[Cryptography] Dispelling some myths about Bitcoin, from a Bitcoin fan

[L. M. Goodman]

On 6/16/2014 at 12:32 AM, "Bear" <bear at sonic.net> wrote:
>
>On Sun, 2014-06-15 at 11:40 -0400, lmgoodman at hushmail.com wrote:
>
>> Myth #6: Decentralized crypto-ledgers are just a technology and 
>have
>> nothing to do with politics.
>
>> Fact: Crypto-ledgers are primarily designed to withstand attacks 
>by
>> governments, that is their *only* advantage of a decentralized
>> crypto-ledger over a centralized or polycentric one.
>

>I think you're missing a point about distributed crypto-ledgers.  
>Because they are designed to be safe against attacks by 
>governments, 
>they provide a way for *governments* to agree on facts recorded in 
>a 
>blockchain, without fear that the facts as recorded at the time 
>have since been distorted, hidden, or misrepresented by other 
>parties
>including other governments, or that third parties, including 
>third-
>party governments, might believe or credibly pretend to believe 
>that they have been.


That's a fair point. It can be valuable for a government who wants to pre-commit to honesty. That said, I still believe resistance to censorship is one of the only advantages.

The point you make underscores the value of a block-chain, but not necessarily of a *decentralized* block chain. If the US government ran a block chain (say by signing a block every minute), then they wouldn't be able to pull the shenanigans you describe without being obviously detected. Take a few governments signing it and you have something pretty robust. I don't think this is going to happen, I'm just pointing out that there is an incompatibility between thinking decentralized proof of work systems are useful and thinking that governments can be benevolent actors.