@mhoye
Is this comment really here? Mastodon is giving me weird messages? Perhaps because you're on a different server?
On the topic of your comment, I've always regarded #BitCoin as an obvious scam. No scarcity there. There's an infinite supply of numbers and an infinite supply of algorithms to pretend that some of the numbers are special and more interesting than others.
Or do I need to repeat the proof that there's no such thing as an uninteresting number?
Doesn't matter what number you divide by infinity, the result is still effectively zero. One or two cryptocurrencies divided by an infinite number of them or 21 million Bitcoins divided by infinity. Still no real value anywhere there.
However what makes #Bitcoin into a special criminal scam is how it deliberately wastes power for the lottery tickets. Electric power is a real thing with a limited supply.
@shanen @Cosmic_Ray @mhoye Bitcoin doesn't "waste" energy. On the contrary, it's specifically the cost of the energy used that makes Bitcoin the first distributed solution to the Byzantine Generals' problem in Computer Science.
You're however absolutely correct in that if noone wants a global uncensorable value transfer network then of course the bitcoin tokens won't have value either.
@mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray I agree that if you don't want an uncensorable global value transfer service then there's no need for a decentralized solution to the Byzantine Generals' problem.
If you do, however, then Bitcoin's Proof of Work is the first such proven to work. The cost of the energy spent (the work) is what makes the transfers uncensorable (cost prohibitive to attack).
@duco @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Sure. And the Cyprus haircut where regular consumers lost some of the holdings on their bank accounts would be an example of when the banks/government don't do the right thing.
Another would be the recent suggestion in Iran to freeze the bank accounts of women who do not wear a hijab.
Don't assume Bitcoin is not needed at all based on your personal needs.
@LuigiDev @troed @shanen @Cosmic_Ray
The "uncensorable" part is what I don't understand. An append-only blockchain might not _redactable_, sure, but do we really believe that the only way to _prevent_ access to data is by redacting or modifying it?
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray That was an exaggeration.
Recent studies have found that, while Bitcoin has massive environmental implications, the traditional banking sector and gold mining give the digital currency a good run. In fact, the former is said to consume at least double the energy annually
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray that's like saying that Europe as a continent consumes more energy than the city of New York. Of course it does, it's bigger! The banking sector processes thousands of millions more of transactions that BTC could ever dream of, so if we check absolutes of course fiat consumes more
But if we're fair, we have to check the cost **per transaction**. In which BTC gets obliterated https://www.statista.com/statistics/881541/bitcoin-energy-consumption-transaction-comparison-visa/
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Those statistics are weird. The Bitcoin energy usage is what secures the base layer - like transporting physical bars of gold around the globe. For millions of transactions per second you use Bitcoin Lightning, a second layer that uses the base layer for security that can scale indefinitely.
So no, the comparison is apt. A Bitcoin financial system uses no more energy than the technology it replaces.
@troed @LuigiDev @shanen @Cosmic_Ray this is absolutely, categorically and obviously false.
Not sure how else to say it. This is a lie.
@mhoye @LuigiDev @shanen @Cosmic_Ray No, it is not.
Please understand that I'm no "crypto bro". My interest in Bitcoin came very early in its existence as I worked in disruptive technologies at Sony Research.
I'm simply stating how it works from a technology standpoint and have no interest in "convincing" or "converting" or whatever people who try to push crypto scams do.
I have a background in cryptography and large scale SaaS. My last full time assignment was heading up global "traditional" fintech SaaS. I know exactly how costly cash transactions (as an example) is in retail, and the size of the industry needed to handle them.
@troed @LuigiDev @shanen @Cosmic_Ray
None of that changes the fact that your claim that bitcoin energy use is comparable to the that of the global financial industry is obvious nonsense.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray
1. BTC lightning requires at least 2 ledger operations (open and close, maybe increase credit) for each pair. Given the current ops per second speed of the Bitcoin Blockchain it would take literally decades just to open one channel per person, when ideally you should open several channels per person (one per pair of people)
2. Money is not based on gold anymore. That's why it's called "fiat"
(+)
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray
3. Why do you say they're weird? Apart from transporting the gold which doesn't happen any more
Do you know the theorical basis around proof of work? We don't even need statistics. Proof of work needs to
1. Get a transaction
2. Allocate several miners to it
3. Each miner has to play a computationally costly game of guessing a random number. This consume tons of energy
+
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray this is not a costly operation because the ciphering algorithm is hard or something. This is costly because you literally need to guess a random number across millions of numbers.
In fact this is not a mistake. The fact that it's so costly is the only reason it's safe. The system is made based that a miner is not going to waste so much energy to trick anybody because another miner will correct it +
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray and the bad actor miner would have lost a lot of money on wasted energy. Wasting energy is not a bug, it's a feature. If energy wouldn't be wasted all miners could just try without any penalization.
4. Once the magic number is computed the transaction is added to the public replicated across thousands of nodes ledger.
On the fiat system you have to
(+)
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray 1. Register a transition with your credit card
2. If it's credit card the vendor checks if you have credit, if it's a debit card the vendor asks the bank if you have money
3. If everything is fine the transaction is registered in 3 places (cars vendor, buyer bank and seller bank)
So yeah. No magic numbers, no replication no nothing.
The fiat system is miles ahead bitcoin in value.
+
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray both from a theorical perspective and from actual data the system is more inefficient. And I'm not talking about less efficient like a 1970 card vs a nowadays car. I'm talking differences like a bicicle vs all Apollo missions.
In a world with infinite energy and no climate change you know what. I'd be fine with people playing with their stupid toys.
In our world? It should be banned from law
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Your argument boils down to: "If no one needs a global uncensorable decentralized payments system then it would be a waste to run one".
I agree.
I just don't agree that there's no such need.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray my argument is that even if we needed it (which we don't). Throwing the planet into flames does not justify it.
Also even without accounting the flames. The transactions per second BTC can pull of is terribly bad. As I said it would be decades to make ledger transactions for each person. So as a system is terrible.
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray But your claim that Lightning cannot work because of low base layer TPS isn't technologically true. Why keep repeating it?
Regarding "into flames" I think it's worth remembering that market pressure forces Bitcoin miners to use the lowest cost energy available. Mostly surplus hydro power - and nothing will beat solar moving forwards.
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray They magically appear since the fiat on-ramp creates them for you - and can create many with a single base layer transaction.
If your source doesn't know this I understand how come it's that off.
VISA transactions are rather costly and the time they take to clear can be upwards of six months. Until then they can be reversed.
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray This is not true. An exchange can open multiple lightning channels for its customers with a single base layer transaction.
There's also no need to close to the base layer often.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray if you're relying on exchanges you've already lost.
Now you have an inefficient system (the magic number shenanigans keep happening albeit it may be only for opening/closing every once in a while) but centralized. Because if we rely on exchanges is exactly the same as relying on banks.
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Of course it's not. Let's replace "exchanges" with "any actor".
It sounds like you have an ideological basis and try to invent arguments that support it. That's up to you of course, but if there's no interest in actual facts then I'm just wasting my time supplying them in the discussion :)
I believe the whole "crypto"
scam industry have ruined clear-headedness when it comes to Bitcoin, unfortunately. It becomes less a discussion on how technologically clever it is and more "I hate it so it can't be of any value".
It's like arguing that the Internet is useless because we already have faxes.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray that's an ad hominem fallacy. Please reply to my argument.
If we replace exchanges with any actor then we're back at the point where probably we would need centuries just to open the L2 channels between pairs of people. You can't have your cake and eat it (and again, opening the channel is a ledger account, which is 400.000 times more costly than 100.000 Visa transactions. So even one is not worthy
@LuigiDev @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray What do you think a VISA transaction cost?
(and as a followup - how long is the actual clearing time?)
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray "Uncensorable global transfer"?
This is incorrect. Unless you are able to hold the entire ledger on your system, you are reliant on someone else's db to validate your claim. The idea is that the people holding copies of the db is "diverse enough" which isn't an intrinsically guaranteed thing.
When YOU and only YOU can hold an entire copy of the blockchain maybe, till then it is NOT "uncensorable".
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Censorship can be many things, for simplicity here are two: "Stop the message" and "Stop the speaker".
Stopping the message can be in means of fees you cannot pay, exchanges where you are not welcomed. While at the moment a network connection is all that is needed, as more nodes fall into centralized servers, you have less to peer with for the ledger's distribution.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Stopping the speaker is becoming easier each day. In this traceable information is is linked to wallets and that information is passed onward to those who would censor.
Unless you control the information collected from you by exchanges, you set the fees for transfer, and can peer with the exchanges, you are beholden to them.
@pop_justy @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Hmm, no, the exchanges are but one type of on- and off-ramp between fiat and Bitcoin. Let's start with whether Bitcoin (not fiat ramps) is uncensorable.
1) You can receive the Bitcoin blockchain wherever you are on the globe due to the fact that it's broadcasted from satellite, needing only a tiny receiver.
2) Sending a Bitcoin transfer can be done over "any" medium. SMS is one example if you don't have actual Internet.
3) There are currently >15000 (reachable) Bitcoin nodes running in 89 different countries.
Except for a global authoritarian rule it's difficult to see how this can be censored.
As to the fiat on- off-ramps. Yes, those are much easier to attack. In the most extreme example you would need to go peer-to-peer (which is how bitcoin originally were sold/bought between individual node-miners and users). This is now possible to do on-chain with decentralized exchanges (Bisq et.al).
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray
Wait if you want to bring up "ramps".
"Satellite" The majority are broadcasted on Telstar sats owned by the Canadian company Telesat, you are beholden to them for broadcast.
"SMS" you are beholden to your cell provider.
">15000" TCP port 8333 and xfer across it is beholden to your ISP.
Don't start with on-off-ramps as bitcoin relies heavily on already built ones.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray No you don't.
Chinese firewall exists. Iran and other countries routinely excise DNS entries and rotatable ports. Cell phone companies sells massive amounts of metadata that agencies act against. And ISPs easily demonstrated capriciousness early 2000s, hence why the whole Title II escapade. Which remind you no net neutrality currently
We don't need some global cabal for things that already happen.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray I think you are missing the point in that governments have been able to shut down particular protocols before. While Bitcoin is "useful" to Iran that's again is not an intrinsically assured thing by bitcoin's protocol.
So in that governments have demonstrated the ability to shutdown particular traffic, there's not some magic element in bitcoin that separates it. It's Internet traffic all the same.
@pop_justy @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray What protocol/service has a government successfully shut down?
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Seriously? Do I need to give a history lesson on Middle Eastern and Asian Internet censorship? Example: https://t.ly/qTOT
And while the notion that a VPN "will cut through" that is a cat and mouse game. While first world nations have the luxury thinking that people will always be a step ahead, that is hardly the case elsewhere.
@pop_justy @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray From your link: "how these measures might be sidestepped."
It's indeed a cat and mouse game. That means there will always be censorship resistant relays.
@troed @mhoye @shanen @Cosmic_Ray I think your perspective is … “interesting”.
While yes, the technical nature of things marches on, it kind of stops being a cat and mouse for those arrested and jailed for breaking internet censorship laws.
I think that’s the POV you miss here while inundating yourself in purely technical definition of censorship. Again this is just these “ramps” as you say.
@pop_justy @troed @shanen @Cosmic_Ray
The thing that kills me is how people do not seem to realize that all these transactions tie specific coins to specific wallets, immutably. The moment you can identify someone’s wallet you can trace all the coins that went in or out them, from where, to where, you can map out entire networks of interactions, immediately and trivially.
Any dissident relying on cryptocurrencies is strapping a bomb to their chests.
@mhoye @pop_justy @shanen @Cosmic_Ray Yes, you're correct - that's how it used to be. However, with the Taproot upgrade this privacy issue will go away as more and more transactions migrate.
https://www.investopedia.com/bitcoin-taproot-upgrade-5210039
@SocialJusticeHeals @shanen @Cosmic_Ray @mhoye Yes, but it's not a major issue. The "51% attack" needs >70% in reality and while the miners are the ones to add blocks nodes are the ones that either accepts them or not.
I do support the initiative I've seen a few solar roof owners doing - mining bitcoin with free electricity instead if selling at very low profit to the electricity company. Makes for quite an effective "battery" - as well as decentralizing mining.
mhoye
shanen
Cosmic Ray
Troed Sångberg
Duco
Luis/Luigi ☭
Pop Justy 
Xalibur
TheAnymouseProphet