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 have been completely explored a decade earlier than Jason Lowery turned a reputation that anybody was aware of on this house.
First let’s take a look at the nation state mining “defensive weaponry” nonsense. Nation states being incentivized to mine, or assist mining of their jurisdictions, isn’t 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 house to review and talk about the place issues have been entering into the long run has thought of the dynamic of countries getting concerned with mining if Bitcoin was really profitable in its progress long run.
If Bitcoin ever turned geopolitically related at a world scale, nation states have been all the time 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 house over a decade in the past.
The facet of Bitcoin securing knowledge nevertheless is patently absurd and incoherent. Bitcoin doesn’t “safe” knowledge. It could possibly timestamp knowledge, however that’s not a magic assure of safety. It does nothing in anyway 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 data is simply absurd. By its very nature any knowledge placed on Bitcoin is accessible by actually anybody. That’s the whole bedrock it’s based mostly on, the whole lot being open and clear in order that it may be verified.
So let’s discuss paywalls, APIs, and nonsense gibberish like “digital vitality.” Lowery’s subsequent large leap is that charging in bitcoin for API calls someway improves safety. That is full nonsense. Proscribing entry to an API is completed for 2 causes, 1) to handle useful resource use and cease them from being wasted, or 2) to solely enable particular people you’ve got approved to entry the API. Bitcoin may help with the previous barely, however does nothing in anyway 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 out a fee. These packets nonetheless should be diverted or managed by conventional DoS methods, 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 arms on does nothing to limit entry to a system to solely particular individuals that you just wish 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 methods 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 methods 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 performed incorrectly or flaws exist in these methods. 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 status 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 warfare over. It’s pure delusion.
Jason Lowery doesn’t have a “thesis”, he has a pile of incoherent rubbish taped collectively round a single commentary that an uncountable variety of Bitcoiners had a decade earlier than he ever entered this house. It’s a whole joke, and anybody shopping for it demonstrates they’ve zero essential considering expertise or familiarity with the related subject material.
This text is a Take. Opinions expressed are fully the writer’s and don’t essentially mirror these of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Journal.
