Nostr Web Client

Security is always going to be inversely proportional to convenience. The need for security is proportional to social trust. In low stakes, high trust environments, low friction solutions will flourish. In high stakes, low trust environments, self-custody will be the default.

I say this all the time. But I think one of the problems is a lot of bitcoiners are in a low trust, high stakes mindset at all times, and believe everyone else should be to. This leads to a bit of confusion to how things are going to play out, in aggregate.

Big Barry Bitcoin 2y ago

A normies default state is high trust maximum convenience. This unfortunately leads them down very bad paths during their journey to learn.

The funny thing also is that trust is given to corporations and anonymous influencers but is reduced when talking with a person face to face.

This is not malicious intent, but rather a habit born from society. It's no wonder that Bitcoiners jump to the opposite extreme, and even after they normalise, they must promote the extreme security model for newbies to be help improve the outcome of their journey.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Mike Brock 2y ago

I just don't think there's going to be a great awakening, here, where everyone's priority becomes to be as self-sovereign as possible. Back in my AnCap days, I convinced myself that people would all reach this conclusion once the contradictions of the system played out. I no longer think that. I think the modern state can exist in a state of contradictions, adapting to shocks and cultural changes, in perpetuity. It doesn't ever have to reconcile down to a self-consistent model. It just has to maintain an ability to adapt.

Modus 2y ago

I think "maintaining the ability to adapt" has limits. The shocks that hit the system COULD all be small enough to stay within those adaptation limits. Or not.