Bitcoin's Dystopian Future (April 2013)
lifeboat.com
lifeboat.com
I'm only ankle deep in subjects like macroeconomics, political science, and sociology, and even I am groaning at the newbie mistakes he makes in his analysis. This guy just flat out doesn't know what he's talking about. He has an audience because his audience is other people who are equally as uninformed.
There is a place where experts discuss these kinds of questions and it's not on blogs. I don't have enough disrespect for my time to bother refuting him (the supply of worthless bloggers is infinite--impossible to make a dent in the endless ignorance) but if anyone wants to be informed on these questions they should start with macroecon 101 and should be learning from specialists, not hobbyists.
There's a name for what happens if someone finds a way to use large amounts of people to act in their interest but against the public interest. It's called a "Nash equilibrium", and it's unstoppable.
This is the point the article seems to be making.
When the ice caps are melting, walk uphill.
I also like the 'TorSlaver' scenario he paints, it's a good bit of scaremongering[1]. It is probably not unwarranted however, as the more people who respect the terrifying power bitcoin holds, the better.
> At some point, we collectively with our governments face a difficult choice between trying to survive this deadly storm or attempting to destroy all decentralized computer networks (including the internet). The former seems unthinkable, the latter, impossible.
I would say it's not impossible to shut down the existing internet, but you'd have to replace it with something else[2] in order to avoid complete socioeconomic collapse.
Both these options have been advocated by various people for reasons unrelated to bitcoin. The climate benefit is obvious (and may help make up for bitcoin's energy expenditure). Georgists and geolibertarians argue that converting to land taxes would have all sorts of benefits.