Bitcoin vs Blockchain: Who Wants Bitcoin Dead and Why
Blockchain’s disruptive potential is omitted solely in yellow publications, and the last company to proclaim its intention to integrate the technology in its services will probably become the stone-age Russian Post. International banks unite under major consortiums, startuppers prowl for opportunities to implement blockchain in yet another app, while venture capitalists headhunt for prospective developers. Five years in four. Long live the distributed labor. Peace to decentralized ledgers.
The cryptocurrency itself thus pales into insignificance as something inconvenient, complex, and market-hostile. The first reason for that might lie in very slow regulation development, and occasional blackmailing and sabotage attempts from prominent members of the community won’t add anything positive to the equation. Mike Hearn, who had reached Washington Post to give vent to his imperial complexes, is but an example of that trend. He was so hot in his rage he even sold all of his bitcoins, while in fact he could perform a more conceptual act by ordering pizza. For more than a week we’ve been hearing bitcoin is bleedin’ demised, so moving back to crooked PayPal and ancient WebMoney is brilliantly rational. Yet another mobbing for bitcoin is underway once again.
First, there way ‘et tu autem, Brute’ effect caused by none other than one of the leading developers of bitcoin. His scandalous statements concerning the experiment’s failure lauched a quite expected reaction within the community, which engaged in what is known as holywar on the web. Major publications started reiterating Hearn’s allegiantions, and the propagandist machine started disseminating bitcoin obituaries throughout the world.
The discourse of bitcoinless blockchain becomes especially burning against that raging background, as it is mostly considered a foundation for distributed technology-based solutions. The key premises of this opposition becomes as clear as possible in BitFury’s research, where the company compares private and public blockchains.
Notably, that while bitcoin is allegedly being convulsed in agony, the blockchain becomes the most popular media cure for all and everything. SWIFT on blockchain, a bank conspiracy around blockchain, and even a government on blockchain is in the headlines. The whole thing lacks only blockchain-based morning-after pills to reach its ultimate goal.
Just imagine major media and financial institutions some fifteen years ago abandoning their good night sleep to speak about how great MySQL all the time. MySQL will change the world, it will let you burn classic libraries to the ground and forget about millions of tassels. MySQL might save billons for banks!
Blockchain is a great technology, indeed, as it may become of use in lots of existing systems. It is specifically true for e-government initiatives and direct democracy issues. However, the fuss around distributed ledgers reminds of dotcom glut all the more, and might be an attempt to switch the masses’ attention from the idea of free money to a mere database, which, frankly, is quite a boring thing as it is. Moreover, the technology won’t make banks more customer-friendly, and most certainly will never turn bankers into benefactors. Blockchain’s role in those processes goes hand in hand with bitcion. Bitcoin, in its turn, has an ultimate goal of driving banks out to give way to less cumbersome hi-tech structures and to re-format the whole global financial system.
That’s where the fintech era actually starts. One might see what it could be like in the first prototypes of the future’s financial services, which include online banks, mobile apps for personal finance management, and even messengers enabling users to send money to their counterparts.
If the involved parties fail to substitute notions, the international stock market may turn into a large-scale network of offchain solutions built on top of bitcoin. This is the sequel to cryptocurrency as digital gold. Most probably, the emergence and development of the stock market in question may not cancel the existing platforms and technologies.
It is quite obvious that bitcoin lying in ruins is quite a desired thing for those unwilling to lose their clientele. This dead and forsaken bitcoin is desired by those seeking to avoid competition with a peculiar adversary. They cannot negotiate with bitcoin about circles of influence, interest rates, and printing a ton of fiat papers. Moreover, the substituted discourse along with the issues discussed under the bitcoin vs blockchain standoff may be signifying not just an attempt to usurp the technology and avoid free money.
The next step is a federal reserve digital currency, so-called FedCoin, extensively discussed in the community back in 2014. The recent statement by People’s Bank of China clearly correlates with this concept. The first country to abandon ‘the fiat protocol’ may become a commonly recognized powerhouse for several decades to follow.
by Toly Kaplan
Subscribe to our Newsletter<
- NEAR Co-Founder: Bitcoin’s Level of Security Isn’t Necessary for Most Blockchain Use Cases
- Antifa Threatened With Extremist Status: No Longer Thinks Bitcoin Is an Alt-Right Currency Antifa and BLM Will Make Bitcoin Edgy Again
- North Korean Hacker Group Lazarus Laundered Over 2,500 Stolen Bitcoins In May, Report
- “BigSpender” Exploit in Some Bitcoin Wallets Allows Attackers to Fake Transactions
- Will Bitcoin Always Be #1?
- U.S. University Pays Over $1M Ransom in Bitcoin to Hackers to Regain Access to Encrypted Data
- Blockstack’s Muneeb Ali: Bitcoin as the Most Secure Blockchain Will Be the Best Foundational Layer for Web 3.0
- Institutional Money In Bitcoin: Problem or Solution? An Expert Take