Jason Lowery’s Softwar “thesis” is a whole joke. It’s a mixture of incoherent, and subtly so, argumentation about cybersecurity and a repackaging of previous matters of dialogue that had been totally explored a decade earlier than Jason Lowery grew to become a reputation that anybody was conversant in on this area.
First let’s have a look at the nation state mining “defensive weaponry” nonsense. Nation states being incentivized to mine, or assist mining of their jurisdictions, shouldn’t be some novel thought of Jason’s. It’s a broadly mentioned dynamic going way back to 2011-2013. Basically each Bitcoiner since that point interval who has been concerned sufficient on this area to check and focus on the place issues had been getting into the long run has thought-about the dynamic of countries getting concerned with mining if Bitcoin was truly profitable in its progress long run.
If Bitcoin ever grew to become geopolitically related at a world scale, nation states had been at all times going to take an curiosity within the mining sector. Nation states have an involvement in regulating all main commodities and their manufacturing, from gold to grease and pure gasoline. This isn’t some novel thesis or notion, it is not uncommon sense that was apparent to each random nerd who was on this area over a decade in the past.
The facet of Bitcoin securing information nonetheless is patently absurd and incoherent. Bitcoin doesn’t “safe” information. It might timestamp information, however that isn’t a magic assure of safety. It does nothing in any way to guard information from exfiltration (being accessed by unauthorized individuals and copied), nor does it assure integrity or accuracy. All information on the blockchain is publicly accessible to anybody operating a node. The thought of Bitcoin being helpful for controlling entry to data is simply absurd. By its very nature any information placed on Bitcoin is accessible by actually anybody. That’s the complete bedrock it’s primarily based on, the whole lot being open and clear in order that it may be verified.
So let’s speak about paywalls, APIs, and nonsense gibberish like “digital vitality.” Lowery’s subsequent massive leap is that charging in bitcoin for API calls someway improves safety. That is full nonsense. Limiting entry to an API is finished for 2 causes, 1) to handle useful resource use and cease them from being wasted, or 2) to solely permit particular people you’ve gotten approved to entry the API. Bitcoin can assist with the previous barely, however does nothing in any way to assist with the latter.
Even monetizing an API with bitcoin doesn’t actually assist useful resource administration defending towards DoS assaults. Folks can nonetheless ship packets to your machine with no fee. These packets nonetheless must be diverted or managed by conventional DoS programs, which generally work by blackholing packets, or redirecting them away out of your system. Bitcoin funds do nothing to eliminate the necessity to do such issues.
A cash that anybody can get their palms on does nothing to limit entry to a system to solely particular individuals that you simply need to entry that system. Cryptography does that. Passwords try this. Applied sciences that exist already fully independently of, and haven’t any want for, Bitcoin. To not point out that even with such programs correctly carried out, the {hardware} and software program on the system being secured is finally what secures that system. Folks don’t fail to breach a server as a result of “Bitcoin is defending it,” they fail as a result of the safety programs on that server are correctly carried out.
Bitcoin, and even correct cryptography with out Bitcoin, does nothing to maintain a system safe when implementations are finished incorrectly or flaws exist in these programs. That’s the root of cybersecurity, and Bitcoin does completely nothing to alter it. It doesn’t assist {hardware} be free from flaws, or safety software program be free from bugs. This whole facet of his “thesis” is completely incoherent gibberish, that makes no logical sense in any respect. It’s a con to sucker in individuals who don’t perceive this stuff and construct a fame by hiding incoherence and incompetence behind clueless individuals cheerleading.
And the entire “Bitcoin will cease wars” nonsense as a result of nation states will compete with mining towards one another? Laughable. Bitcoin mining is not going to change the geopolitical competitors over agricultural lands, pure assets, tactical navy positions, or something that nation states go to conflict over. It’s pure delusion.
Jason Lowery doesn’t have a “thesis”, he has a pile of incoherent rubbish taped collectively round a single statement that an uncountable variety of Bitcoiners had a decade earlier than he ever entered this area. It’s a whole joke, and anybody shopping for it demonstrates they’ve zero vital pondering abilities or familiarity with the related material.
This text is a Take. Opinions expressed are fully the writer’s and don’t essentially replicate these of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Journal.
