summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorBryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>2015-02-11 09:46:34 -0600
committerBryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>2015-02-11 09:46:34 -0600
commitc1b327b03a97fb9328f44744832899a574dc36b7 (patch)
tree5a86a43c9121af65efbe20f07a73cb266d195730
parentc7366380897b0fbf82f14734f0945ca285503134 (diff)
downloaddiyhpluswiki-c1b327b03a97fb9328f44744832899a574dc36b7.tar.gz
diyhpluswiki-c1b327b03a97fb9328f44744832899a574dc36b7.zip
even more circle words...
-rw-r--r--transcripts/bitcoin-devcore-2015/jeremy-allaire-circle.mdwn6
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/transcripts/bitcoin-devcore-2015/jeremy-allaire-circle.mdwn b/transcripts/bitcoin-devcore-2015/jeremy-allaire-circle.mdwn
index ddb8adc..9ccb0ee 100644
--- a/transcripts/bitcoin-devcore-2015/jeremy-allaire-circle.mdwn
+++ b/transcripts/bitcoin-devcore-2015/jeremy-allaire-circle.mdwn
@@ -11,3 +11,9 @@ How do we mature the development of Bitcoin Core itself? One of the things that
"The root problem with conventional currency is all the trust that’s required to make it work. The central bank must be trusted not to debase the currency, but the history of fiat currencies is full of breaches of that trust. Banks must be trusted to hold our money and transfer it electronically, but they lend it out in waves of credit bubbles with barely a fraction in reserve. We have to trust them with our privacy, trust them not to let identity thieves drain our accounts. Their massive overhead costs make micropayments impossible."
"Identity is a key concept"... (blah, no thank you). Reputation, federated identity, regulatory approaches to know your customer, anti-money laundering, fraud, risk and things like that in transactions and it layers into protecting consumer privacy and avoiding criminal anonymity for certain kinds of things. It's an important issue. I have long been passionate about identity for 12 years including federated identity. There is a fundamental relationship between government identity and financial identity. They are tightly coupled. If you talk with governments and large financial institutions, these are the issues they are grappling with. They want identity. They want identity for their citizens. Sean and I have talked about these themes. I think the blockchain has blown open the reputation and identity stuff.... the concept of Sybil attacks, and public key cryptography and how people ((don't)) need identity is a really powerful concept. It's pretty important. There are two sides to when we talk about the benefits of Bitcoin as a transaction medium. One is that, hey, we have this existing internet which has been built on.... ((Nevermind, I really can't tolerate this. They don't seem to understand Sybil attacks.))
+
+Complexity is a key problem in terms of Bitcoin adoption. This idea of a spectrum of control... having absolute control of private keys, and simplicity... The simpler you make it, the more control you have to give up is not true. This is intellectually lazy to think of this as a spectrum. I think both of these things could be accomplished at the same time. It's not about stripping out control, it's about the essential nature about what people should be able to use the blockchain to accomplish and then iterating on that. Complexity and mainstream adoption means something different to Bitcoin people than just mainstream consumers... we talk about reducing complexity, we're talking about workflows for multisig or securing your keys in hardware. Mainstream consumers don't care about any of that stuff. It has to be far simpler. It has to be like Steve Jobs. If it has a stylus, you have lost. There has to be another level of simplicity who don't want to join the Bitcoin movement but still stand to benefit from Bitcoin. Maybe they don't need to be aware that they are using Bitcoin, perhaps they get the near zero fees and near instant settlement. There needs to be a different kind of thought to address complexity for actual mainstream consumers. Otherwise we can make Bitcoin simpler. Really what we're doing there is finding the early adopters instead of actually moving to the next group which is the early majority and getting them on board.
+
+Is 2015 or 2016 the years when we can go mainstream? I'm constantly asked by family and friends and people etc is what is the killer app. The killer app means introducing new layers of... it emerges when the technology disappear, when web search made HTTP become a non-issue. When you can sign up and use a web mail account instead of configuring SMTP. It's about making the technology disappear. What's the right token ring, to make this simple? If you are thinking about token rings, then you've already lost. The right abstractions need to be put in place. We're right on the cusp of the benefits, like near instant settlement, global interop, better security, better privacy, these are huge advantages over existing payment systems. To the average person it's still too much of a commitment. That really is a turn off to a lot of users. One of the other things on the complexity side, if it was just a problem of creating software, things would be easier for us, unlike in other businesses which have involved meaningful infrastructure and tools for other users, this is the first business where I need permission to write software or launch a product, I need permission from the government to do that. So there's another kind of complexity with Bitcoin itself which is it really you know to to deliver truly great experiences and to to make it work for users it requires sort of interop with the existing legacy payment systems and the existing ways that people move value to make it useful to peopel today and to make it useful today we can innovative on Bitcoin in a permissionless fashion which is amazing but we can't innovative on top of ACH or the card networks without a great deal of oversight and that makes it complex to get mass acceptance because we have to invest more and you could argue whether this is good or bad and does it hurt our ability to grow and that's worthwhile to debate. I think that is the basis for the constraints of blockchain adoption. Certianly lots of startups have felt the impact of that, like unexpected fees or things like that, which I think you know makes it very very different to other technologies that were made simpler.
+
+Closing thoughts. Yeah. Just sort of. I think, high level, I think, Bitcoin is going to have profound impact in over 10 or 20 years. I think the impact is going to be far greater than we anticipate. There is this sort of truism. New technologies on the web in the 90s take lots longer than advocates think, but the long-term impact is often greater than what the strongest advocates think. We had giant ideas about web being available everywhere. Expansion will take longer than we think, but I think the long term impact will be more than we think. Fiduicary trust apps.. these kinds of apps touch every institution on the planet, everyone needs these intersections of accounting and payments, they weave their way through every institution on the planet. The people who figure that out and contribute to Bitcoin Core and figure out what can be built on top of it is really exciting. Work on something.