Cryptocurrency: Still A Hopeful Wreck 10 Years Later... (re: Falkvinge BTC)

grarpamp grarpamp at
Sun Mar 31 21:26:18 PDT 2019

On 3/31/19, Punk <punks at> wrote:
> altcoin(bcash)

There's unlikely such thing on the markets by that
string, nor did you bother to pair it with any
symbol or site as a complete reference.
"Bitcoin_Cash - BCH -"
is a well known thing.
Grow the fuck up.

Unfortunately neither native BTC (txrate too low)
or LN (tech problems and well noted meta issues
trending toward control, liability, etc) inspire much
long term confidence. Nor do most distributed coins
right now either. It's still early days. There might
even be no solution until everyone trying to make
one decides to get together and remove their
biggest competition... Govts and Banks.

And clearly all controlled coins (Bank, Gov, Corp
Consortia) are Fiat garbage. Given Gov and Gov
Bank ineptitude, Gov endorsed Corp and Private
Bank Consortia Coins are probably the biggest
fake news the clueless masses will end up adopting.
That's scary and sad... for that they'd probably be better
off sticking with what remaining Fiat Cash and Metals
options they have today to avoid that Great BeastMarking Event.

> huge blocks will lead to the system being centralized
> and controlled by a few players at best.

Seems too many people still believe in the first solution
as, or can be, the only one. It's likely the blockchain
on disk model will be mooted in favor of a tx stream
updating a UTXO set db, mined checkpoints, various P2P
means to bootstrap the db off the network itself, splitting
up work areas, magical DHTs, storage networks, compute
grids... so much more possible... don't read this stupid shit,
go look at what all the coins are dreaming up and mashing
together... and that's just today.

The fundamental question for a minimally acceptable
and successful crypto "currency" function might be can
you throw 5-10x credit card level tps rates into say the
same amount of globally distributed nodes that can
provide a solution to the UTXO db that people trust
more than central / Fiat, for a respectively moot fee,
in tolerable time. Most probably yes.

Cryptocurrency is barely 10 years old,
and the levels of research being thrown
at it make the Moon Landing look just
as quaint as the morons wasting time arguing
over stupid shit like blocksize as if it were
going to be the sole solution to anything.

There are other factors... social and political
change towards voluntary, self-capable,
personal responsibility, ethics, economic
knowledge, etc necessary to make distributed
trust happen.

For example, picking just the OG BTC model...
most people still go blank trying to understand
why it is *their* responsibility to never allow more
than 21M BTC to go past their client, or to throw
just 10 watts 24*365 at a spread of small local indie
mining pools to bring their numbers up into the
hundreds and each of them into being regular
block producers on par.

Or have a clue how their favorite Banks and Govs really work.

Whatever will be, it's early, help them cypherpunk,
and enjoy the ride :)

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list