“Proficient” bitcoin author Andreas: one day in the future, everyone will need encryption currency?

This article from the information: Babbitt (ID:bitcoin8btc), author: Colin, the daily planet authorized forwarding.

In the ten years of bitcoin change is undeniable. Bitcoin has experienced about 6 market cycles, spawned a has more than 2000 competitive currency market in two, and laid the foundation for the rapid development of the industry chain block. It has been from the beginning of the password and password small hobby punk anarchist become a viable currency privatization, enough to provide an important economic lifeline for those who are unable to enjoy banking services and basic rights in the near collapse of the economic man.

Andreas Antonopoulos photograph: Bitcoin Magazine

There are a lot of people change bitcoin this ten years have their own views, including Andreas Antonopoulos. He is a well-known bitcoin preacher, is committed to the popularization and promotion of bitcoin. Since 2012 to enter this industry, Antonopoulos will go all around the world to share their views on bitcoin. The “master”, “currency bitcoin Internet” and the forthcoming “proficient” etheric Fang known as learning and reading encrypted bitcoin currency publications.

There are people in the rich at the same time, he has become “rich” to the community in another form, reminding bitcoin is not just Lamborghini wood and soil (to the moon) expression package. Last year, the bitcoin Authority revealed that their own hands and not bitcoin, immediately after he was given to the value of $160 million dollar coins, this is enough to prove its influence in the community.

In an interview with Bitcoin Magazine, Antonopoulos shows the change of the whole ecological experience, lessons learned from these changes, he also explains why experienced challenges 10, bitcoin’s spirit still exists.

Straight, this decade what change?

Antonopoulos: change too much, where to start?

When I started to enter the industry, the community is really small, contact is also very close, but very focused. We have a lot of common goal, the feeling is very close. I remember that I most want to let people know that this is not just the payment. Bitcoin is not PayPal; it is more powerful than PayPal. It is not only a payment network.

In order to better express the view, I put bitcoin as a platform at the time. You have to think so, this is not just a bitcoin, but a bigger thing: block chain. Unfortunately, I wanted to describe a something more convenient for people to understand the potential, but the next 3 years, people began to use the word “blockchain”, rushed to the spot, and all the block chain has been linked – and in fact many things and not block chain. So the 4, I went back to the origin, published a theme for the “VS” block chain nonsense speech.

Are you referring to currency ecological competition?

Antonopoulos: not only that. There are books distributed technology (DLT), a private bank, chain chain, “pretend this is to the center of the ecology but actually not.”. They tried to hijack this industry acceptance, expansion and differentiation, and even destruction of the industry.

In 2013 the first meeting on the first meeting, I also participated in, this kind of phenomenon began to appear. By the end of 2013, this is the fourth or fifth bubble, bitcoin prices reached $1000, this phenomenon began to spread.

So this is a close knit community, while ‘swim shark’, everyone wants a share, and use your influence to make money. All of this seem stupid is false is also very hypocritical: “I have a project, we must reform the real estate industry, we should reform the transaction, we must reform the medical industry.” Most of them are rubbish, purely for profiteering.

I have to change an angle to think, to distinguish between what is real, what is the real “killer application”, what is happening now.

So you have come to the conclusion that (the killer app) is bitcoin?

Antonopoulos: not necessarily bitcoin, but to go to the center of the currency and to the center of things. To the center is the core. If you can do to the center of the currency itself can also be a killer application.

This is the first change.

Another change is that one of the reasons to attract people into this area is the people here to find a sense of belonging, make them feel like they belong to this adventure — this kind of adventure in violation of the conventional, mainstream, very strange, it sounds like we are powerful forces and not to be optimistic about a square.

And similar movement, eventually the interior will be split, there are some people in the “weak” and “identity within the system bitcoiner ‘counter. Suddenly, bitcoin will become within the system, some people would say “this is bitcoin 2, better than bitcoin, bitcoin can solve all the problems.” Then you’ll see the bitcoin community division.

Do you mean this circle of people in “cannibalism”?

Antonopoulos: because some people think they must be weak, we must fight with others. They are such a character. When you fight for something suddenly recognized, IBM and other companies are also involved, this time the situation is very interesting.

That is to say, they must find a new “target”?

Antonopoulos: yes. This is the status of crypto currency field, full split and internal struggle, whether between bitcoin or bitcoin and other systems or other systems are in such a situation.

Soon after the etheric Fang appeared, shouting “we will replace bitcoin, bitcoin beyond the slogan”. Next, before you begin to understand the etheric square, there is not 5 version: “etheric Fang is too conservative, we are the best solution.”

This is Trotsky (Stalin’s opponents) phenomenon. At the start of the revolutionary weeks appeared anti revolutionary movement. Some revolutionaries are not idle down, this is not a bad thing: principles, ideals, political belief. Many people think that this is an act of aggression, is hypocritical. But honestly, in the past 4 years, in opposition to the new machine I know (bitcoin) people, mostly well intentioned.

This is like fighting on both sides, side to side and external confrontation, like fighting himself, right?

Antonopoulos: Yes, this is a very typical human behavior. Ironically, for those outsiders, we are all freaks. They will be impossible to distinguish between those good for business freak and bad for business freak. We are all freaks. Because this system has existed for hundreds of years, you can’t say come, say to change.

Of course, each facing change will say. There is a simple solution: to one day, there will be a strong conflict, “the system” to those who attempt to subvert its people launched a strong counterattack, but that day has not come yet.

Interestingly, when they came back, they do not think that Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and bitcoin, bitcoin, Fang Fang and Ethernet and Ethernet, Gerbaud Monroe and Zcash – what is the difference in their opinion, we are just a group of strange anarchists, trying to help terrorists and drug lords destruction financial order. They do not distinguish between. They will attack us all, and this is precisely the best moment of unity.

Once subjected to external attacks, everyone will unite for common interests, we became friends again. This in any divided country can be proved, once the external appearance of the enemy, will set up the United front.

When it comes to external forces, how do you think the government plays in this field? Especially North america. What we see is the right direction? Or just to show off?

Antonopoulos: I think that is not important. This is just a grandiose performance. They want to seem to keep pace with the times, seem to support business support innovation — it is nonsense. First of all, the system is not enough to produce a great influence, has not been able to disrupt the existing industry, really at that time the government will start to adjust their livelihood strategy, know where, know who pay. But we are not for all the people to pay.

Then we will feel very direct hostility, see a lot of false information. At present, they only played the role of the regulators kind and generous, calm and considerate, do not want to hinder innovation. This is acting. No meaning.

In the United States, the division of the state is more obvious — because there are 15 federal regulators, 50 state regulators, some institutions will say ‘I don’t want this thing, you will be responsible for supervision! ” Others will say “this is our territory! You go out! ” The same thing is staged around the world.

There is no country’s government have done better in this regard?

Antonopoulos: This is really important? This is not the government. In a decentralized system, the algorithm creates governance mechanism, and it is the first to subvert the supervision.

This pattern of early subversion of the regulators: “we are managed according to this way, we don’t need to be some institutions and supervision committee.” People think I said these are questioning their authority. In fact, I’m not questioning their authority; they are the authority of the owner. I just question their ability to perform this kind of authority.

You said that there is no way to determine whether there is a place that allows them to execute the authority?

Antonopoulos: yes.

So you think this field does not need regulation?

Antonopoulos: of course. It has already been supervision; supervision it is mathematics. This regulatory model is highly uncertain, is predictable. No ruler in this system, but it does not mean that there are no rules. There are many rules, there are many specific rules.

There is no wavering rule. People must be aware of this: we don’t need supervision of encryption currency, this does not mean that the encryption currency does not need to be regulated, but because it has been regulated, it is regulation algorithm.

If you want to let the algorithms assume regulatory responsibilities, here is your playground. If you want to rule, we have such a system. This is not what new things, in fact, this is the problem we are trying to solve.

I will come to see the problem in a very simple way: most of today’s institutions in the management are basically the era of industrialization, it is the product of the industrial revolution. This means that they are born in late eighteenth Century and early nineteenth Century. Here has been unable to continue to expand, because of a sneeze in one place may trigger a hurricane in another place.

The relationship between us is too tight, that can not pass the rule of man and human decision-making way to manage different areas. If you try to accept the industrial age model of governance, and want to expand the scale, form bigger gathering area — EU, Russian Federation, United States, soon after they are either there will be corruption, or will become very cold, either unable or very difficult to make decisions, because they can not scale.

The question before us is, we not only need them to expand the scale, they also need to expand enough to cross the boundaries of the scale. This sounds terrible, because there is only one world government, if our own government fails, then multinational government how bad? We need a different mode of governance. The industrial revolution is no longer suitable for us. This is my view on the system.

Once the government realized it was a game, a game to change the governance mode of the game, I think we will see a completely different response, we may face obstacles.

There is one thing: I think we overestimated the government of interest (blockchain). Their problem is too serious, and we are doing nothing. The dollar has its own problems, but also very much.

Many people think that bring a lot of institutional investors and funds bitcoin ETF by. But in fact, ETF is not a bitcoin bitcoin, which is similar to the contract. Do you think bitcoin ETF or whether futures with bitcoin concept draw further apart?

Antonopoulos: This is two completely opposite. Because the things you say is the center of the custodian to give you a small part of the ownership. You will be subject to currency fluctuations. You and those who hold private and have bitcoin or other encryption currency directly to the person, you do not have any autonomy, can not participate in the vote, can not be independent of the transaction. Encryption currency should be a direct participation system.

When you invest in this ETF two class market, you have no right to participate directly. You are just two or three citizens, the rights and interests is limited.

The remaining interest in where? In the hands of the custodian. They have the right to decide which branch is legitimate, you can’t. They have the right to vote for the next time you can’t soft bifurcation. They have the right to decide whether you want to switch to other currencies, you can’t.

But this does not mean that they will destroy the encrypted currency.

If this investment, so investors better. But this is not related to investment, technology and related. So many people into a technology, especially the technology was not ready when carrying so many people, so there is a benefit without harm.

When the AOL (United States Internet service providers) when entering the field of Internet, AOL said this is “the golden age”, said the Internet is “black Monday”. Because the AOL on the Internet just when the general development, standards and application in this field, brought 3 million do not understand what rookie. Everything is out of control, because the Internet is not ready for large-scale users, also not ready to load those do not adapt to the new culture of the people.

You mentioned the concept of “one bank” at this stage it seems unrealistic, because of the presence of user experience, practical and technical problems. It is not as long as we have used more intuitive design and more secure, we will witness the popularity of more comprehensive?

Antonopoulos: we will not see the overall popularity. At that time, we should be able to help those who really need the technology people. You know not everyone needs this technology. The world about 5% to 10% of the population living in the democratic society, where institutions and banks can normal operation. We are the lucky ones — we are not the technology of the target population. In the long term, we need this technology because our democracy is rapidly disintegrated, but in the short term we do not need to use bitcoin to buy coffee.

So, in the long term, developers and educators should do what? The rapid development of the community should do in order to achieve encryption currency?

Antonopoulos: first of all, we must know that not everyone needs bitcoin, don’t put it “sell” to those who don’t need it. Not everyone is ready or should participate in this system, right? I know we have a lot to the bitcoin. My friends are involved, they may be involved in the investment, perhaps they feel happy, but also may not be happy, this is a double-edged sword.

But that really is the impact of this technology is the 60 million people: they cannot enjoy normal banking services. For them, bitcoin on behalf of the human rights, especially the protection of basic rights, so that they no longer have the corruption mechanism of persecution. This is where the power: it gives people freedom.

So whether the future one day, everyone will need encryption currency?

Antonopoulos: of course.

Do you think that day, there will be a crypto currency with privatization or nationalization form?

Antonopoulos: all possible. May each of you can think of: state-owned and private, issued by the government, private issue. I think, in essence, issued by the State Encryption currency belongs to the “business”, will not change what. The most fundamental problem is the control center, and the government issued currency is the absolute center of the encryption.

But they could not issue a fixed number of encryption currency, right?

Antonopoulos: really. And it is not a review or they cannot control or verify the identity of the crypto currency. Because the supervision in their view is the most important.

Therefore, all this may occur, but may become boring. Because the more significant is a global system of open, borderless, neutral, anti censorship, it can give people the power of choice.

Bitcoin is no borders, no control center, the purchasing power and the right to vote to ordinary people.

Antonopoulos: I think that bitcoin, people will think of politics. This is because bitcoin is like a mirror, you can always see the things you want to see. However, it is Marx and Marxism or capitalism has nothing to do. It is the encrypted currency. It is interesting that the Marx doctrine and the capitalist system were created in 18 at the end of the century and the beginning of the 19 century, is the product of the industrial revolution.

Bitcoin is a product of post-modernism. It can not enter any existing system, because we are trying to create a new system, a system to redefine the governance model. Some people regard it as the Marx doctrine, some people regard it as capitalism, some people think it is liberalism, some people think it is anarchism, this is because they try to give bitcoin labeled traditional labels.

You must re create a label. Bitcoin is an asset? Is the stock? Is money? Is the stock? No, bitcoin is encryption currency. What is the encryption currency? This is a new thing, and all of the above concepts are different. It also has the characteristics of precious metals, securities, stocks, contracts and currency, but does not belong to any kind of concept.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *