Jason Lowery’s Softwar “thesis” is an entire joke. It’s a mixture of incoherent, and subtly so, argumentation about cybersecurity and a repackaging of outdated matters of dialogue that had been completely explored a decade earlier than Jason Lowery grew to become a reputation that anybody was acquainted with on this area.
First let’s take a look at the nation state mining “defensive weaponry” nonsense. Nation states being incentivized to mine, or help 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. Primarily each Bitcoiner since that point interval who has been concerned sufficient on this area to review and focus on the place issues had been entering into the long run has thought-about the dynamic of countries getting concerned with mining if Bitcoin was truly profitable in its development long run.
If Bitcoin ever grew to become geopolitically related at a worldwide 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 fuel. This isn’t some novel thesis or notion, it’s common sense that was apparent to each random nerd who was on this area over a decade in the past.
The side of Bitcoin securing knowledge nevertheless is patently absurd and incoherent. Bitcoin doesn’t “safe” knowledge. It might probably timestamp knowledge, however that’s not a magic assure of safety. It does nothing in any respect to guard knowledge from exfiltration (being accessed by unauthorized individuals and copied), nor does it assure integrity or accuracy. All knowledge on the blockchain is publicly accessible to anybody working a node. The thought of Bitcoin being helpful for controlling entry to info is simply absurd. By its very nature any knowledge placed on Bitcoin is accessible by actually anybody. That’s the whole bedrock it’s primarily based on, every little thing being open and clear in order that it may be verified.
So let’s speak about paywalls, APIs, and nonsense gibberish like “digital power.” Lowery’s subsequent massive leap is that charging in bitcoin for API calls by some means 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 enable particular people you might have approved to entry the API. Bitcoin may help with the previous barely, however does nothing in any respect to assist with the latter.
Even monetizing an API with bitcoin doesn’t actually assist useful resource administration defending in opposition to DoS assaults. Folks can nonetheless ship packets to your machine with no cost. These packets nonetheless must be diverted or managed by conventional DoS programs, which usually work by blackholing packets, or redirecting them away out of your system. Bitcoin funds do nothing to do away with 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 wish to entry that system. Cryptography does that. Passwords try this. Applied sciences that exist already fully independently of, and don’t have any want for, Bitcoin. To not point out that even with such programs correctly applied, the {hardware} and software program on the system being secured is in the end 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 applied.
Bitcoin, and even correct cryptography with out Bitcoin, does nothing to maintain a system safe when implementations are performed incorrectly or flaws exist in these programs. That’s the root of cybersecurity, and Bitcoin does completely nothing to vary it. It doesn’t assist {hardware} be free from flaws, or safety software program be free from bugs. This complete side 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 these items 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 in opposition to one another? Laughable. Bitcoin mining is not going to change the geopolitical competitors over agricultural lands, pure sources, 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 an entire joke, and anybody shopping for it demonstrates they’ve zero essential pondering expertise or familiarity with the related subject material.
This text is a Take. Opinions expressed are completely the writer’s and don’t essentially replicate these of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Journal.
