3 ms·

I don't have a strong cryptocurrency opinion, but "we should have a better way to move money" vs. "we should have a totally different money system that's differ

I don't have a strong cryptocurrency opinion, but "we should have a better way to move money" vs. "we should have a totally different money system that's different in every way" is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. We can have "better credit cards". Most countries do. Bitcoin at present has a massive theft rate. Clearly it alone doesn't solve that problem at all.

stcredzero 13y ago
The bitcoin protocol isn't in question. It's the exchanges and the security of user computers that is the problem. Likewise, one could say that it's security of these institutions and user computer security that's the problem with credit cards.
- ketralnis 13y ago
  AES maths isn't in question either but a viable sidechannel still makes a broken system that happens to use AES a bad system. I don't care if the Bitcoin protocol is in question, I care if all of my money is stolen. Still, I'm not saying that Bitcoin sucks and I disclaimed that I don't care one way or the other about Bitcoin up-front specifically to preclude predictable knee-jerk defensive replies like this. My claim is that "Bitcoin will solve this problem!" in response to every article about money is bullshit because we have Bitcoin and it still has problems, like a massive theft problem. It's a problem of bad implementations, whether cloned credit cards or stolen wallet files. And Bitcoin doesn't keep me from writing bad implementations. In fact it may make it worse: financial companies that move dollars have a high startup cost because of the regulatory work. Because it can no longer be two guys in a garage, it becomes more likely that the chain of people that they have to hire and speak to has at least one competent member. Clearly not guaranteed though, you'd think that the DMV would have the resources to become competent if they wanted to.
  - stcredzero 13y ago
    I disclaimed that I don't care one way or the other about Bitcoin up-front specifically to preclude predictable knee-jerk defensive replies like this. Uh, yeah. I'm not a knee-jerk defender of Bitcoin, and my statement is not a defense of Bitcoin so much as a balanced evaluation of the weaknesses of all sorts of payment systems.
- grey-area 13y ago
  Bitcoin relies on unique and stealable tokens to represent wealth. Digital cash does not. Bitcoin is actually worse in terms of security for the end user than the centralised systems we have now - with banks keeping ledgers of who paid what, who owns what, in charge of security and paying insurance etc. if money is stolen from banks, it is their responsibility to make it good, if they can't, the state steps in. Contrast that with the many bitcoin exchanges going bust. Ordinary people are not good at security (physical or digital), so keeping hoards of intrinsically valuable stuff at home without paying insurance is a terrible idea, and I'd argue that keeping hoards of intrinsically valuable stuff anywhere is a bad idea, and digital currencies have moved on from there. Bitcoin is still trying to be a digital analogue to paper cash, so even if the protocol is not broken, the premise is.
  - stcredzero 13y ago
    Bitcoin is still trying to be a digital analogue to paper cash, so even if the protocol is not broken, the premise is. Just the fact that it's digital puts Bitcoin into another realm entirely. I can make a bitcoin hoard so secure that only rubber hose interrogation will allow another access to it. It's also true that it would require concerted effort, or that I could do this improperly, or that I may already be subject to surveillance. It used to be that ordinary people were hopelessly clueless about automobiles, up to the point that people hung bulbs of garlic under the hoods of their Ford Model T's to "fix" them. Now, while not everyone is an expert mechanic, there's all sorts of automotive knowledge floating around the culture. Unfortunately, the sad truth is that we don't yet have the proper security infrastructure for even very knowledgeable people to be safe without constant, concerted effort. Expecting general security knowledge in today's world is like expecting widespread literacy in the days before the printing press.

stcredzero 13y ago

The bitcoin protocol isn't in question. It's the exchanges and the security of user computers that is the problem. Likewise, one could say that it's security of these institutions and user computer security that's the problem with credit cards.

ketralnis 13y ago
AES maths isn't in question either but a viable sidechannel still makes a broken system that happens to use AES a bad system. I don't care if the Bitcoin protocol is in question, I care if all of my money is stolen. Still, I'm not saying that Bitcoin sucks and I disclaimed that I don't care one way or the other about Bitcoin up-front specifically to preclude predictable knee-jerk defensive replies like this. My claim is that "Bitcoin will solve this problem!" in response to every article about money is bullshit because we have Bitcoin and it still has problems, like a massive theft problem. It's a problem of bad implementations, whether cloned credit cards or stolen wallet files. And Bitcoin doesn't keep me from writing bad implementations. In fact it may make it worse: financial companies that move dollars have a high startup cost because of the regulatory work. Because it can no longer be two guys in a garage, it becomes more likely that the chain of people that they have to hire and speak to has at least one competent member. Clearly not guaranteed though, you'd think that the DMV would have the resources to become competent if they wanted to.
- stcredzero 13y ago
  I disclaimed that I don't care one way or the other about Bitcoin up-front specifically to preclude predictable knee-jerk defensive replies like this. Uh, yeah. I'm not a knee-jerk defender of Bitcoin, and my statement is not a defense of Bitcoin so much as a balanced evaluation of the weaknesses of all sorts of payment systems.
grey-area 13y ago
Bitcoin relies on unique and stealable tokens to represent wealth. Digital cash does not. Bitcoin is actually worse in terms of security for the end user than the centralised systems we have now - with banks keeping ledgers of who paid what, who owns what, in charge of security and paying insurance etc. if money is stolen from banks, it is their responsibility to make it good, if they can't, the state steps in. Contrast that with the many bitcoin exchanges going bust. Ordinary people are not good at security (physical or digital), so keeping hoards of intrinsically valuable stuff at home without paying insurance is a terrible idea, and I'd argue that keeping hoards of intrinsically valuable stuff anywhere is a bad idea, and digital currencies have moved on from there. Bitcoin is still trying to be a digital analogue to paper cash, so even if the protocol is not broken, the premise is.
- stcredzero 13y ago
  Bitcoin is still trying to be a digital analogue to paper cash, so even if the protocol is not broken, the premise is. Just the fact that it's digital puts Bitcoin into another realm entirely. I can make a bitcoin hoard so secure that only rubber hose interrogation will allow another access to it. It's also true that it would require concerted effort, or that I could do this improperly, or that I may already be subject to surveillance. It used to be that ordinary people were hopelessly clueless about automobiles, up to the point that people hung bulbs of garlic under the hoods of their Ford Model T's to "fix" them. Now, while not everyone is an expert mechanic, there's all sorts of automotive knowledge floating around the culture. Unfortunately, the sad truth is that we don't yet have the proper security infrastructure for even very knowledgeable people to be safe without constant, concerted effort. Expecting general security knowledge in today's world is like expecting widespread literacy in the days before the printing press.