@Jeff Booth just did more digging after my initial post. While they could theoretically create agents to run nodes and attempt to hijack the protocol, they still would have to over run the miners. Too expensive to do. The agents could cause a great deal of chaos , but it would be short lived. More than likely if you measure in fiat money the price for sure would drop during that time. But overall as a monetary and freedom protocol, no damage would be done!
Login to reply
Replies (2)
Just replied to you prior to seeing this but along same lines. (And talked of other “risks”)
The algos control the narrative. In 2017, sone people went all-in on bitcoin cash. I suspect this is largely due to the social proof likes and retweets that reinforced thier beliefs.
The dangers of B.F. Skinner style behaviorism were discussed by Ayn Rand and Noam Chompsky. When people with polar opposite viewpoints agree, I tend to take these viewpoints more seriously. The Skinner Box social media is incentivized to create seems like the biggest risk to me.
Maybe it won't be another blocksize war. Maybe it will be so-called experts scaring the quantum pants off of everyone, but if x is only full of people who don't know what they are talking about, they will drive the narrative.
I mean it's not that there is no quantum risk, but it seems small. Maybe Satoshi put his million coins in a wallet he created with 3 dice rolls. Is it possible? Sure, but I don't lose any sleep over it. That's how I feel about Quantum computing.
Maybe it's time for people who think about these things to get out of the closet and educate the masses. I just don't like x because I feel like the algos mute me.