I think Jason P. Lowery is right about this:

“In hindsight, the counterbalance to the threat of AI will be obviously Bitcoin. Here's the billion dollar answer that nobody seems to understand yet:

AI agent hackers = the inevitable end state of infinitely collapsing marginal cost of computation. Systems that are capable of outsmarting & exploiting any human-made cyber defense system that attemps to use conditional, permissioned-based logic alone.

Bitcoin = the world's chosen proof-of-work protocol. Want to defeat an AI agent hacker? you can't rely on conditional logic alone. you have to introduce something into the equation that AI can't defeat: brute-force physical limitations. AI's Achilles heal is computational cost, and it just so happens that the world has adopted a proof-of-computational-work protocol where we treat the electro-mechanical cost of computing as a tradeable digital asset that can be used as a form of restrictive collateral: it's called Bitcoin.

Understand this, and you understand the fundamentals about how Bitcoin will become the thing that ALL computing systems rely on to defend them against the threat of AI.

"digital gold" barely even scratches the surface of the importance of Bitcoin in 2030 and beyond.”

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Nice. Makes sense to me

Seems like word salad to me. What am I missing?

Lowery thinks future AI attackers will easily break most rule-based digital security because attacks become very cheap. Bitcoin’s proof-of-work forces attackers to pay real physical costs (energy, hardware), which even super-smart AI cannot avoid, so he sees Bitcoin as a core defensive layer against AI.

The thing is, AI will make social engineering attacks easier. Passwords also use SHA256.

I think nostr will be useful for the web of trust because the keys provide no repudiation and will make fake accounts moot.

The lightning network seems like a no-brainer to pay for AI because credit cards are easily hacked. I'm surprised more AI companies aren't using it yet. A few are.

Not clear to me