There's a lot of misconceptions in this post I'd like to address.
1. The state has suspicion regarding bitcoin as well, nothing more. There's no identity on the public ledger, the government is relying on heuristics to 'track' any coins they 'identify' as yours. A single tx and the deterministic link that it's really still you holding the keys is gone.
They have a strong suspicion in this example case, sure, but when it comes to the state it doesn't matter. They will ruin your life over any suspicion. How are you buying the gold in the first place without generating any suspicion? Peer to peer? You can do that with bitcoin much easier.
2. 'Geofencing' bitcoin is just flat out false, can't happen. Go ahead and look at transaction counts in every single country that's ever tried banning it. 'App store bans' or anything like that is just completely ineffective. Much more effective is just... the real world we live in where no one will transact in gold because it is slow, cumbersome, expensive, not verifiable, hard to move physically, hard to divide into smaller units.
3. Bitcoin actually has no 'core devs' either. Bitcoin Core, the client, does. That's just one way to run bitcoin. The best encapsulation of bitcoin, the protocol, development is the consensus ruleset, which is IMPOSSIBLE to change. This is a nuanced point, but it CANNOT be changed. Any change is a fork that you don't have to participate in. So stuff like 'client upgrade that increases storage risk by 1200x' is illegitimate.
4. Node maintenance is trivial and distribution of nodes is already massively overkilled. Any attack on node runners in a legal jurisdiction would activate the antifragility of the network globally. You also are never required to upgrade a node/client software because the system is backward compatible. So the 'requirements' for this pose zero systemic risk.
5. What? Absolutely ridiculous FUD. And even if it's granted truth, you already gave the answer to the problem with multisig solutions. This makes bitcoin expropriation 100% physical same as gold.
6. Gold doesn't need society. Ok, you win this one!
Login to reply
Replies (1)
segwit was a softfork that increased the storage size/risk by 4x
there are numerous ways a softfork could ruin the network, ie an OFAC softfork, etc
if a country bans Bitcoin the number of users will drop. It simply adds more friction to getting access to Bitcoin, like when it's removed from brokers/exchanges. But I'm not sure what the original OPs point was