Stephen L. Carter a Bloomberg View columnist and a professor of law at Yale University writes:
Call me a dreamer. Call me a contrarian. I still believe in Bitcoins.
The collapse of Mt. Gox -- and the evident disappearance of perhaps 6 percent of the world's supply of the virtual currency -- hasn’t put me off at all. And even if I’m wrong, and Bitcoin fails, I’ll probably support the next digital currency. The reason is simple: For those willing to take the risk, eyes wide open and fully informed, money without government carries a certain appeal.This is simply absurd. Bitcoin is not a money without government. Bitcoin can be regulated at a number of different points, when bitcoins are bought or sold, at the point of a retail transaction, to just name two points of potential government intrusion.
Further, it is very difficult to successfully hide a stream of Bitcoin transactions from the government.
I am beginning to question whether any internet currency will ever be able to provide large scale anonymity to its users---Bitcoin, for sure, doesn't come close. Bitcoin didn't come about because of government, but government can get as deeply as it wants into the, regulation, tracking and identifying of Bitcoin transactions.
And from was has been stated, it is still not clear that they were "lost", but instead stolen.
ReplyDeleteIf so, no drop in supply, only confidence.
Keep thinking and preaching that Bob. That will give the cypherpunks more time (and cover) to strengthen and harden the numerous privatization tools currently under development. #TrojanHorse
ReplyDeleteMy opinion: bitcoin is not, at this time, money as it lacks acceptance as such on any scale beyond a few enthusiasts. What would it take to gain widespread acceptance? 1. A perception of security. 2. A perception of anonymity, though I'm afraid that the majority of people no longer value it. And unfortunately, I think those of us that value anonymity is a dwindling number (even in the age of Edward Snowden). 3. Seamless convertibility into other accepted stores of value. In other words, a bid-offer spread of zero.
ReplyDeleteRobert, I agree with you that government will likely always have access at the point of sale thereby retaining the ability to enforce whatever regulation they deem fit. However, if we assume this to be the case for any form of money, bitcoin (or some future crypto-currency) appears attractive if for no other reason than governments' inability to inflate it.
That said, I think that crypto-currencies have the potential to eventually offer the level of anonymity available to cash transactions. Your statement that it is difficult to hide bitcoin transactions from governments is accurate today though it is reasonable to assume that this will change at some point in time. The challenge here is that in order to assure a lack of counterfeiting, it is assumed that there needs to be some sort of record of creation and subsequent transactions. I'm not convinced that this is true if the bitcoin were to contain some sort of hashed identifier and a list of genuine bitcoins was available in the form of a public key. I'm not sure how this would work with bitcoins trading in fractions, however.
Regardless, my guess is that sometime down the line theory and reality will come together with workable solutions. It may not be bitcoin but the concept of crypto-currencies is, I believe, here to stay.
I've never understood exactly how I am supposed to "support" Bitcoin, even if I believed in it and wanted do. Am I supposed to do hours of research about the tricks and tips to preserve complete anonymity and to avoid my bitcoins from being stolen or seized and then purchase bitcoins at $1,200 and then lose half my capital to support the concept? And then there is the larger problem of where the Internet is going. I see more and more news in the MSM about cyberattacks and hacking. I suspect that these stories are laying the groundwork for strict government control of the Internet. Between NSA hacking and phishing and more government controls, I fear the heyday of the open Internet is coming to a close, which will present an even bigger problem for all things digital, including digital currencies.
ReplyDeleteWhat a wonderful comment! (meant with all sincerity)
Deletesuch a negative person you are rob
ReplyDelete"Bitcoin can be regulated at a number of different points, when bitcoins are bought or sold, at the point of a retail transaction, to just name two points of potential government intrusion."
ReplyDeleteDo you consider this true of gold and silver? Is that significant for the future of gold and silver as money? Why or why not?
"Further, it is very difficult to successfully hide a stream of Bitcoin transactions from the government."
Assuming that this is true, do you think that it will continue to be true? If anonymity and fungibility were solved tomorrow, would you change your stance on Bitcoin? Why or why not?