat.
cupcakecommons 3y ago
I agree that bitcoin is definitely in trouble if there's a powerful totalitarian world government that can unilaterally hack anything, stop any internet service via backdoors and packet manipulation, potentially break double SHA-256 encryption and send invincible commandos into any location without any kind of repercussions.
- smallmancontrov 3y ago
  The US has done most of the things you are laughing off, lol. It's not common for a superpower to deploy its strength. Most of the time you would be right to laugh off the suggestion that it would. Most issues are pretty minor on this scale and internet tough guy rhetoric tends to overestimate the importance of every stupid thing. However, the BTC maximalist scenario is not minor on this scale. It's up there with oil. If it comes for the USD, there will be a fight. I would bet on BTC today (and have). I would not bet on it to win this fight.
  - cupcakecommons 3y ago
    What about my post suggests I'm laughing anything off? I'm agreeing with you.

ChainOfFools 3y ago

"See that mining farm over there? it's officially outside the protection of our police force. Come have at it, anyone who wishes to douse it with a few jerry cans of gss or ram it with an excavator, it's fine with us." There, done. The blockchain is secured by proof of work, but proof of work is secured by proof of lead.