The protocol is more than code, code itself is just abstract power, just as written and spoken language are.
The protocol is LITERALLY a PHYSICAL power projection technology.
And if people are legally allowed to use lethal kinetic power projection (guns) then it would clearly protect people utilizing non-lethal electronic physical power projection.
2A isn't an attack vector, it's the strongest legal argument you have for protecting bitcoin mining and the network.
Totally refute this. Once you agree that speech is violence you are allowing the government to dictate who can use it.
The 2nd amendment us being trampled on. I gwce to examples of restrictions(bump stops, barrel lemghts) niw think of hiw thus could be applied to the manufacturing, distribution amd ownership of the ASIC miners that secure the network.
You're helping enable thought crimes here. Once you accept that mathematical equations and code are anything more than speech, a whole new door is opened.
Tell me hiw this is in anyway different to the PGP case in the 90s
The bitcoin network is the most secure network on the planet because it's primary value delivered function is that it imposes severe physical costs on attackers. So physically costly that's its actually impossible for them to successfully attack the network.
Your inclination to refuse to accept that bitcoin is a physical power projection technology comes from the fact that your ideological beliefs about using physical power to secure yourself are somehow unethical.
That's a result of the current dominance hierarchies domestication of the population under its control. Don't be domesticated. You are an apex predator.
Bitcoin started a revolutionary war for freedom.. wars are fought with physical power projection tactics. The difference now is that we can project physical power peacefully without killing eachother.
You are ignoring my question purposely now. It figures as Lowery himself does.
If you want to have a honest conversation, address my points. Do you even know about the PGP case? This is just pointless
I don't know about it, I'd be willing to hear you explain it if you'd like.
I can tell you are passionate but slow down a bit the typos on that last post were pretty bad.
You make some interesting points there, unfortunately it is hard to follow te discussion as i cannot get it to display sequentially.
I understand your point is that the theory of BTC as a defence technology will attract the eye of Sauron and initiate a new push for restrictions (attack vector)? I think that tracks. But is Lowery's premise true? Or do you believe it to be completely fabricated? I also agree that having a government employee radically reframe the conversation in this manner should raise alarms.
I believe the government will most definitely mine bitcoin. Whether we allow them to frame it as a weapon and restrictions be placed on the few countries that manufacture the ASICs. Think about how you would ship a miner from a country under sanctions. This us a shirt sighted approach IMO.
Bitcoin is secured because of it's decentralisation. If the government becomes the only game on town we are finished
I thought the weapons analogy was just for the purpose of illustration, In many ways you could make similar rhetoric about the US dollar being a weapon, or any other technology. My understanding is that BTC is a big deterrent to physical violence and an incentive to peace. I guess anything can be extrapolated and taken out of context.
I still haven't read the book though
It's this generations attemt to ban encryption and nothing more. He relying on the fact some people refuse to learn from history and have broken intention spans. PGP has settled this and i know I'm on point because Lowery blocks or ignores anyone who asks this question.
