About extreme scenarios like 80% of btc stolen (- I'm going to ignore the "how do you measure it" part, though I suspect that'll come back to bite us at some point!): i mean there is presumably a failure mode where trust breaks down, but it's not really about a specific number or ratio. It's about whether there's any credibility that going forward, the system will be trustworthy. Anything above 30-40% is presumably disaster-level and the project *might* just kind of fall apart. But I really don't know. I just know that if you violate the core principle of private property you've mostly already lost. Maybe I'm wrong and everyone would love it, but what's the point in bitcoin in that case, I don't see it.
Login to reply
Replies (1)
> It's about whether there's any credibility that going forward, the system will be trustworthy. Anything above 30-40% is presumably disaster-level and the project *might* just kind of fall apart. But I really don't know.
Right I guess part of my point is I don’t buy that there’s any credibility left in the system at all even if just 1M coins are stolen. Maybe that’s the biggest disagreement?
> I just know that if you violate the core principle of private property you've mostly already lost. Maybe I'm wrong and everyone would love it, but what's the point in bitcoin in that case, I don't see it.
I still haven’t seen you contend with the relative loss issue - by freezing some coins you lose the ability to recover potentially many more. I just don’t see how this is a good tradeoff.