[Cryptography] What has Bitcoin achieved?

[ianG]

On 14/06/2014 18:50 pm, Bear wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 20:09 +0200, tpb-crypto at laposte.net wrote:
...
> Indeed, well over 90% of the trade that might ever be done in 
> cryptocurrencies will not be done if they remain unregulatable.
> 
> So let the crypto anarchists continue to use Bitcoin as it is.  
> Serving the people at large has a different set of requirements
> because most people want the security of operating within the 
> framework of laws and authorities that provides the context of 
> their societies. 
> 
>> You know your idea will not be welcome and you know why, so avoid
>> shaming yourself by trying to hijack the very system which could
>> liberate the entire humanity from a post-information-age nightmare.
> 
> I know that it will not be welcomed by anarchists.  But that's a 
> tiny, tiny bunch of people;  Most who are doing serious trade want
> to be trading in assets that police can trace and courts can 
> recover, because for most purposes and most people that's safer.  


This is not really true, I'd say this is an example of western rich
country bias.

In the western/rich zone, they have courts, police and customs that work
to a fashion.  This is a long standing tradition that dates back
centuries.  So much so that, as a result, the people themselves trade
according to higher principles, which might be summarised as "thou shalt
not steal."  Else, you're nicked, or fear of it.  And we don't believe
it can be any other way.

However, this is not the case in all places or all times, nor is it
especially the case in those places where we assume it.  For example, in
the west, there are plenty of examples in the financial system where the
incumbents are robbing the victims blind, and regulators, police and
courts stand by without lifting a finger.  Cognitive dissonance?

And in the poorer zones or the non-first world, the existence of courts
and police can be a curse.  The system can work differently.  It might
be bakshis all the way to the bank.

So, when the cryptocurrency community looks to facilitate trade on the
Internet, our sometimes adoption of a regulator/police/courts-free
assumption might actually be closer to the reality of more people than
you or I rich western geeks would like.

That is to say, the question is pretty darn relevant, and claiming it is
just a bunch of anarchists who think that way is missing the real picture.


> A blockchain "Open ledger" guarantees that the powers we give 
> our regulatory agencies cannot be exercised secretly, and that 
> if exercised in violation of law or due process, no one will 
> be able to pretend otherwise.


(Leaving aside totally whether the bitcoin answer is worth anything.)


iang