Douglas_Knight comments on Bitcoin value and small probability / high impact arguments - Less Wrong

4 Post author: vbuterin 31 March 2015 04:48PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (50)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 31 March 2015 07:41:10PM *  2 points [-]

There is a long-term risk to black swan supply increases in gold due to any of { space mining, nanotech-enabled ultracheap earth mining, nuclear transmutation }; this does not exist for BTC

In the much shorter term than those threats there is the very white swan that quantum computers will completely destroy the bitcoin protocol.

Comment author: vbuterin 01 April 2015 09:10:29AM 0 points [-]

Quantum computers actually will not kill bitcoin. It'll take a significant coordination, but it'll survive:

https://bitcoinmagazine.com/6021/bitcoin-is-not-quantum-safe-and-how-we-can-fix/

Now, P = NP will kill bitcoin. But I rate that risk as being much lower than scifi gold mining techniques.

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 01 April 2015 05:53:30PM *  1 point [-]

Yes, post-quantum cryptocurrency can be built using Lamport signatures or, I think more likely, a full-fledged post-quantum public key system. But would such a hard fork still be "bitcoin"? Will there be enough coordination to make the jump? Why bet on it? Added: in other words, you have now switched to an argument of the form: this community will respect property rights, which is exactly opposite to the technical argument you started with.

Also, it's not just about Shor's algorithm. Grover's algorithm is a big deal. The advent of quantum computers will dramatically concentrate the pool of hashing power into few hands. I'm not sure what will happen, but I think that there is a good chance that the value of existing cryptocoins will be wiped out, even though the technology will be resurrected after quantum computers become widespread.