He is NOT saying Bitcoin is useless. He states in the first sentence that Bitcoin is full of potential use cases. Then he exercises some critical thinking to determine how "ownership" is likely not one of them.
No, he said "supposedly". If you read the article that he links to, it is actually a rebuttal of using Bitcoin to handle the problems of logistics. If you see where he wrote something to the contrary, please link it. As far as I can tell, he is saying Bitcoin does not solve any problems.
Then he exercises some critical thinking to determine how "ownership" is likely not one of them.
Establishing ownership is the sole purpose of the blockchain.
There are people of the opinion that blockchain makes this transfer of ownership (of the goods) completely transparent and truthful. That is not the case.
In the article, he's talking about transferring a physical item (like art) by using a transaction on the blockchain. He gives an example why this doesn't offer truth of ownership. It offers truth of the transaction.
This is just playing word games. How does the court or a centralized database offer truth of ownership?
The mistake is in thinking blockchain is a "source of truth". You have to add context. What is it a source of truth for? Transaction validity.
And what is the purpose of validating transactions? Just to consume CPU cycles? No, it's to establish ownership.
Come May 24th, I will still wear a mask which will indicate that I’m ‘unvaccinated’. Hopefully, that will stir more conversation but may also be controversial but I couldn’t care less. I already have a memo prepared incase I get heat about being ‘unvaccinated’ to send out. What are your thoughts? Am I approaching this the right way? I can’t just sit idly not saying anything.
What's the memo about? I think being honest with people on why you are wearing a mask is great. There is a time to speak and a time to remain silent though. I wouldn't just start blurting out stuff like I'm possessed or something. You can't fix crazy world by making a political stand in the workplace. Protect yourself and your conscience. Don't forget that this is just work. You are there to do a job and collect a check. If you don't find the relationship between you and your employer agreeable any longer, I'd look for work elsewhere. These things take care of themselves as the company experiences brain drain.
You miss the point. He's not trying to say Bitcoin is useless / has no utility. He's not saying the real world is messy.
That’s exactly what he is saying. That the blockchain does not map 1:1 to the real world.
And you repeat that here
It doesn't matter if the entire blockchain world agrees that Thief_Hacker_X owns it. The court has the final say, and their decision is centralized in a court database.
And the implication is what? That the blockchain adds no value over a centralized database or court system because they are going to have the final say anyway.
Again, what he fails to realize is that you can take his exact same argument and apply it to the legal system, or centralized databases.
How are they an improvement upon just having a man go with his opinion on what should be done? Why formalize the process or result in a database or legal procedure if someone along the chain can potentially be corrupt and establish a different truth than what those systems would provide?
In other words, why bother trying to use objective methods to establish truth when a human can override them in the real world by force?
The author could stand to do some more thinking on this. It's not that he's incorrect, he just doesn't understand the utility of Bitcoin in spite of his point.
Think of this scenario. The French government has a top notch security protocol in place to secure the private key to the ownership of the Mona Lisa. But we have a change of government and some high ranking government official gets corrupted. They have access to the keys and he uses them to transfer the Mona Lisa to one of his rich buddies Joe Shmoe.
What happens now? According to the blockchain Joe Shmoe is the rightful owner. Can he just enforce that ownership against the French government and force the Louvre to move the Mona Lisa to his beach house in St. Tropez? Or can the French government force him to reverse the transaction. But what if he is smart enough to destroy the private key? Transferring ownership at this point becomes virtually impossible.
It would absolutely be true for a completely virtual item, but he fails to realize that because the artwork is physical, all you need to do is generate a new token for it. The old one was destroyed, so there is no conflict here. You must keep in mind that the token is just a virtual representation or reference to the actual thing. The important part in such a system would be to ensure there are never multiple tokens pointing to the same physical resource existing at the same time.
This is an extreme example and I think no one would argue for a Big Bang introduction of an art blockchain. But it highlights the core problem of using blockchain for the real world. For every transfer of ownership you have 2 operations. These have to be in sync in all time to work properly. In Computer Science this is called an atomic transaction. You either execute all of the operations or none of them. This is already hard in a single database, it is near impossible within 2 systems and is essentially impossible in the real world.
This is dumb. Yes the virtual world is not the same as the real world. And? You know a written ledger or database doesn't actually map 1:1 to what occurs in the real world either right? Are those useless too?
In reality the source of truth would most likely be the courts of the world. And we already have that. Unless the French state is OK with giving up ownership of the Mona Lisa (which would most certainly go through a complicated legal process), it will never change owners. And if it does, this is what we call theft and the French state has a legal mandate to take ownership back.
All in all: when your source of truth is the legal system, there is absolutely no point for a blockchain and you might as well record ownership in a database.
Yeah I understand him. He's basically saying the real world is messy and a blockchain doesn't change that. Well obviously. And yes state officials and judges and whoever can be corrupted. That's EXACTLY why you want a blockchain. His argument is essentially, "Well humans are involved, humans are corruptible, therefore the blockchain is useless". Sure, the blockchain can't fix that. What it can do though, is demonstrably prove the chain of ownership. So while you cannot stop a judge or political official from being corrupt, you can at least have OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE OF THE CORRUPTION. And if you are dealing with something purely virtual, like cryptocurrency itself, then no one other than the owner of the keys can control the resource. So forget judges and courts. They can send you to prison, but they can't take your property without you giving them the key.
His argument is like saying, "Well the judge can rule however he wants, so evidence of a crime and having a trial with objective procedures is pointless". You can't fix corruption through physical means, but being able to identify it is good regardless, and trying to minimize it by adhering to objective rules is basically the core foundation of our society.
If you think this stuff is useless and doesn't work, then we may as well go back to might makes right, and let whoever can kill the most have all the power. Does the author realize we moved towards politics and a legal system to get away from that mess? I mean the legal system doesn't solve corruption either, so I guess it's just as useless as the blockchain and we should throw it out the window lol. I don't blame him though, most people don't have the time or inclination to deeply consider these issues.
Let me state that again for emphasis: the author's argument can be used to justify getting rid of our own legal system, the scientific method, etc., because there is no objective principle, process, or concept that maps to the real world and can eliminate human corruption.
What do you mean?
But yeah they get less flu and cold then kids.
Well sure, I never said they didn’t
Oh so your criticism is just that adoption has been slow? Yeah I can understand that.
I think you need to look into it. There is actually a term for this phenomenon, it's called Immunosenescence. It describes the decline in your immune system that occurs with age.
As you get older you can't get the same colds and flus and chick pox or mumps that you got as a child.
That doesn't mean your immune system is stronger, it means that your body has a memory of past viruses that a child doesn't have. When your body encounters a threat it doesn't have protection for, then compare what happens to adults vs children. There's a reason why gathering old people in nursing homes results in deaths while gathering children together in schools doesn't.
It's not not helping when we pretend it's supposed to be all one big family.
Well only Christians are. I totally understand though.
No it is weaker, that is why when the flu virus mutates and becomes something new which your body has not experienced, if you are old, you are likely to just drop dead. Whereas a kid is experiencing them all for the first time but is able to handle them.
You can't hate evil if you are good. Hatred is a spirit that dwells within you. You hate if you are of hatred. You love if you are of love. It's not my place to judge good or evil because I am not God. I can only see the difference because of him.
I recognize evil like forcing masks upon children. It doesn't mean that I hate their parents for doing it. I know they can't help it. If they could see, they wouldn't do it in the first place.
You know that kids have a powerful immune system, much more powerful than ours. They need it to fight off illness while they are still developing, but it weakens as we age. And we can see that most if not all kids are not affected by the china virus. So then why would you force them to cover their faces? To prevent them from breathing normally as they should? It is only done out of fear by the parents, and that's what makes it evil.
What makes you say it's natural? Just that it is common?
Yeah that’s so relevant to today because the answers are all easy if we would turn back to God. I see them due to God allowing me to see. Those that refuse him remain blind and stuck in their ways, hating people.
It remains to be seen if America will survive, but if it does it will only be because Christians repent. It won’t be saved through war or resistance of any physical nature.
Because hating is wrong. Even apart from morality, whites today never did anything to blacks of today. All the persecution they are facing is in their imagination. So they are hating whites for something that didn’t even happen.
I thought asians were supposed to be smart. Lock the doors asap, tell your passengers not to open them no matter what, and drive the hell away when the mob approaches, even if you have to hit a few of them to escape. Hopefully he knows better now.
They do seem cursed.
They are wrong to hate whites.
Don't ask stupid questions. Try to awnser the question asked.
Did you somehow lose your crypto because you lost the internet or power? Nope.
What if the people think that is what's saving the kids lives?
What about women in good health cutting off their tits like Kayleigh McEnany? Is she evil?
If you kill someone who has done you no wrong, and think you did something right, does that make it right? If you desecrate the temple of God, are you not evil?
It's all over the Bible.
Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:
By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.
And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;
And patience, experience; and experience, hope:
And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us. - Romans 5:1-5
But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.
Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,
And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead. - Phillipians 3:7-11
Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;
That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God. - 1 Peter 4:1-2
Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:
But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ's sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
If ye be reproached for the name of Christ, happy are ye; for the spirit of glory and of God resteth upon you: on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified.
But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.
Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf.
For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?
And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?
Wherefore let them that suffer according to the will of God commit the keeping of their souls to him in well doing, as unto a faithful Creator. - 1 Peter 4:1-19
Only let your conversation be as it becometh the gospel of Christ: that whether I come and see you, or else be absent, I may hear of your affairs, that ye stand fast in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;
And in nothing terrified by your adversaries: which is to them an evident token of perdition, but to you of salvation, and that of God.
For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;
Having the same conflict which ye saw in me, and now hear to be in me. - Phillipians 1:27-30
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. - John 16:33
James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing. - James 1:1-4
Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you. - Matthew 5:10-12
From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.
Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.
But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? - Matthew 16:21-26
Much of it is also implicit, like when Jesus says that you are blessed if you are hungry, poor, or hated, because your reward in heaven will be great. Suffering is what allows you to appreciate the things of God. That's not to say that you should pursue suffering, just not resent it if it happens. If you are rich or well fed, it is tempting to think all your needs are met, and that you don't need God. When you are suffering though, God is all you have to rely on. The world and God are at odds, so it stands to reason that if you want to know God you have to reject the things of this world, but for that you will be hated and punished by the world. If you are rewarded by the world, it is likely because you have rejected the things of God, and will be rejected by him in the end. Anyway, you don't have to agree, I'm just putting some thoughts out there. And I'm not a Jesuit. I don't follow any denomination.
Forcing your children to wear masks is evil. If that’s not clear to you, I understand, that’s why we’re in this mess.
Fiat is an imaginary digital currency and that doesn’t stop you from using it.
As a "replacement" for the banks? Get real people. Show me how to convert labor into bitcoin and back again, without using the banking system,
You don’t need to use the banking system. If someone pays you in Bitcoin, they just send it to your address. People only use the exchanges because they want fiat. If fiat was not necessary or desirable, you would deal in pure crypto sent directly to each other.
and without leaving a neon paper trail permanently etched into the cybersphere, and I might take people more seriously.
Having a “paper trail” is mandatory, because that’s where the security comes from.
Your wallet doesn’t need to be connected to your identity though. If I know Bitcoin has been sent from wallet X to wallet Y to wallet Z, I don’t know if it has left your possession at all. You could own all three wallets. That information is not encoded in the blockchain.
So a simple privacy measure is to make a new wallet for every transaction, which can be done automatically by software.
That is a lot of what the privacy focused coins do, in addition to off chain or mixing of inputs.
The weakness of cryptocurrency in a privacy sense is the exchanges, and everyone’s need to convert back to fiat. That’s where they will get your identity from.
Ledgers and databases too. We can just go back to trusting Ted. He's a good fellow, would never cheat me.