This post may contain affiliate links which is shown by a *. This means if you click on a link I may get a small commission at no cost to you.
The appearance of bitcoin is similar to the classical dilemma of the philosophers: who was first, the egg or the hen? For the media and the general public, debates in the bitcoin space are usually troubled because of the endless confusion – can you have a blockchain without bitcoin? Is the protocol safe even if bitcoin-based businesses are not? Who did all this and why can’t we ask them? Is this about making sense of a technology that appears to have emerged as a ready-made “hen” in the financial system?
It is normal for the media to look for answers to these questions, but the report today illustrates the way in which searching for answers is often overwhelmed by the complexity of life. Learn more here.
Bitcoin or blockchain?
Maybe the most significant debate was resurrected after the Nasdaq OMX announced that it would begin testing how the blockchain could be used to change the way the shares are sold and marketed. Banks and other international corporations are increasingly open to the idea of adopting blockchain technology, but at the same time abolishing the concept of bitcoin. By doing so, they often do not even notice – or do not recognize – co-reliance on the digital ledger.
In an article on Wired entitled “Bitcoin may never reach Wall Street, but his technology will,” Cade Metz’s article began by quoting James Angel, professor of finance at Georgetown University, who compared Bitcoin with MySpace. The comparison, which does not overlap with reality, has attained its purpose. He conveyed the message that some are not yet convinced that bitcoin is more than a first defective iteration of a publicly distributed book.
It is not surprising that this mixed message was attacked by the non-profit Coin Center, which defends the bitcoin and notes that the bitcoin ledger needs an excellent coin to operate. However, Angel spoke about the need for distributed ledger technology to provide more privacy, illustrating the reasons why there is still a need to discuss blockchain technology in general.
Today’s most abundant and most widely distributed ledger is the bitcoin, but many investors, as Angel noted, prefer to keep private transactions. As a result, specific attributes need the appearance of other blockchains or distributed ledgers. By being interested in the Bitcoin Profit system, you will start to grow your trading and be more successful. On the other hand, Bitcoin supporters will continue to come up with the argument that their ledger is best suited to becoming the most used.
Liz Peek, a former Wall Street analyst, and the first woman to become a partner on a Wall Street firm approached a somewhat pessimistic view of technology. Detaching the bitcoin flaws in a Fiscal Times article, it seems to have mistaken the bitcoin security protocol with that of the business that operates with the technology. Peek is by no means the only one that makes this confusion.
“At a time when cybersecurity has become an oxymoron, why does the government join Wall Street to give the green light to the bitcoin? The virtual currency, shaken by serial scandals and spikes since it was invented in 2008, has taken on a new life as regulations from the finance departments, regulations governing e-money. ” She continued, “By demanding the bitcoin exchanges to register and giving them legal status, governments give signals to users and bankers, which may prove to be unrealistic promises of transparency and security.”
It is indeed a news story, but misleading information has gone one after another as Peek continued his crusade against the bitcoin, citing an article in MIT Technology that says academics have noticed problems in the math, which leaves room for cheats.
“High-risk currency – it’s not a completely incorrect bitcoin definition at this time. And yet, not only those who make regulations legitimize the bitcoin, and the Wall Street heavyweights are almost guaranteed for this coin, “Peek concluded.
See additional info: https://www.blockchain.com/explorer
In search of Satoshi
Peek’s story also referred to the mystery that surrounds Satoshi Nakamoto, the author of the famous bitcoin manifesto, a subject that was also attacked by Nathaniel Popper this week. In his New York Times article, Popper highlighted evidence suggesting that Nick Szabo, the famous cryptographer, might be behind the creation of the digital coin: “Mister. Szabo is almost as mysterious as Satoshi. But during my report I found all sorts of new clues that bring me closer to my hunt,” he noted. His article reproduces a conversation between Popper and Szabo which, although not conclusive, comes with an exciting view of the mysterious cryptographer and his work in space bitcoin. Nik Peek and Popper are not the first to dive into the story of bitcoin origins in an attempt to decipher the identity of its mysterious creator – or creators. It is neither the first to indicate the mystery surrounding it as a disadvantage of technology.
Intermediaries will be removed from the Internet
There was a time when transactions between people were face to face, when people knew the florist, the doctor, the mechanic, the butcher and all the people they were trading with. This had created a system where reputation was critical, and reputation made people think twice before stealing from each other. In the end, you deceive a client; he will tell his friends, and his friends will not come to you. The business will suffer, and you risk losing more than you earn if you deceive your customers.
However, if you could have a business and never reveal your name, nobody will know how you look? If the profit when mistaken for someone or even more customers is much higher than to provide quality services on time? This can only happen if nobody knows how you look and what your name is. In other words, if you cannot destroy your reputation.
This is what the Internet gives you – the opportunity to do business without associating the figure or the name with them. Without a personal reputation. Moreover, although the ability was a real blessing from some points of view, it turned out to be a curse in the rest.
The recent deception of the online store Evolution – when the founders ran with $ 12 million in bitcoins – is just one of many examples. Every sad story tells a definite thing – that the problem will not disappear on its own. Not before eliminating bitcoin intermediaries and third parties on the Internet.
What about the multisig system?
There have been all sorts of revolutionary attempts to solve the problem of Bitcoin’s multisignature transactions. Multisig, as it is called, creates a kind of situation where funds cannot be moved without two out of three signatures – from the buyer, the seller, and the agent with legal authority. But this does not eliminate the problem of the non-trusted third party – the agent empowered. He can always arrange something with the seller to share the money but not send the product to the buyer or refuse to sign the transaction. If the seller and the buyer do not reach a deal, the funds remain frozen for an indefinite period of time. The infamous Evolution store offered such transactions – multisignature, but not many customers we using it.