Replying to Avatar Lyn Alden

A steelman argument is the opposite of a strawman argument. It's where you imagine the best possible argument from your opposing side (sometimes even better than they themselves can articulate it), and address that. In other words, you treat your critics like absolutely serious people and try to address any concerns they may have with regards to your outlook.

If someone were to argue that, "yeah bitcoin is cool, but ultimately when push comes to shove the major governments are going to outlaw it, drive it into the black market as a small asset, and issue a replacement that they back as legal tender", what would your steelman argument be?

Similarly, if someone were to argue, "Look how fast they are advancing on superconductors. Quantum computing may come sooner than we think, and threaten Bitcoin's security. That's why I don't buy bitcoins", what would your steelman argument be?
Avatar
nym 2y ago

Scenario 1: Governments Outlawing Bitcoin

Opposing Argument: Major governments will outlaw Bitcoin, driving it into the black market and replacing it with state-backed digital currency, rendering Bitcoin irrelevant.

Steelman Argument: It's true that the regulatory environment is an ever-present concern for decentralized digital assets like Bitcoin. Governments could indeed exert pressure through regulations or even outright bans. However, Bitcoin's decentralized nature makes it resistant to control by any single government. While certain jurisdictions may limit or ban Bitcoin, it might thrive in others that see the strategic or economic advantages of a decentralized currency. Furthermore, the technical and philosophical underpinnings of Bitcoin mean it could continue to operate as a store of value or medium of exchange even if driven underground in certain areas. It may even stimulate innovation in privacy and decentralized finance, leading to more resilient and adaptive systems.

Scenario 2: Quantum Computing Threat to Bitcoin

Opposing Argument: Rapid advancements in superconductors and quantum computing might threaten Bitcoin's security sooner than anticipated, making it an unwise investment.

Steelman Argument: Quantum computing indeed represents a theoretical risk to Bitcoin, particularly concerning its public-key cryptography. If large-scale quantum computers become a reality, they might be able to break the cryptographic algorithms currently used in the Bitcoin network. However, the cryptographic community is actively researching post-quantum cryptography, and algorithms resistant to quantum attacks are under development. Furthermore, the Bitcoin protocol is not static; it can be updated to include quantum-resistant algorithms as the technology approaches practical viability. Transitioning to new cryptographic algorithms would be complex but not necessarily infeasible. While the threat is not to be dismissed, the collective interest in maintaining Bitcoin's security and the ability to adapt the protocol provide some measure of confidence in its resilience against this evolving technological landscape.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.