10 ms·

And this is what bitcoiners and similar don't understand. It's not like your internet connection will remain happy and stable while the rest of the world goes t

And this is what bitcoiners and similar don't understand. It's not like your internet connection will remain happy and stable while the rest of the world goes to hell around us. Telecomms will be a first-class target, and most systems have some pretty central points of failure that would make juicy (and easy) targets. In such a situation, if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time. This doesn't even contemplate the additional issue for bitcoin and its derivatives: the blockchain depends on a consistent, global view of network transactions, and apocalyptic-type network segmentation will cause severe forking in the blockchain, further diminishing the utility and therefore the value of the [already worthless] cryptocoins.

BCM43 14y ago
What would you suggest people put their money in then? Gold? Guns? The problems you describe are problems for just about every currency right now. How much of your money do you have in cash, and how much is in the bank? Do you think you will still be able to use the bank in a situation like the one you describe?
- 3am 14y ago
  Gold and guns would both be much better decisions that Bitcoin in a raging civil war. So would food, and transport to safe haven. Bitcoin would be insane. Even if you had extra money, that's what Swiss bank accounts are for. edit: to be clear, the utilities of these items is relative, think a DAG. gold > bitcoin. food > gold. transport to safe haven > food,guns. Maybe. Medicine > gold, also. Not trying to say anything special about gold, I mostly agree that it has very little use to justify its value.
  - greghinch 14y ago
    I don't get this obsession with gold. Yes it's shiny and has historically represented value and wealth, but people apply it as the unit of currency society will fall back on in times of crisis, like a civil war. If there's fighting and chaos all around and infrastructure is cut off, clean water, food, medicine, and weapons are pretty much all that will hold any value.
    - gwright 14y ago
      Here is one explanation, but perhaps not the one you were looking for: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/02/15/131430755/a-chemist-explains-why-gold-beat-out-lithium-osmium-einsteinium http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/02/15/131430755/a-chemis...
    - jmathai 14y ago
      During a war, perhaps. But once things settle down I think gold will be the go to unit of currency. In a functional society no one wants to pay for their goods with food or water.
      - greghinch 14y ago
        Right but then wouldn't you just go back to standard currency?
        cookiecaper 14y ago
        No, because things can be sufficiently stable that people are no longer in contest over the fundamentals like food and water, but not sufficiently to have a widely-standardized currency. Gold is useful because everyone, everywhere recognizes its value independent of any other entity. This happens simply as a function of gold's rarity and manipulability; if you're looking for a natural resource to stand in as a currency, gold meets the requirements better than other materials. This is so, and will remain so despite any human ongoings.
    - xerula 14y ago
      In absolute life-or-death situations, yes. But as soon as we move even a tiny bit past that point, history shows we seek universally recognized, convenient mediums of exchange. And for every culture that has access to them, precious metals have fulfilled this role since year dot.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - gaussianblur 14y ago
- venomsnake 14y ago
  I will coin two phrases now: 1. Venomsnake's law - every discussion on Hacker's news degrades to bitcoins. 2. Goldilocks apocalypse - every goldbug, bitcoin miner and similar depends on the crash of civilization in just the right way that everything will be the same but his economic decisions will put him on top with the pure strength of speculation. Whatever assets you have the federal government will be able to confiscate if the need is dire enough. Whatever protection the law gives you can be reverted. There is no safety. To be able to claim and hold to a property you rely on massive infrastructure. If the dollar and the federal government crashes - it will vaporize too.
  - gfodor 14y ago
    To be fair, even gold (and as I'm loathe to put in the same category, bitcoin) speculators aren't really relying upon a full-out goldilocks apocalypse for their assets to appreciate, just a continuation of the current trend of currency devaluation of the U.S. dollar. I think you're right that if something really bad happened (read: worse than 2008 or 2001) then the men with guns would take your gold and your bitcoins (though honestly, they probably won't give a shit about the bitcoins) has they've done before and will do again.
  - pyre 14y ago
    Not if you're a subsistence farmer out in the boonies with a bunch of hidden, unregistered guns. :P As for gold though, it takes a long-term view of the apocalypse. In the immediate aftermath, no one will care about gold. Guns, food, etc will all be at a premium. It might take a decade or so for people to care about gold, and even then enough of the population will probably be dead that gold can be had by looting for jewellery that no longer has an owner.
- aaronblohowiak 14y ago
  "put their money in?" are you seeking an instability-hedged value store or trying to maximize the utils for given items? Water and fuel.
- cinquemb 14y ago
  >The problems you describe are problems for just about every currency right now. How much of your money do you have in cash, and how much is in the bank? Do you think you will still be able to use the bank in a situation like the one you describe? I believe cyprus had to find out the hard way as well sans civil war. They had internet, but no access to bank accounts (still very limited to this day). And I doubt the the 25%+ in spain and greece are much better off… Call me a nut but at this point, people who have the means should put their money in things they can live off of sustainably or at least partially (PV's, rain water catch, DIY small greenhouse) because things are not getting any better globally and we seriously can't expect the printing press to get us out of this. Oh yeah, DOW closed above 15000. quelle chance.
- ctdonath 14y ago
  Gold is a good high value density financial medium. Regardless of the objective value, it always has been and always will be in demand. It's best for carrying value from one side of an economic crisis to the other, and taking advantage of some good deals that crop up in the meantime. If anything the high value density makes it hard for anything but large transactions. Guns? Well, ammo really. Guns are plentiful in the USA and are extremely durable. Ammo is more suitable to currency type usage, being handy during the crisis, comes in small units comparable to coins, and the value of each is around a dollar making it convenient for smaller commonplace transactions.
- ericd 14y ago
  Guns, Cigarettes, and Everclear should all be fairly value dense in that scenario. Gold should do well too - the value that people assign to it due to life-long indoctrination plus its immutability as a valuable substance through history should help it do much better in those scenarios than fiat currencies whose backers have obviously disintegrated. Food, water, and fuel would obviously be valuable too, but they're harder to carry a lot of.
- rthomas6 14y ago
  >What would you suggest people put their money in then? Gold? Guns? How about: potable water, non-perishable food, gasoline, batteries, tools (including weapons), and other commodities that will be scarce and have intrinsic value during a crisis?
Lambdanaut 14y ago
1) We're heading closer and closer to a world where none of this bullshit(pardon my Frank) can happen. 2) You think REGULAR currencies have much more value than cryptocurrencies during these types of crises? 3) If Syria hypothetically still has a working "intranet" but not a working "internet", then Bitcoin will continue working just fine for them while they're not connected to the rest of us. After the Syrians re-connect, their branch will be withered, but not dead. Re-merging will be automatic when the Internet returns.
- Jabbles 14y ago
  Re-merging does not work like that. All Syrian transactions will effectively be reversed. That's assuming that they managed to mine anything, with such a small fraction of the usual computing power available.
  - Anderkent 14y ago
    The difficulty level adjusts to the mining power. And only transactions that were double-spent will be reversed, since nodes will re-broadcast transactions from the short chain onto the long chain, and those that weren't double spent will be accepted.
    - eurleif 14y ago
      >The difficulty level adjusts to the mining power. But difficulty adjustments occur every 2016 blocks, not instantly. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#How_often_does_the_difficulty_change.3F https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#How_often_does_the_dif...
    - teraflop 14y ago
      There's another important class of transactions that are reversed: mining outputs. In order to accept a payment from someone while isolated from the network, you have to carefully check that all the coins they're sending you were generated before the split, or else those coins will evaporate at some point in the future.
    - 14y ago
mindslight 14y ago
> the blockchain depends on a consistent, global view of network transactions Actually the chief effect of the continual hashing is robustness against netsplits. By defining the longer-hashed chain as prevailing, global reconciliation is actually possible. All protocol-following parties agree - double spends on the smaller side lose out.
- venomsnake 14y ago
  In a case where the entire country is cut from the internet double spending will be insignificant - the coins cannot transfer out of the country, so it will be minor.
  - mindslight 14y ago
    Transfer the private keys ahead of time, to a program which waits for a significant split and then automatically spends to a new address. Which means that one can't really trust generic spends in the cut-off area.
CamperBob2 14y ago
In such a situation, if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time. Yes, clearly, it's better in all cases to use paper fiat currency dependent on things like a robust, modern, well-defended, and rationally-operated government infrastructure to function as your primary value store.
daniel-cussen 14y ago
You can memorize the keys to a bitcoin account and carry your wealth with you in your head until you get to a place with an internet connection. Better that than diamonds in tubes of toothpaste.
- venomsnake 14y ago
  Go on :) Lets see how long it will take, and how many times you will be able to reproduce it without error. qWoXWwQQQyVF69SkJfGgG/x9ehR8NQmXwDvLxMbh2iALkGe0nd+NiFgvtXseoHn0 mEfjKXDbMMY7wyU8Xv1yNQGYw/V+pnfG/qiw8dirIF5jQOQprS/5YWt2Ts803pzu Y8V+FhMHoKtKozHKemH6THRQ0QbasdlO21+uwk7HGtKZh60NSEre+90I9GNEE8lO Vjq1r5YwdHpe7VZAyAYdJOJCS2wKKh7yJowOBLReyF7nR+hKw4ZAXibmg0/WM6tF tcccKbNPZZDYt9han1SsiCFew/6dUNoa5Qt+Q9wiDrZ9YLqRduULMQcOZhgPqN96 E5C1+TpaWj6w8JSXU016Nd6QWocGMYt/BvvzLwbcyMEAs5LWECsMkWBtjPI4pELJ Ft4MqCEROR5Q0QgcVu4W2ePEUMz2/C7WPziCebvMvHQgvwMpCVw/10dtZrvYsp0m ofOA0HJIsw92yqPd1ZDLzTnvCt4PuBIzWeyx7bWryWfO1fZQFw8IFENoZ7xlDuba yIu1eCceri2dEHAIzlwkMtkWWaXSNN9x9w4pA2MacDHdvyCmeIPmm71TAXskITZz cse3fZb50xhstQaH5IFPw+auSW2Q1KykT/KS8+wjjwclYjnqFshjpmHEdjiRIH5r zvZwvlRQwFw5ssRxuQPWSr216MZN/SUrhGjFV6L4drsoKaPfsCwBSvC0hu+IUYuj GJNNuzxcCYeTjYyELhVXVsDIs7z8m44ZxJ0FTtjQ7dHl4FoTRIb9SceB86ylrNTp Da0MYqHb3UBq0GxGMtTLmTqfel1S7MhaI7LDha9y6F4v/TGwTtfKrcV1EEPRtL2P RaRLnuRrOC4QOqMCryPlBG4P5nusqiN225xuF5fuJCG5pJBGZWML63L2ThlsrvZ7 FZUyza7Zz5wT7FrFPlVGV+mY7p2faZ4BKtwhOIHHCJbUz/22S8jmIQdqedfhkiGb Tz/nYpN6VfJYl/aXAn/Kz1mO0ejLgPkKOcEfamA8mvu8nK0u+weSHkx08ckhuV6n ecNMOdkFWjbz2zpsaAITcz0kuG6Z5A97gMpjCXqinNIuKNlrZHKoWZzBJSlrdRX+ OCyhroVFKS2iL+V/XIqCRmnTIh4D1cCYlo/Q1VdIjsNBcoBB/uUtgNu21X+Mh3Ob wrTnCzjUBZm5Ozo9ZWbvsS5oe23KnWvsdMpwBvddFUJzafPviIm/vQJKzRS2mVvg RpOzlwwl5nfi6Q/dWO45b35O6lvRuwOPnx+v9A29pWm30CWce4XKGxoIsuCCVFfn CHhjRhqjYXAuHJTbUjAOK+1mBB+DhNMmOnkUiGR2DLZJ48lb3+a+JadALZjKdDhU Tdys2E1d8qjBTKkyHY3MV7cILyW623qLrFTtOA4DnXJzZF7zDz/pufFECDOibEkI 8IZRFViimAQHRH4rAmToihh7cQwkY3u7tKd6wl5GxP/R4deY566/8xxMzNz2/wrS PA74sh2yuuRcv9+qeKitpjY1z0B9sYPLzgBpDfCptKoaSdYRXiPXINgKCyaq84p1 o51S6xvGBbbVhe/wYnUfHgOtAWLX50etfBQ7zGe7Yy9NjCpBg/OcFPWgRMxL86un
  - bitcoinMini 14y ago
    how about S6c56bnXQiBjk9mqSYE7ykVQ7NzrRy https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mini_private_key_format https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mini_private_key_format
    - 14y ago
fixxer 14y ago
"And this is what bitcoiners and similar don't understand." Replace "bitcoiners" with "crypto-anarchists" and your argument is more plausible. I like bitcoin, but I have never considered it the answer to a civil war type situation. In those situations, wealth is equivalent to utility (food, gas, water, and yes, guns).
mrb 14y ago
"if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time." Apparently you are unaware of the tools to build offline transactions. Or of the ability to store bitcoins in your head (brain wallet). Want to send bitcoins to someone without Internet? Just communicate to him/her the brain wallet passphrase (http://brainwallet.org http://brainwallet.org). Or sign an offline transaction on your computer, and send him the raw TX (~300 bytes) printed on paper. That's the beauty of Bitcoin! The sender still has options to transmit bitcoins despite being offline. Sure these mechanisms are clunky; communicating a brain wallet passphrase gives access to the whole amount associated to the private key, but I imagine in such dire situations (civil war, no internet) you are more concerned with abilities to for example send money to your son in another country, and you would trust him with the brain wallet. Also, nothing prevents you from splitting different amounts of bitcoins in different brain wallets (eg. 3 wallets containing 10, 50, and 250 BTC). Also, a country under civil war typically destroys the value of their government currency via huge inflation. This is actually a perfect example to demonstrate why Bitcoin is superior to inflated fiat money!
- angersock 14y ago
  I'm going to go with, no. Having easily stockpiled and manipulated hard currency (fiat or no) makes waaay more sense to me than some combination of words or what have you in my brain wallet. I don't think there's been any real demonstration of the use of bitcoins for non-connected transactions--theory does not a practical application make. Better off trading bottle caps or ring tabs.
  - mrb 14y ago
    Yes there are people building real world offline transactions. See the whole API: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions Typically they use this API for offline cold storage wallets.
    - angersock 14y ago
snarfy 14y ago
Currency should never be used as a primary value store. You should minimally hold as much currency as you need to perform the transaction. The only purpose of currency is to facilitate trade.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  That really depends on circumstances. If conditions favor liquidity and portability, and your currency is stable, it's a rational choice as a value store. Your _best_ value store is investments which grow in value. In a well-functioning economy, stocks, other investment vehicles, a business, agricultural or other productive land, etc. Where this isn't the case, your most valuable assets are those which can protect you, support you, and/or get you to where you will be safe. If you've got value left over at this point, a convenient store that's readily convertible at your destination is best. If things aren't horribly bad, a fiat/hard currency (even bitcoin might work), gold, or other items of high but convertible value. One argument in bitcoin's favor (and I'm not generally a fan) is that you can store immense quantities in very small physical space, or (assuming communications) transmit them elsewhere quickly. The main caveat is their utility (and value) once you're outside the trouble zone. Assuming there is an "outside the trouble zone".
knowaveragejoe 14y ago
And like that, a discussion about the Syrian internet blackout devolves into an argument about bitcoin and currency.
noonespecial 14y ago
Bitcoin isn't to defend against the end of the world as we know it, its to defend against the end of your country as you know it. This time when you end up at Ellis Island, you don't just have the shirt on your back.
gambler 14y ago
I never saw anything to suggest that Bitcoin is built to withstand Syria-style collapse of society. (Not to say that we shouldn't try to design our networks to survive that if possible.) It looks more like a way to counterbalance gradual bullshitization of monetary systems of otherwise civilized societies.

BCM43 14y ago

What would you suggest people put their money in then? Gold? Guns? The problems you describe are problems for just about every currency right now. How much of your money do you have in cash, and how much is in the bank? Do you think you will still be able to use the bank in a situation like the one you describe?

3am 14y ago
Gold and guns would both be much better decisions that Bitcoin in a raging civil war. So would food, and transport to safe haven. Bitcoin would be insane. Even if you had extra money, that's what Swiss bank accounts are for. edit: to be clear, the utilities of these items is relative, think a DAG. gold > bitcoin. food > gold. transport to safe haven > food,guns. Maybe. Medicine > gold, also. Not trying to say anything special about gold, I mostly agree that it has very little use to justify its value.
- greghinch 14y ago
  I don't get this obsession with gold. Yes it's shiny and has historically represented value and wealth, but people apply it as the unit of currency society will fall back on in times of crisis, like a civil war. If there's fighting and chaos all around and infrastructure is cut off, clean water, food, medicine, and weapons are pretty much all that will hold any value.
  - gwright 14y ago
    Here is one explanation, but perhaps not the one you were looking for: http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/02/15/131430755/a-chemist-explains-why-gold-beat-out-lithium-osmium-einsteinium http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/02/15/131430755/a-chemis...
  - jmathai 14y ago
    During a war, perhaps. But once things settle down I think gold will be the go to unit of currency. In a functional society no one wants to pay for their goods with food or water.
    - greghinch 14y ago
      Right but then wouldn't you just go back to standard currency?
      - cookiecaper 14y ago
        No, because things can be sufficiently stable that people are no longer in contest over the fundamentals like food and water, but not sufficiently to have a widely-standardized currency. Gold is useful because everyone, everywhere recognizes its value independent of any other entity. This happens simply as a function of gold's rarity and manipulability; if you're looking for a natural resource to stand in as a currency, gold meets the requirements better than other materials. This is so, and will remain so despite any human ongoings.
  - xerula 14y ago
    In absolute life-or-death situations, yes. But as soon as we move even a tiny bit past that point, history shows we seek universally recognized, convenient mediums of exchange. And for every culture that has access to them, precious metals have fulfilled this role since year dot.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - gaussianblur 14y ago
venomsnake 14y ago
I will coin two phrases now: 1. Venomsnake's law - every discussion on Hacker's news degrades to bitcoins. 2. Goldilocks apocalypse - every goldbug, bitcoin miner and similar depends on the crash of civilization in just the right way that everything will be the same but his economic decisions will put him on top with the pure strength of speculation. Whatever assets you have the federal government will be able to confiscate if the need is dire enough. Whatever protection the law gives you can be reverted. There is no safety. To be able to claim and hold to a property you rely on massive infrastructure. If the dollar and the federal government crashes - it will vaporize too.
- gfodor 14y ago
  To be fair, even gold (and as I'm loathe to put in the same category, bitcoin) speculators aren't really relying upon a full-out goldilocks apocalypse for their assets to appreciate, just a continuation of the current trend of currency devaluation of the U.S. dollar. I think you're right that if something really bad happened (read: worse than 2008 or 2001) then the men with guns would take your gold and your bitcoins (though honestly, they probably won't give a shit about the bitcoins) has they've done before and will do again.
- pyre 14y ago
  Not if you're a subsistence farmer out in the boonies with a bunch of hidden, unregistered guns. :P As for gold though, it takes a long-term view of the apocalypse. In the immediate aftermath, no one will care about gold. Guns, food, etc will all be at a premium. It might take a decade or so for people to care about gold, and even then enough of the population will probably be dead that gold can be had by looting for jewellery that no longer has an owner.
aaronblohowiak 14y ago
"put their money in?" are you seeking an instability-hedged value store or trying to maximize the utils for given items? Water and fuel.
cinquemb 14y ago
>The problems you describe are problems for just about every currency right now. How much of your money do you have in cash, and how much is in the bank? Do you think you will still be able to use the bank in a situation like the one you describe? I believe cyprus had to find out the hard way as well sans civil war. They had internet, but no access to bank accounts (still very limited to this day). And I doubt the the 25%+ in spain and greece are much better off… Call me a nut but at this point, people who have the means should put their money in things they can live off of sustainably or at least partially (PV's, rain water catch, DIY small greenhouse) because things are not getting any better globally and we seriously can't expect the printing press to get us out of this. Oh yeah, DOW closed above 15000. quelle chance.
ctdonath 14y ago
Gold is a good high value density financial medium. Regardless of the objective value, it always has been and always will be in demand. It's best for carrying value from one side of an economic crisis to the other, and taking advantage of some good deals that crop up in the meantime. If anything the high value density makes it hard for anything but large transactions. Guns? Well, ammo really. Guns are plentiful in the USA and are extremely durable. Ammo is more suitable to currency type usage, being handy during the crisis, comes in small units comparable to coins, and the value of each is around a dollar making it convenient for smaller commonplace transactions.
ericd 14y ago
Guns, Cigarettes, and Everclear should all be fairly value dense in that scenario. Gold should do well too - the value that people assign to it due to life-long indoctrination plus its immutability as a valuable substance through history should help it do much better in those scenarios than fiat currencies whose backers have obviously disintegrated. Food, water, and fuel would obviously be valuable too, but they're harder to carry a lot of.
rthomas6 14y ago
>What would you suggest people put their money in then? Gold? Guns? How about: potable water, non-perishable food, gasoline, batteries, tools (including weapons), and other commodities that will be scarce and have intrinsic value during a crisis?

Lambdanaut 14y ago

1) We're heading closer and closer to a world where none of this bullshit(pardon my Frank) can happen. 2) You think REGULAR currencies have much more value than cryptocurrencies during these types of crises? 3) If Syria hypothetically still has a working "intranet" but not a working "internet", then Bitcoin will continue working just fine for them while they're not connected to the rest of us. After the Syrians re-connect, their branch will be withered, but not dead. Re-merging will be automatic when the Internet returns.

Jabbles 14y ago
Re-merging does not work like that. All Syrian transactions will effectively be reversed. That's assuming that they managed to mine anything, with such a small fraction of the usual computing power available.
- Anderkent 14y ago
  The difficulty level adjusts to the mining power. And only transactions that were double-spent will be reversed, since nodes will re-broadcast transactions from the short chain onto the long chain, and those that weren't double spent will be accepted.
  - eurleif 14y ago
    >The difficulty level adjusts to the mining power. But difficulty adjustments occur every 2016 blocks, not instantly. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#How_often_does_the_difficulty_change.3F https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty#How_often_does_the_dif...
  - teraflop 14y ago
    There's another important class of transactions that are reversed: mining outputs. In order to accept a payment from someone while isolated from the network, you have to carefully check that all the coins they're sending you were generated before the split, or else those coins will evaporate at some point in the future.
  - 14y ago

mindslight 14y ago

> the blockchain depends on a consistent, global view of network transactions Actually the chief effect of the continual hashing is robustness against netsplits. By defining the longer-hashed chain as prevailing, global reconciliation is actually possible. All protocol-following parties agree - double spends on the smaller side lose out.

venomsnake 14y ago
In a case where the entire country is cut from the internet double spending will be insignificant - the coins cannot transfer out of the country, so it will be minor.
- mindslight 14y ago
  Transfer the private keys ahead of time, to a program which waits for a significant split and then automatically spends to a new address. Which means that one can't really trust generic spends in the cut-off area.

CamperBob2 14y ago

In such a situation, if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time. Yes, clearly, it's better in all cases to use paper fiat currency dependent on things like a robust, modern, well-defended, and rationally-operated government infrastructure to function as your primary value store.

daniel-cussen 14y ago

You can memorize the keys to a bitcoin account and carry your wealth with you in your head until you get to a place with an internet connection. Better that than diamonds in tubes of toothpaste.

venomsnake 14y ago
Go on :) Lets see how long it will take, and how many times you will be able to reproduce it without error. qWoXWwQQQyVF69SkJfGgG/x9ehR8NQmXwDvLxMbh2iALkGe0nd+NiFgvtXseoHn0 mEfjKXDbMMY7wyU8Xv1yNQGYw/V+pnfG/qiw8dirIF5jQOQprS/5YWt2Ts803pzu Y8V+FhMHoKtKozHKemH6THRQ0QbasdlO21+uwk7HGtKZh60NSEre+90I9GNEE8lO Vjq1r5YwdHpe7VZAyAYdJOJCS2wKKh7yJowOBLReyF7nR+hKw4ZAXibmg0/WM6tF tcccKbNPZZDYt9han1SsiCFew/6dUNoa5Qt+Q9wiDrZ9YLqRduULMQcOZhgPqN96 E5C1+TpaWj6w8JSXU016Nd6QWocGMYt/BvvzLwbcyMEAs5LWECsMkWBtjPI4pELJ Ft4MqCEROR5Q0QgcVu4W2ePEUMz2/C7WPziCebvMvHQgvwMpCVw/10dtZrvYsp0m ofOA0HJIsw92yqPd1ZDLzTnvCt4PuBIzWeyx7bWryWfO1fZQFw8IFENoZ7xlDuba yIu1eCceri2dEHAIzlwkMtkWWaXSNN9x9w4pA2MacDHdvyCmeIPmm71TAXskITZz cse3fZb50xhstQaH5IFPw+auSW2Q1KykT/KS8+wjjwclYjnqFshjpmHEdjiRIH5r zvZwvlRQwFw5ssRxuQPWSr216MZN/SUrhGjFV6L4drsoKaPfsCwBSvC0hu+IUYuj GJNNuzxcCYeTjYyELhVXVsDIs7z8m44ZxJ0FTtjQ7dHl4FoTRIb9SceB86ylrNTp Da0MYqHb3UBq0GxGMtTLmTqfel1S7MhaI7LDha9y6F4v/TGwTtfKrcV1EEPRtL2P RaRLnuRrOC4QOqMCryPlBG4P5nusqiN225xuF5fuJCG5pJBGZWML63L2ThlsrvZ7 FZUyza7Zz5wT7FrFPlVGV+mY7p2faZ4BKtwhOIHHCJbUz/22S8jmIQdqedfhkiGb Tz/nYpN6VfJYl/aXAn/Kz1mO0ejLgPkKOcEfamA8mvu8nK0u+weSHkx08ckhuV6n ecNMOdkFWjbz2zpsaAITcz0kuG6Z5A97gMpjCXqinNIuKNlrZHKoWZzBJSlrdRX+ OCyhroVFKS2iL+V/XIqCRmnTIh4D1cCYlo/Q1VdIjsNBcoBB/uUtgNu21X+Mh3Ob wrTnCzjUBZm5Ozo9ZWbvsS5oe23KnWvsdMpwBvddFUJzafPviIm/vQJKzRS2mVvg RpOzlwwl5nfi6Q/dWO45b35O6lvRuwOPnx+v9A29pWm30CWce4XKGxoIsuCCVFfn CHhjRhqjYXAuHJTbUjAOK+1mBB+DhNMmOnkUiGR2DLZJ48lb3+a+JadALZjKdDhU Tdys2E1d8qjBTKkyHY3MV7cILyW623qLrFTtOA4DnXJzZF7zDz/pufFECDOibEkI 8IZRFViimAQHRH4rAmToihh7cQwkY3u7tKd6wl5GxP/R4deY566/8xxMzNz2/wrS PA74sh2yuuRcv9+qeKitpjY1z0B9sYPLzgBpDfCptKoaSdYRXiPXINgKCyaq84p1 o51S6xvGBbbVhe/wYnUfHgOtAWLX50etfBQ7zGe7Yy9NjCpBg/OcFPWgRMxL86un
- bitcoinMini 14y ago
  how about S6c56bnXQiBjk9mqSYE7ykVQ7NzrRy https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mini_private_key_format https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mini_private_key_format
  - 14y ago

fixxer 14y ago

"And this is what bitcoiners and similar don't understand." Replace "bitcoiners" with "crypto-anarchists" and your argument is more plausible. I like bitcoin, but I have never considered it the answer to a civil war type situation. In those situations, wealth is equivalent to utility (food, gas, water, and yes, guns).

mrb 14y ago

"if you've chosen to use an electronic cryptocurrency dependent on things like robust network and electrical infrastructure to function as your primary value store, you're going to have a bad time." Apparently you are unaware of the tools to build offline transactions. Or of the ability to store bitcoins in your head (brain wallet). Want to send bitcoins to someone without Internet? Just communicate to him/her the brain wallet passphrase (http://brainwallet.org http://brainwallet.org). Or sign an offline transaction on your computer, and send him the raw TX (~300 bytes) printed on paper. That's the beauty of Bitcoin! The sender still has options to transmit bitcoins despite being offline. Sure these mechanisms are clunky; communicating a brain wallet passphrase gives access to the whole amount associated to the private key, but I imagine in such dire situations (civil war, no internet) you are more concerned with abilities to for example send money to your son in another country, and you would trust him with the brain wallet. Also, nothing prevents you from splitting different amounts of bitcoins in different brain wallets (eg. 3 wallets containing 10, 50, and 250 BTC). Also, a country under civil war typically destroys the value of their government currency via huge inflation. This is actually a perfect example to demonstrate why Bitcoin is superior to inflated fiat money!

angersock 14y ago
I'm going to go with, no. Having easily stockpiled and manipulated hard currency (fiat or no) makes waaay more sense to me than some combination of words or what have you in my brain wallet. I don't think there's been any real demonstration of the use of bitcoins for non-connected transactions--theory does not a practical application make. Better off trading bottle caps or ring tabs.
- mrb 14y ago
  Yes there are people building real world offline transactions. See the whole API: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Raw_Transactions Typically they use this API for offline cold storage wallets.
  - angersock 14y ago

snarfy 14y ago

Currency should never be used as a primary value store. You should minimally hold as much currency as you need to perform the transaction. The only purpose of currency is to facilitate trade.

dredmorbius 14y ago
That really depends on circumstances. If conditions favor liquidity and portability, and your currency is stable, it's a rational choice as a value store. Your _best_ value store is investments which grow in value. In a well-functioning economy, stocks, other investment vehicles, a business, agricultural or other productive land, etc. Where this isn't the case, your most valuable assets are those which can protect you, support you, and/or get you to where you will be safe. If you've got value left over at this point, a convenient store that's readily convertible at your destination is best. If things aren't horribly bad, a fiat/hard currency (even bitcoin might work), gold, or other items of high but convertible value. One argument in bitcoin's favor (and I'm not generally a fan) is that you can store immense quantities in very small physical space, or (assuming communications) transmit them elsewhere quickly. The main caveat is their utility (and value) once you're outside the trouble zone. Assuming there is an "outside the trouble zone".

knowaveragejoe 14y ago

And like that, a discussion about the Syrian internet blackout devolves into an argument about bitcoin and currency.

noonespecial 14y ago

Bitcoin isn't to defend against the end of the world as we know it, its to defend against the end of your country as you know it. This time when you end up at Ellis Island, you don't just have the shirt on your back.

gambler 14y ago

I never saw anything to suggest that Bitcoin is built to withstand Syria-style collapse of society. (Not to say that we shouldn't try to design our networks to survive that if possible.) It looks more like a way to counterbalance gradual bullshitization of monetary systems of otherwise civilized societies.