Skip to main content


Showing posts from October, 2017

If Bitcoin is better than fiat why is adoption slow?

Bitcoin adoption is not slow. On the contrary a few million people use it just after 9 years after it was introduced. The people actually love the idea of Bitcoin, but they're scared to have to store Bitcoin for themselves. Even with all the bank scandals in the world, even with the Cyprus haircut and the Greek capital controls, the people still prefer to have the bank handle their money.

In a sort of sense they are right. It is difficult to handle fiat currency safely and securely. If one has $50,000 in savings, it's not considered the safest bet to store them at home, even in an unbreachable vault. For what it's worth, for $50,000 thieves are willing to break the wall surrounding the vault and carry the entire vault with them until they can find a way to open it. Similarly, the other kind of thieves -banks and politicians-, can simply pass a law that decides that all deposits bigger than $5,000 will be used to bailout the bank institutions or the government. Magically i…

The Bitcoin white paper before Satoshi decided to call it "Bitcoin"

The below is probably not the original PDF, however it contains what I and a few others consider to be the original writing (based on review from Wei Dai possibly).

Edit: As confirmed by Gwern this document's source is from another fake Satoshi. As it was emailed to me anonymously from someone that keeps sending me stuff like this anonymously (possibly an encounter I had on a forum or mailing list), the best source to verify such a document would be from the people who have already done some research on this. Have a read on Gwern's page about the ecash.pdf document and the Nakamot/Dai emails

Local cryptoeconomies

Who decides how the economy of a city or country works? Upon which standards is the money supply controlled and defined?

While most are thinking that the economy is now global and what happens in one part of the world affects the other, I choose to think that economies should be allowed to exist on a micro scale rather than the macro one we see now. The price of milk and bread in Zimbabwe cannot and should not correlate into the economic crisis of the Euro or the Dollar. We may not continue to allow these globalist currencies to consume the consumer.

We need to decentralize.

Many are, in my opinion, making the mistake of thinking of bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency as a global one. While it may be true that it can be traded into a global level, don't be so sure that 1 bitcoin in Tokyo is worth the same as one bitcoin in Athens.

Those who propose that one cryptocurrency should rule them all should stop and think about how that affects not only the people, but the cryptocurrency…

The few... (by Dorian Nakamoto)

We should protect Bitcoin from take over by the few. Its function should flow free as the Volga River despite the centuries of Tsars, Mongols, Vikings, Swedes, and the Communist regime rule. We need to toss out any thinking of the apparent treasure in the boat over the the river as the Stenka Razin did to keep the boat rower and citizens free. Keep the flow free and wide.

The Stenka's men were able to trust him to navigate the river and to support the poor. In our case, Bitcoin does have a few generals to serve the crypto math, with many rowers (the open source programmers) to float in the river. The concept of the Bitcoin is the captain of the ship. Not a single or a group of people, which they may call themselves Oh, NO:

A board of Directors

We need to preserve this structure. No board of directors. A few, governing many to navigate in their own purpose, their own ports to deposit goods, ... must not be allowed.

I see this happened to our great nation of USA. 535 legistrature g…

A Cypherpunk's Manifesto (by Eric Hughes)

Privacy is necessary for an open society in the electronic age. Privacy is not secrecy. A private matter is something one doesn't want the whole world to know, but a secret matter is something one doesn't want anybody to know. Privacy is the power to selectively reveal oneself to the world.

If two parties have some sort of dealings, then each has a memory of their interaction. Each party can speak about their own memory of this; how could anyone prevent it? One could pass laws against it, but the freedom of speech, even more than privacy, is fundamental to an open society; we seek not to restrict any speech at all. If many parties speak together in the same forum, each can speak to all the others and aggregate together knowledge about individuals and other parties. The power of electronic communications has enabled such group speech, and it will not go away merely because we might want it to.

Since we desire privacy, we must ensure that each party to a transaction have knowle…