• Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not at all. National currency, for example, is backed by the government’s desire to maintain power, so you can be fairly certain that it will remain stable for as long as the nation remains viable. Bitcoin is backed entirely by random strangers agreeing to trade national currencies for it.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      You know the blockchain, right? Basically, whenever anyone trades a bitcoin, that transaction is recorded on the blockchain. And there’s a bunch of math work that goes into recording each transaction. When people do this math work, they get rewarded with a tiny bit of a bitcoin. This is what mining is. So then you have some bitcoin. And some other people accept bitcoin for goods and services.

      Bitcoin itself is a virtual currency, just like Runescape gold or the dollars in your online bank account. It’s just numbers on a computer. The blockchain part is what makes it different.

      Now don’t get me wrong, for the majority of applications this is overkill and not at all useful. Bitcoin and blockchains are solutions looking for a problem.

    • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Bitcoin was the very first solution to how do you prevent a digital item from being copied and used repeatedly aka double spending.

      Nothing digital was truly safe from this until bitcoin as you always had to trust someone who could double spend or steal it if they wanted to, or the database/system being hacked and things altered.

      Things became truly immutable once committed to the chain.

      The whole system needed an incentive to keep everyone aligned to reject double spends, and the coin itself was the reward. (Edit and there’s a limited number of coins, making them scarce)

      Miners get rewarded for ensuring transactions are legitimate. It costs money to gain the reward so it’s better for them to just keep the reward instead of risking losing it

      Edit: it also created the first time we could prove something digital existed at a point in time. Everything before this involved trusting someone data wasn’t altered to ‘prove’ it. Since blocks are immutable, their timestamp proves something existed then. E.g. a hash of a picture. It’s irrefutable the picture existed on that day.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    Being labeled as Satoshi Nakamoto is basically a fucking death sentence due to how much money is on the line. It feels deeply irresponsible of HBO.

      • 9point6@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        He potentially has billions of dollars in bitcoin

        Bad people do bad things for big sums of money

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Other billionaires also have security. The accused people who aren’t really Satoshi likely don’t have the means to properly protect themselves the same way.

            • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yea - Taylor Swift, as an example, has serious security around her due to her wealth and also the personal threats she’s received… that doesn’t come cheap.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            You can’t torture the money away from most billionaires. Someone who has most of their wealth in Bitcoin theoretically could have that happen to them.

            And after stealing the money, there’s not that much chance of getting caught, unlike if you just tried putting billions into your regular ass bank account.

          • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Satoshi could liquidate 4.76% of all the bitcoins that will ever exist, that would wipe the crypto market and potentially bring the stock market along for a very bumpy ride, wipe a ton of money in pension funds and so on.

            The fact that one person owns that much Bitcoin should worry anyone who is invested in it.

          • Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yes but having billions in Bitcoin more closely resembles having billions in cash than billions in stocks / other assets which are harder to steal and get away with.

            • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yup, if you robbed Elon Musk you’d just walk away with some IOUs that might be worth millions… and also billions in Twitter debt.

              The actual Satoshi has billions in untraceable cash equivalents that already happen to be in a currency that drug lords like dealing in.

            • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              2 months ago

              Ironically, that’s the kind of “issue” you need trustworthy banks for. The thing crypto was meant to replace. But none of the crypto exchanges that exist are trustworthy enough

  • HootinNHollerin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    That was a good read. I haven’t watched the documentary or kept up with this, but the part

    Len Sassaman, a cryptographer who moved in similar online circles as Satoshi, as the most likely candidate to be revealed as the Bitcoin creator. Sassaman took his own life in 2011 at the age of 31, shortly after Satoshi disappeared.

    seems pretty strongly like the guy to me though. Hopefully the documentary goes into that?