Skip Navigation

Petition: Bitcoin is Stupid and Does Not Deserve an Emoji

35 crypto companies made a Change Dot Org petition called "Bitcoin Deserves an Emoji"

F that

Sign this one instead: "Bitcoin is Stupid and Does Not Deserve an Emoji": https://www.change.org/bitcoin-is-stupid

108

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
108 comments
  • The problem isn’t just the nature of blockchains, the problem is the uses to which such systems will be put. The explosion in ransomware fuelled by bitcoin et al isn’t something that can be replicated with physical cash at the same scale, for example (consider why you want electronic cash in the first place). Similarly, the need to “be your own bank” will always expose you to a greater risk of fraud and theft and loss, because being a bank is harder than people seem to think.

    The technology involved is (almost) irrelevant.

    • I wanted this "electronic cash" to make it easier to carry cash without ending with lots of coins in my wallet. The point of being your own bank seems dangerous and too convoluted to make it more convenient.

      I guess I will keep trying to use cash whenever I can and call it a day.

      • So I realise that this is very euro-centric and the majority of people on earth don’t get this sort of convenience, but… fast and easy interbank transfers and contactless debit and credit card payments just do all the stuff that most people want out of electronic cash, and transaction logs are a small price to pay for a substantial reduction in risk.

        • I use those services currently but I would prefer not to have logs of what I do with my money in someone's computer

          • You realise that all electronic currencies will necessarily involve transaction logs stored in someone else’s computer? Even Zcash and monero, which have clever anonymous transactions, allow selective disclosure of the details of those transactions if you ever find yourself at the wrong end of a criminal investigation or tax audit. Moreover, their anonymity guarantees are not perfect (the IRS has certainly paid big bucks to chainalysis for de-anonymisation, for what that’s worth).

            Unless someone magically invents a software artefact that can’t be duplicated (don’t hold your breath, I’m serious about the magic) there’s no escape from this fundamental requirement.

            • Using that logic, the US government has enough computing power to decrypt your internet traffic even if you use a VPN. I only want more protection, not complete anonymity.

              And for what it's worth, I think that the protection an internet service can provide is only "trust that we are doing it right", every data leak that is happening is proof of this.

108 comments