Please watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e__m-w4N7NI
Topic: Bitcoin viable during periods of mass instability? (Read 703 times)
It's not going to happen soon so I don't see any reasons to worry too
New technologies develop all the time, google is in the process of designing wifi ballons.
Exactly. No need to worry about such events which are most likely not going to happen soon.
Physical Bitcoins 
Basically they are coins with BTC encoded in a sticker beneath a tamper-evident seal. They work, it's legit. The problem is, this represents a very real and very serious threat to the status quo, because governments know that once people get their hands on this, no one will bother with clownish fake fiat money printed on paper or plastic. The only reason we use that money now is because governments will harass / sue / arrest / detain / murder us if we try to use anything else.
Their power is waning, though. Soon nation-states and their fiat sick joke slave-currencies will both be laughing stocks. Cryptocurrency is a very powerful technology for liberation from government theft.
Another problem with physical BTC is that it is the private key which is passed around. This creates an extra degree of freedom which exponentially compounds the problem of tracking value flows using reasonably workable algorithms. (This suggestion is largely my own conjecture, so take it for what it's worth.)
Physical BTC are not the only way to leverage the extra privacy protection of dis-associating private keys from value stores and flows. Taaki's SX toolkit does something similar. Physical BTC, however, have usability advantages in some scenarios, and could have more as the Internet is progressively weaponized (a process which could accelerate quickly in times of widespread crisis.)
But those wont be physical bitcoins those would be physical private keys!
I have seen things like that sold online and it is not difficult to print out a piece of paper with your public and private key so that you can pay and receive money using it.
I dont think we need physical developments I think we need user friendly apps that help merchants and buyers use it and make it spread.
I have seen things like that sold online and it is not difficult to print out a piece of paper with your public and private key so that you can pay and receive money using it.
I dont think we need physical developments I think we need user friendly apps that help merchants and buyers use it and make it spread.
Physical Bitcoins
Basically they are coins with BTC encoded in a sticker beneath a tamper-evident seal. They work, it's legit. The problem is, this represents a very real and very serious threat to the status quo, because governments know that once people get their hands on this, no one will bother with clownish fake fiat money printed on paper or plastic. The only reason we use that money now is because governments will harass / sue / arrest / detain / murder us if we try to use anything else.
Their power is waning, though. Soon nation-states and their fiat sick joke slave-currencies will both be laughing stocks. Cryptocurrency is a very powerful technology for liberation from government theft.
Physical Bitcoins
As I watch the situation in Ukraine unfold, my first impulse is that Bitcoin is ideal during periods of instability. After more consideration, I am no longer sure.
I definitely think it holds that potential, but a major problem exists: communications infrastructure reliance.
Bitcoin, in turn, is effectively reliant on governments and major powers for the networks that enable the decentralized network.
Considering the recent internet shutdown in Syria, how would Bitcoin fair?
Is Bitcoin utility and integrity at odds with communications infrastructure instability?
Natural disasters also have potential to render Bitcoin useless for large groups of users.
These are exactly the reasons Bitcoiners need to push back HARD against the laws preventing the creation of physical bitcoins !I definitely think it holds that potential, but a major problem exists: communications infrastructure reliance.
Bitcoin, in turn, is effectively reliant on governments and major powers for the networks that enable the decentralized network.
Considering the recent internet shutdown in Syria, how would Bitcoin fair?
Is Bitcoin utility and integrity at odds with communications infrastructure instability?
Natural disasters also have potential to render Bitcoin useless for large groups of users.
Fuck them and their greedy, selfish laws!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqooIX4E0sM
We need decentralized creation of physical coins! In many countries! Anonymously until the laws change!!
We did it with Cannabis, we did it with culture sharing ("piracy" [sic]), and now we will do it with cryptocurrency.
https://www.casascius.com/
Dear nation-state governments of the world, and especially the USA:
We're coming for you and ALL your money, you corrupt federal fucks!
We will give you the same mercy you gave the poor of the world: None.
Truly bad crisis usually end up with a lot of the people who have the ability (read, have money) getting the hell out of Dodge. If Bitcoin is considered a viable way to store value (rather than a way to buy trinkets) then it serves the goal of paving an escape very nicely. One can cross the boarder without the strip searches revealing anything and re-claim one's life savings on the other side.
When I was theorizing about the potential value of Bitcoin some years ago as a part of deciding how financially involved to get and trying to deduce the real world potential value of each BTC, this idea was one of the big ones I considered. So far this effect has not even kicked in yet.
It's worth note that the most realistic method of controlling such use (or exploiting those who seek to employ it) is to have good individualized identification (iris scans, DNA samples, etc) and also have enough background information on individuals to assess whether they may have come into control of BTC (or other assets in that class.) This could explain why the NSA doesn't really seem that interested in 'terrorists' (e.g., the underwear bomber or Boston guys) but is much more focused on monitoring every ordinary individual in very high detail.
When I was theorizing about the potential value of Bitcoin some years ago as a part of deciding how financially involved to get and trying to deduce the real world potential value of each BTC, this idea was one of the big ones I considered. So far this effect has not even kicked in yet.
It's worth note that the most realistic method of controlling such use (or exploiting those who seek to employ it) is to have good individualized identification (iris scans, DNA samples, etc) and also have enough background information on individuals to assess whether they may have come into control of BTC (or other assets in that class.) This could explain why the NSA doesn't really seem that interested in 'terrorists' (e.g., the underwear bomber or Boston guys) but is much more focused on monitoring every ordinary individual in very high detail.
New technologies develop all the time, google is in the process of designing wifi ballons.
Considering the recent internet shutdown in Syria, how would Bitcoin fair?
Is Bitcoin utility and integrity at odds with communications infrastructure instability?
Is Bitcoin utility and integrity at odds with communications infrastructure instability?
In the case of Syria, internet connectivity was very limited in the first place, making it very easy to isolate.
In the case of the Ukraine, when I last looked at the backbone map, Kiev is a relatively busy node. It connects to the internet through several minor backbones to west, and a major backbone connection to Moscow. A few parts of Russia are dependent on backbone connections in Kiev. Due to the multiple connections to western countries, it would be hard for Russia to isolate the Ukraine from the internet. In fact, most of Russia's traffic could be isolated by cutting the backbones from Kiev, Stockholm and Helsinki.
Now there's a thought!
Hardware wallets maybe but everything need to communicate with the blockchain. I would think that the very places Bitcoin could help so much have the worst communication infrastructure too.
Hardware wallets maybe but everything need to communicate with the blockchain. I would think that the very places Bitcoin could help so much have the worst communication infrastructure too.
As I watch the situation in Ukraine unfold, my first impulse is that Bitcoin is ideal during periods of instability. After more consideration, I am no longer sure.
I definitely think it holds that potential, but a major problem exists: communications infrastructure reliance.
Bitcoin, in turn, is effectively reliant on governments and major powers for the networks that enable the decentralized network.
Considering the recent internet shutdown in Syria, how would Bitcoin fair?
Is Bitcoin utility and integrity at odds with communications infrastructure instability?
Natural disasters also have potential to render Bitcoin useless for large groups of users.
If a large group of users lose external connectivity, what happens?
Blockchain fork?
I definitely think it holds that potential, but a major problem exists: communications infrastructure reliance.
Bitcoin, in turn, is effectively reliant on governments and major powers for the networks that enable the decentralized network.
Considering the recent internet shutdown in Syria, how would Bitcoin fair?
Is Bitcoin utility and integrity at odds with communications infrastructure instability?
Natural disasters also have potential to render Bitcoin useless for large groups of users.
If a large group of users lose external connectivity, what happens?
Blockchain fork?
Jump to: