Bitcoin Forum

Quantum computers? Bugs in the code? Centralized mining?

Is there anything that can't potentially be overcome that is a threat to Bitcoin? Anything I didn't mention?

Thanks in advanced.

I would say bugs in the code not yet exploited.

Thanks for reply.. Interesting.

@bitomatic Yep, they sure could pose a serious threat to the whole Bitcoin world, this is one of the worst problems with virtual currency.

Anything that threatens the fungible nature of Bitcoin.  See my signature.

Thanks, I'm not quite sure i understand that term even though I checked the definition.

Bitcoin clones. They are the biggest threat not only to Bitcoin but to cryptocurrencyes movement in general.

Basically if you have to defer to a third party "authority" in order to determine the value of something it is not fungible.

Take USD for example.  They are fungible.  If I send you $100 you are never going to say "I don't want those $100, send me a different $100"

Diamonds are not fungible.  We have to defer to a rating authority in order to determine the value.  If I send you a diamond you may very well send it back saying "I don't like that one, send me a different one"

Money is fungible.  Bitcoin needs to remain fungible.  If Bitcoin is not fungible it is no longer money and becomes a collectible.

(Kind of) Playing Devil's Advocate here, but - what kind of bugs in the code would cause a problem that couldn't be overcome? Particularly post-Heartbleed I'm very impressed with the online world's resilience. Bugs in, say, Bitcoin-QT would only affect people using it - people with their BTC in an offline wallet wouldn't be directly affected (though they might be affected by a fall in price resulting from the bad publicity).

Do not agree.  Currently there are what, 50 alt currencies.  Or is it 100?  Or is it 25?  See?  It matters so little that we don't even really care how many alts there are.

BTW Quantum computers are the least of our worries.  First, they do not exist.  Second, when/if they do they would not pose a threat to Bitcoin for a very long time - enough time for Bitcoin to adapt if necessary.

We don't need too many of them to destroy everything. Even 1 clone could be enough.

BTW, I think there are now significanly more than 200 alternate cyprocurrencies, exact number indeed doesn't matter. Maybe 80% or so of them are Bitcoin clones. The rest are clones of several other key cryptocurrencyes which became centers their own swarms of clones (parasites). I can name a couple of them: PPC, NXT. May be there are more.

Seems like no one has come up with a genuinely scary enough threat to Bitcoin, I take it that people that claim there is a a lot of risk in Bitcoin apart from it's fluctuating price are merely spreading FUD?

As for bugs in Bitcoin, don't developers test for bugs in clones of Bitcoin..

People who do not spend it

Bitcoin p2p code or BTC the money which you spend?
The frauds, thefts and major scams have set-back BTC a lot, since "we" have a bad reputation.
Fortunately the competition is paper money.  :)

Loss of net neutrality? maybe?

I worry that ISPs in the future will block ports or otherwise try impeding bitcoin network traffic. 

You mean Mike Hearn?

It doesn't matter, do they test or not, because they don't go ahead of bitcoin development. And most of them are not capable of thorough testing, all they are able to do is just copy/paste code, clone repos, change several numeric parameters, and that's it. And usually they are not even able to merge code improvements from Bitcoin to their clones in timely manner. Basically, changes are first tested on Bitcoin, and then, sooner or later (maybe never) get incorporated into their code.
Additionally all the clones have much much lower tps rate, i.e. their nets are working under much less load, and bugs are less likely to come out.

More bugs is likely to come out, it's just a matter of time.

Yeah this has the potential to be a problem. It all depends on how far they take it. Now, with a distributed p2p protocol like Bitcoin, there is little chance that this could affect the framework itself. However, if ISPs started targeting sites that accept bitcoin or deal in bitcoin transactions and transfers, then we've got a potential problem. Worst case scenario is that Bitcoin takes on more of a blacklist status and ISPs start all out targeting related services. If this happens though, you can bet there are going to be a lot bigger problems. Essentially, in order to squelch Bitcoin, you will have to effectively block free speech through the internet and I really don't see that happening. It has worked so well with bitTorrent  ::)

Sure. That's the nature of software development. There are currently 375 open issues logged at Github: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues (https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues). But the OP was looking for problems which couldn't be overcome - and a bug that bad is pretty hard for me to imagine after Heartbleed, and the speed with which it was addressed by most developers and sys admins.

Can you name two major bugs in the core Bitcoin code in the last four years?  Not just any bug but one that was a threat to the Bitcoin network.

I ask for two since there was only one that I know of.

Threat? Well, peer to peer networks are hard to kill. And bitcoin is more than just a peer to peer network so it's more complicated. But imagine if nothing had changed since 2009-2010. If no further development was done, if no exchanges were made and bitcoin had no real world value not as many people would get involved. Also some early investors promoted bitcoin in it's early stages.

Do you remember the BOOM after Cyprus's bankruptcy? Media attention has helped much!

From what I can tell Mike just discussed white, black, red lists etc. from a developer point of view in a "what if" or "how would it be done" sort of way.  Discussion of how to do something is a good way to figure out how to make it impossible to do.  I don't know if he personally supports these ideas or not and even if he does it does not matter.  There are enough of us that do not support them to be able to counteract anything he might try to do.

What is more concerning is the idea that the goobermint may someday (probably years from now at the rate they move) pass laws concerning this and try to create classes of coins:  "dirty", "clean", "bad", "good" and so on.

We should take this opportunity to implement automatic mixing and automatic tainting of all coins so that by the time they get around to trying to force something like this on us it will be too late.

for all you noobs

1. if a bug did exist - it will be patched within a short period ( check out the 1mb limit fork and the heartbleed for examples of speedy patches)

2a. if ISP's blocked certain ports, then bitcoin can still work by sending API's to websites (PUSHtx to pools and blockchain.info)
2b. changing the ports to a different number that is not blocked takes only seconds too

3. altcoins - these are separate to bitcoin, meaning an altcoin cannot destroy the bitcoin code, it can only persuade people to change what they are hoarding. NXT is purely an altcoin even worse its centralized under the guise of blockchain 2.0 /bitcoin 2.0.. they are really trying to push their advertising campaign to will people over, yet people can see through the sells pitch. meaning right now nothing truly beats bitcoin

now my main concern is 51% attacks, by this i do not mean someone buying enough equipment to own more then 51% of the network.. i mean the easier method. bribing just 3 people (mining pool owners) to change their mining scripts.

I believe also, massive cases like Silk Road would threaten Bitcoin because governments would ban it as a mean of money laundering.

Bugs can be much more dangerous than any type of governmental interference. Imagine a previously unknown bug which makes counterfeiting and double spending possible. It will destroy Bitcoin.

What do you mean by threats?   Do you mean like a threat of BTC ceasing to exist, or a threat to prices, or market cap, or liquidity?

I think the biggest threat to prices would be overzealous governments trying too hard to control, tax, or ban it.

I am not great at the technical side of BTC, so I can't really speak on that part...

And that's what we will probably see with China soon. It will be interesting to see how bitcoin is doing in a hostile environment.

Bugs in the code, quantum crytography advancing perhaps
Regulation

IIRC, quantum computing can only bring 256-bit bitcoin private key to be "as safe as" 128-bit.

There are many different wallet clients out there, and people are using different versions. Bugs in the code may affect some people, but probably not for the majority.

I think centralized mining could be a big problem, especially if we have some "bad" big miners trying to double-spend their own transactions.

Sooner or later the ecosystem will just need to flourish with or without China. At the end of the day, they are just one country in the gigantic planet

+1 for non-fungibility

Also, the ability for which an individual's transactions and economic activity can be identified, tracked and taxed by a government is also a major and real threat.  Bitcoins that can be taxed as less valuable and have less utility than bitcoins that can't be taxed, we would see a drop in demand.

The power to tax is the power to destroy. Many believe that by making Bitcoin taxable and legitimate will increase adoption, I believe the inverse is true.

Can anyone confirm or share info on the quantum computing part?

Hackers,

Hackers can't do much harm if people store their bitcoin in offline wallet or paper wallet. :)

I can't but I can say that if quantum computing became a credible threat to Bitcoin it would also be a threat to all online commerce. The quantum computing argument is a bit like saying "a global nuclear war would bring down every node!" It's true, but misses the point that we would no longer care.

The biggest threats to me are the media if they keep on the attack and spreading propoganda but also from the price fluctations. I just dont see how it can become a mainstream currency if the value dips as much as it does. I hope there will be a way around this somehow.

We'll have free energy before true quantum computers. Then we can run any kind of miners for free.

Yep,
Some of the actual threats which I can think of now, while writing this post (not in any order):
1. Media bashing
2. ISP/Governments, banning bitcoin or making it illegal to trade bitcoin <-> fiat
3. Bitcoin v2.0

To the moon!!! I mean the difficulty ;D

the biggest problems with bitcoin that I see are:
1) It offers no real advantage for consumers for day-to-day spending than cash or a credit/debit card - it's just more complicated. It's easy to dismiss this if you are tech-savvy, but think of the dumbest person you know. This could probably be improved with better POS terminals, etc.
2) Getting money in/out of bitcoin is still way more difficult than it needs to be
3) You can't buy hardly anything with it - and the incentive for merchants to accept it is low given the volatility and the fact that all of their bills are in a different currency. Instant conversion back to dollars kind of defeats the point if you ask me.
4) Most people view bitcoin as a money-making scheme, hoping that the value will rise dramatically due to the design-limited supply. If you're always thinking in your head that 10 years from now a coin will be worth $100k, there's a lot of pressure to not spend today. If the case for bitcoin was really cheaper, faster, better payments, there would not be so much focus on speculation.

All solid points but:

1. Will change once the technology is there. It takes time to improve but that's the direction it is moving in - being easy enough to be used by anyone.
2. Won't be an issue if Bitcoin truly catches on, because there will be no need to transfer it into fiat.
3. Once again, this is slowly improving every day. There are more and more merchants accepting it. But yes, we still need big names to accept bitcoin to get the ball rolling.
4. I think this has improved a lot over Bitcoin's lifetime. I personally got into it at the hope of making $$$, but as time goes on I stick with bitcoin because of its actual revolutionizing advantages like cutting off governments from controlling a currency. Also, with every new up and down more and more "weak hands" are weeded out - the people that are really here just for the profit.

I think the issue with its security. Lots are seem very interested in getting BTC easily with its current value.

IMHO, the biggest threat to Bitcoin is the large group of knuckleheads who seek universal adoption.

that it is unsustainable because of mining ( polutes a lot ) thats why blackcoin is better--> no pollution at all

That kind of tyranny is why guns were invented.

There are still the kind of men in this world who think, "fuck with my money, and I fuck with your life". Many of them are American and armed.

We need to get the Tea Party into Bitcoin. And the south.

Governments.

In all honesty, there are no real viable threats to Bitcoin. Least of all governments.

Why do you think so many geniuses are going in?

bears

better alternative cypro currency.
and Govermnets of course.

I guess if you are only looking at bitcoin right now then yeah you have a point.
But bitcoin a few years from now will be an entirely different animal. It's like the vast majority of criticisms are like blaming a zygote for not having a job yet.

Quite a few of us think the pressure to spend shouldn't exist in the money supply. Spending should be deiced on the merits of the exchange, not spurred by fear of loss due to inflation. When your currency stops throwing bricks though your windows real economic gain will be realized.

A major, unrecoverable flaw in the core protocol and/or underlying cryptography are the only real threats.  Outside forces will have a negligible impact. 

To add to that, because of the hoarding the available supply dwindles. If most people are holding out for $100K coins then the coins available to buy for $500 will be less and less.
Supply and demand starts to creep in. Low supply, high demand, high price.

This is why I feel it has features of a ponzi scheme (Downvote mode initiated for 99% of the people reading this). The early investors are promising spectacular things, hoarding, driving up the price so that they can dump at the expense of the late comers.

https://bitcoinfoundation.org/

Stop fear-mongering, the foundation doesn't have any real power to damage anything except their own reputations.

To steal some of the risks listed in the Winklevoss IPO documents (https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312514190365/d721187ds1a.htm#toc721187_4) for their proposed bitcoin trust:

• Currently, there is relatively small use of bitcoins in the retail and commercial marketplace in comparison to relatively large use by speculators, thus contributing to price volatility
• The Core Developers or other programmers could propose amendments to the Bitcoin Network’s protocols and software that, if accepted and authorized by the Bitcoin Network’s community, could adversely affect it
• If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network, it is possible that such actor or botnet could manipulate the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects it
• If the award of bitcoins for solving blocks and transaction fees for recording transactions are not sufficiently high to incentivize miners, miners may cease expending processing power to solve blocks and confirmations of transactions on the Blockchain could be slowed temporarily. A reduction in the processing power expended by miners on the Bitcoin Network could increase the likelihood of a malicious actor or botnet obtaining control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network or the Blockchain, potentially permitting such actor or botnet to manipulate the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects it
• As the number of bitcoins awarded for solving a block in the Blockchain decreases, the incentive for miners to continue to contribute processing power to the Bitcoin Network will transition from a set reward to transaction fees. Either the requirement from miners of higher transaction fees in exchange for recording transactions in the Blockchain or a software upgrade that automatically charges fees for all transactions may decrease demand for bitcoins and prevent the expansion of the Bitcoin Network to retail merchants and commercial businesses, resulting in a reduction in the price of bitcoins that could adversely impact it
• To the extent that any miners cease to record transactions in solved blocks, transactions that do not include the payment of a transaction fee will not be recorded on the Blockchain until a block is solved by a miner who does not require the payment of transaction fees. Any widespread delays in the recording of transactions could result in a loss of confidence in the Bitcoin Network
• The acceptance of Bitcoin Network software patches or upgrades by a significant, but not overwhelming, percentage of the users and miners in the Bitcoin Network could result in a “fork” in the Blockchain, resulting in the operation of two separate networks until such time as the forked Blockchains are merged. The temporary or permanent existence of forked Blockchains could adversely impact it
• Intellectual property rights claims may adversely affect the operation of the Bitcoin Network.  Third parties may assert intellectual property claims relating to the holding and transfer of Digital Math-Based Assets and their source code. Regardless of the merit of any intellectual property or other legal action, any threatened action that reduces confidence in the Bitcoin Network’s long-term viability or the ability of end-users to hold and transfer bitcoins may adversely affect it

They've certainly done their homework, but personally I don't perceive any of these as a likely outcome that would seriously jeopardise Bitcoin in the near future.  Possible, certainly, but not likely.

I think that the biggest threat to bitcoin is :"Misinformation".Yes things like Security and Ease of Use are important, and of course Government Regulation (though hopefully lack there of) will play a big part, but public perception and sentiment will always be the primary driver of any new technology.

The biggest threat to Bitcoin so far has come from the people using and promoting it.

Bitcoin mining pools' concentration is #1 threat imho. Now it takes just to control the 2 biggest pools for a 51% attack.
https://blockchain.info/pools (https://blockchain.info/pools)

even the decreasing trend in full nodes seems like bad news:
https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/chart/?days=60 (https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/chart/?days=60)

agreed +1

There will be always bugs and threats so it's hard to state what's the biggest threat to Bitcoin.
It's our duty to make a secured haven for the Bitcoin

The greatest threats to Bitcoin are the many idiots involved.

Agreed.  We look kind of foolish if one takes the time to really research the people involved.  I do like the progression of US exchanges evolving (not all).  I think Coinbase is doing a really great job keeping it simple and user friendly.

Assholes who so willingly spread unconfrimed rumors as FUD like this jerk (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=602198.0).

Folks who don't respect anyone's privacy, or who think deviant sexual behavior is at all relevant to the health of Bitcoin.

Innocent until proven guilty. Until there's a conviction, you are slandering people.

Sex negativity hurts everyone.

There is a magazine called Goat Quarterly? 

The amount of dumb money involved buying any coin hyped (including ripple like coins, proof of stake coins that anyone with little common sense can grasp why they cannot be a decentralized consensus mechanism)

I see what you did there!

Federal reserve and another central bank
i think they hate BTC

My feeling is that the above statement is correct. If people had used Bitcoin quietly, it might have slowly become big without all the problems that it has had. And there wouldn't be so many banks and governments out to shut it down. It's all in the greed of the people who have tried to milk Bitcoin for all it's is worth that is the biggest danger to it.

:)

I"d have to say the the biggest threat to BTC at this time is bad press.  For example the bad press of Gox being hacked people losing their money and China banning Bitcoin all caused some damage.

If my info wasn't so relevant, then sure as hell the mainstream press wouldn't have expanded on it.

I haven't even begone to show, thus prove, the hundreds of millions of dollars being pumped into Bitcoin by shady characters like Brock Pierce going down a black hole with NO CHANCE of an ROI.

BTW, I am not making plans to commit suicide, especially via jumping off the 25th floor of a high-rise building in Singapore and crashing on the concrete landing slab above a garbage bin two blocks from GoCoin's office at 7 AM on a Wednesday because I'm depress over the post I just quoted.

But, if I change my mind, a handful of sick flowers, shown below, would suffice, placed where my body landed, for paying homage to me.

http://www.csmonitor.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/images/media/content/2014/3-6-14-autumn-radtke/18180340-1-eng-US/3-6-14-Autumn-Radtke_full_600.jpg

The 1 MB block limit threatens Bitcoin's ability to function as the global reserve currency. It should eventually be changed to 10 GB per block to handle tens of billions of transactions per week.

Future scenario:

Paychecks are sent to billions of people in the form of bitcoins twice a month. People fund online accounts with bitcoin transfers once a week to do a majority of their transactions off the blockchain. No one runs a full node anymore, it's just too expensive. Instead everyone uses a SPV client and countries keep copies of the full blockchain to keep each other honest. Each country's government mines bitcoins and uses the transaction fees to fund government projects.

Fees per KB are around 20 satoshi or 2 USD, so peer to peer transfers are affordable, but rarely initiated because the opportunity cost of spending old bitcoins is just too damn high. The floating transaction fee formula everyone has agreed on effectively limits the average number of transactions to 6 per person per month. Because of this, everyone divides their bitcoin balance into thousands of addresses to accrue confirmations in case their bitcoins need to be quickly spent. Around 50M transactions are included in each block, giving a block reward of 100M USD from fees alone.  Governments are smaller and more cost-effective with their spending so the 100M is just enough.

The price of a bitcoin is 10M USD and fiat is nonexistent.

The biggest threat to Bitcoin?

The high percentage of scumbags involved. More than half the exchanges have gone bust, most through "take the money and run" operators. The "Bitcoin stock exchanges" had few, if any, real companies that did anything behind them. The "Bitcoin Ponzis" were even worse. Most of the ASIC system vendors can't reliably deliver ordered products. Some of the Bitcoin Foundation leaders turned out to be crooks.

This is pathetic. It doesn't seem to be getting better, either. Look at the crowd behind Sunlot.

The biggest threat to Bitcoin is people not using it. Many have it as a store of value, but few trade in it. Merchant adoption has been hopeful but aside from the initial buying boost, purchases in bitcoin go down after. I always make it a point to pay in Bitcoin at as many places I can, e.g. Namecheap, Tigerdirect, local restaurants.

In Russia the biggest threat is government. And in China too...

Hmm that is interesting as I've been thinking bitcoin was just to big for an attack like this to take place.  I also read a posts on this forum I believe or maybe a video that that said something similar effect.  I guess that is simply not the full story however.  Thanks adding this in to the mix.

hackers.

I'm just now finding the same lot (no pun intended) attached to some of the exchanges that's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! Is no more! Has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 're makers!

'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If they hadn't fleeced 'im clients 'e'd be pushing up the daisies!
'Er algorithmir processes are now 'istoried! 'Ere's off the net!
'Ey's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir "we's fucked yous up da ass"!!

I've yet to make a connection, but Bitcoin-Central's owner, Paymium, still owes me 1,132 BTC that once was in InstaWallet, and now resides in one of davout's bitcoin wallets, plus some, nicely washed between Paymiums concerns and a notable bitcoin dice site (not SD).

For those that may ne pissed at me due to my recent postings, you have Paymium to blame for me having the red-ass (again, no pun intended). If or when they decide to play nice, I may consider playing nice myself. Until then, I'm on full-tilt.

I have been reading several negative things/news about BTC.
Maybe negative feedback/news about it could be a big threat too?

imo biggest threat to bitcoin would be coinbase and bitpay consolidating and centralizing it all between merchant and consumers. banks are just going to brand each one of us and track our transactions live. ;D

I guess it would also be best to take into consideration and worth a mention that if the internet was lost for a long period of time or indefinitely that would be a major threat to Bitcoins.

A 51% attack and the end of internet ;)

I agree with you. I also think that alternative currencies are biggest thread to Bitcoin.

It is very naive to think that virtually anything but govenment poses a real danger to Bitcoin.

State instigated Psychological Warfare waged via the media

I believe the media is a huge threat to bitcoin.  Some people (a lot of people) take what the media says seriously. From what I have seen, mainstream media is very anti bitcoin.  Considering who controls the media, it's no big surprise to me, but others don't see it that way.

I am an open bitcoin supporter on my facebook and of course many know very little about it.  Whenever there is something negative in the media, it gets brought to my attention fairly quickly. 

The greatest "threat" moving forward will be from competing digital currencies.

But I think Bitcoin will always be there lurking in the shadows like a behemoth IBM.

Bitcoin will succede or fail based on its own qualities and how its adherents handle thing.

"Competing" currencies, IMHO, have nothing to do with it.

If governments end up really deciding they want crypto's gone... they're gone. That's my bet at least.

That depends on the dedication and depth of involvement of users.

What are you willing to do?

Music: Napster sued by Metallica. Bigass congressional hearing over Metallica tunes being shared for free online. (Really, Lars? Really? Took 2 days to download a three minute song on dial up and you felt violated?) Ripping music CDs and P2P music sharing pissed off government and music industry corporations, and some artists. Fear mongering: ZOMG!! You're stealing from Metallica! Courtney Love, of all people, wrote a fabulous 5 page essay/commentary on the thievery of the record labels and supported *decentralization* of the industry.

And lo, record labels either adapted and learned to accept people, when given a choice between paying 30 bucks for a CD of crap they might not even like, most of which went to the label and not the band, and P2Ping any given tune for free and eventually making micro payments for what they wanted, they all chose option B.

And the government AND corporations lost to the people choosing decentralization of the music industry.

Movies: MPAA and RIAA decided the pirates were costing (them) billions. Bigass congressional hearing over it and various assorted one hit wonder actors testifying about how hard done by they were to be losing all those royalties when people illegally download/stream their movies. Then came the fear mongers and threats...we will find you and kill you!...or, find a 13 year old and make an example of him when we sue him for 49.2 billion dollars for all the movies he jacked from Pirate Bay. And let's go stop Pirate Bay! And China!

TPB came back better than ever with renewed P2P numbers and now there are all kinds of streaming freebie sites to watch anything and everything absolutely free - right alongside Netflix...because given a choice between paying 60 bucks to go to a crowded (or empty) theater and put up with idiots kicking the seat, yapping, or the kids crying, or the $12 box of popcorn, and jacking the same movie for free online, or watching their favorite tv series/shows free online, the people chose to cancel their cable tv subscriptions and haven't stepped foot in a theater in years.

And the government AND the movie studios lost to the people choosing decentralization of the movie industry and the television networks who caved and signed deals with online movie houses who charge a fraction of a movie ticked for unlimited viewing.

Books: Big name publishing houses set the rules by which any of us ever see an author's work. They had sole authority to determine who was worthy of being published and who was rejected. Until someone figured out a way to digitize books and then Amazon came along and opened up self publishing. Out came all the fear mongering and law suits. ZOMG! You're stealing food off the tables of starving authors! And self publishing? Anyone can PIRATE YOUR STUFF and you lose money!

And the government AND the publishing houses made examples of various "unscrupulous" authors faking reviews and whatnot, and held hearings on digital content prices and media harped that nobody would ever take self published authors seriously, nor would anyone choose a computer device to read on in place of real books.

And the government AND publishing houses lost to the people choosing decentralization and the ability to publish and create and own 100% of their work...so the publishing houses either adapt and promote digital format options or they go out of business.

Same for the video game industry, the electric companies, the telecom industry, and every other industry that has been controlled by corporations backed by government enforcers.

In the end, it doesn't matter what the government wants because the government isn't an entity. It's a conglomeration of smaller agencies made up of people with self interests over business interests at the end of the day and they also have a choice to support a dying currency in a weak economy or an alternative with much more security and potential for much wealth...

Bitcoin is doing and experiencing the same, exact "conflict of interest" and "threat" from the same two "entities" - government AND corporations (banks included) who have a vested interest in NOT making the USD worse than it is already...but the people have seen the reality of incompetence, corruption and psychosis of those "in charge" and are quite willing to look closer at THE ALTERNATIVE to USD.

Not everybody jumped on the internet/email/website/doing business online bandwagon the first half dozen years. Tons of people vowed it was a fad that nobody would take seriously - in the face of mega corporations, banks, and agencies moving business online. It was beating them in the face and still they hollered fad, nobody's gonna do all that, it's too hard.


Government can make all the laws it wants about bitcoin, same as they made all the laws they wanted with pirating movies, music, books, and games, or trying to regulate solar panels to pacify the electric companies who'd lose business to el sol...but ones the P2P genie is let out of the bottle, the government can't enforce a damn thing...they can't afford to pay enough people who have the technological capacity to do anything other than go after a few people to use as examples...Mt Gox may as well be Napster. May have gone out of business, but P2P music sharing is stronger than ever...

Government can outlaw it, which will only reinforce the black market. They can't enforce it anymore than the government can "turn off the internet".

Just a matter of time before the money thrown at the infrastructure gets things stable enough for Joe Blow to easily grab some bitcoin over the counter as a gift card and store it securely - and those two things will be when the rest of society gets on board.

IMO the biggest threat to bitcoin is the information overload and convoluted, overly technical aspect of learning how to get it and secure it and use it...as long as it's over the head of Joe Blow it's not going to gain traction. It just isn't.

Joe Blow can get on you tube, watch half a dozen reviews and figure out what kind of smart phone to get, go to WalMart, buy it, get the pay as you go plan (because given a choice between a corporation's 2 year $100 a month plus first born child contract plan and a $50 pay as you go card with unlimited use and no horse shit, people choose option B without hesitation), set up the account and start using the damn phone within 15 minutes or so.

When Joe can go to WalMart or the local vape shop or coffee shop and grab a bitcard over the counter, scan the barcode to set up the account via the smart phone, pay the merchant the value amount and activate the card same as a gift card, and the bitcard is also the wallet that isn't hackable, then it'll catch on.

Government is not a threat. It's just a nosey, fear mongering, psychotic pain in the ass - same as it's always been. This fight will be more interesting to watch though because the ones who control the money control civilization...and when the people choose the P2P option of currency, the government loses its control short of a tyrannical retaliation...which is the line in the sand...it won't happen in this country. No matter how lazy Suzy Homemaker is, there are millions of people who won't for one second tolerate any government official trying to pull it off without blood in the streets...which includes LEO, feds, and soldiers refusing to enforce the dictatorship.




TLDR - 1. bite me, 2. we've fought all this already with music, movies, books, games, power and they lose to p2p, 3. government aint shit, don't sweat it.  ;D

Speculation that is a big threat for bitcoin. Right now bitcoin is seen like a vehicle for speculation and to as it suppose to be :a currency .What makes a good currency? It should be a medium of exchange, and a store of value - and in the current state it fails pretty much on both accounts due to +-40% daily price swings. If you order pizza, by the time it arrives the pizza might be 20% more expensive/cheaper than when you ordered it. Its ridiculous.

The kind of stability that you are talking about will never come to crypto.

Government "regulation" of ISPs.

pool owner(s) with large amounts of the network hashrate

Are bubble networks possible? I'm wondering if that'd be the same as a mesh net but not sure since I'd assumed a mesh network still has to rely on some paying user's ISP account and jacking into it via wi fi but it's a new concept to me so I'm probably utterly wrong.

It's more an intuitive based question than one grounded in a lot of techno knowledge or comprehension.

Is there a way for groups of people to be their own ISP, even having free access, so they can't be regulated by a central authority, aren't forced to pay a company fees for the permission to "get online", and aren't at the mercy of an ISP, court orders to release info, and all that sort of thing - not as a way around the law but a way to guarantee the same sort of freedom of choice.

I'd see small, independent networks with their own isp capability like mini internets that can be linked together to other networks voluntarily but nobody can order any of them to shut down or cap traffic or release identifying information, etc. It's not one giant network, it's mini networks.

Is something like that technologically possible?

Mesh Networking already exists, but it is not widely implemented.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking

I think you're wrong for a few reasons, although I do agree with you in some aspects.

Taking this from a few different angles...

1. You cannot use Napster, The Pirate Bay, etc. to launder money.

2. None of your examples involve violence as a result of the theft.

3. All of your examples amount to the government not being able to stop piracy. The energy and traditional finance industries are where I've made my living to this point - they are still firmly controlled by the government and must obey all those regulations, of which there are many. Sure, "deregulation" as a whole has been a trend, but deregulation and decentralization (although they're admittedly similar) do not always produce similar or comparable outcomes.

4. You say, "but the people have seen the reality of incompetence, corruption and psychosis of those "in charge" and are quite willing to look closer at THE ALTERNATIVE to USD." This makes for a great soundbite, but I really just don't think it's true. Look, I don't think anybody is wrong saying the government is inherently coercive, tyrannical, etc. But the way I've thought about it: look at a developing 3rd world country. First, the rebels are petty criminals. Then they're organized criminals. Then they're terrorists. Then they're rebels. Then they're a political party. Then they win, and they're politicians and diplomats and war heroes. If they lose, they're evil people going to hell and "those scummy rebels" or whatever. But the government is just the gang/party/whatever that has the *most* legitimate *and* enforceable (that part is key) claim on ruling a country than anybody else.

But anyways, I would just disagree about this idea that the government is inevitably going to collapse. When you stack them side-by-side, the average, everyday person is going to choose USD every time. You don't need tech (as you mentioned) to make it simpler for you. You know that the world's superpower will help you collect any debt owed in USDs. You know that the currency has served its role that it's meant to in your everyday life for your whole life. You know things can go wrong, but you've lived through the last 10 years (or even better, the last 20-30) and seen the "government is collapsing under the weight of its own corruption" crowd be wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, and wrong again. None of the predictions ever come true, which leads me to think the underlying logic may be flawed.

The everyday person can probably see that things have actually improved significantly over time, albeit at a slower pace than in the past. How can they respond that the government is inept when, in reality, we have some of the best governance in the world here in the US? Sure, there's bad things that happen in a massive country, but look at all the good. Furthermore, the Collapse Camp completely fails to address much of modern macroeconomic thought and why the monetary system works how it does. They completely fail to address its complexity and how counterintuitive it is, and so they call things like QE "money printing" and so on. But then they can't explain why all their predictions end up being wrong.

So, tldr: the everyday person will choose cash+US Legal System+US Military+superpower/reserve status trade deals all but ensuring a longer store of value than digital codes + no legal system + no backing + sketchy legality and little formal economic integration.

So I get that that's the problem BTC adopters are trying to solve, but I think that's something of a chicken/egg problem. BTC bulls seem to justify anything that reality presents them with. (Fixed supply money being a good idea, widespread crypto adoption "right around the corner", etc.)

Quick Edit: let's assume the government does not collapse in the next 15-20 years and maintains stable, relatively peaceful control, and that things generally go as they have in the past. In this "base case" (which we should probably assign at least a 40% probability based on history), what happens to cryptos? What about a "bull case" (for the USA / world economy), in which things actually end up getting significantly better pretty soon, rather than worse? What happens to cryptos then?

Furthermore, in your scenario that the global economy will collapse, or that the government will be overthrown by corruption (http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2013/results/ tell me why the US in particular is the one about the collapse?), why would you choose BTC as the asset of choice? There are far more investments that could yield a higher ROI and prove more practical/usable in such a scenario.

True, but my illustrations were illustrating the reality that when given a choice, a viable alternative, people choose freedom and decentralization over servitude and regulation, and eventually work in cooperation to establish their own policy to keep the system afloat. People don't mind rules and regulation, it makes things run smoothly. People mind being treated like criminals and being marginalized and discriminated against, and people mind some blow hard with a self appointed title giving orders like a king, and people mind other people making decisions that effect them adversely just to pacify and promote the ones making the decisions.


In the fake ID and kids thread the point has been raised along the lines of your rebuttal or comments so I'll add it here. Casinos and fake businesses also can be used to launder money and nobody's shut down casinos. They use fiat/cash to buy drugs, guns, and commit felonies and nobody's stopped that or tried outlawing the USD.

The problem is not the currency. The problem is why all these things are being done. If all the criminals - excluding the legitimate addicts feeding a habit - were capable of finding rewarding work that paid well and allowed them to live in the manner that preferred, have nice things, and enjoy living without breaking the law, they'd all do it. The reason they are doing any of this sort of thing (aside from psychopaths) is the money...they can't find a line of work that'll pay them that kind of money where they can afford to live that way and have lavish lifestyles - not honestly.

Too many loopholes, red tape, rules, regulations and so on that do not benefit the one doing the work.

I personally spoke with a local drug dealer years ago over an unrelated issue and at one point I got irritated and spouted off, "Well so get a fucking real job then" and he laughed, looked at me like I was a retard and told me, "And try to live on minimum wage? I make more money in 3 days dealing than I'd make in 4 months working a minimum wage job"...and while that can be argued, he had a legitimate point. Legitimate work anywhere in this country is not rewarded without a specialty degree which I'm not referring to. The neuroscientist is doing okay. The guy trying to just make his expenses cannot.

I genuinely hope bitcoin catches on even grander so people can be paid in bitcoin. If I make $10 an hour and work 40 hours a week, I expect $400 when I get a paycheck. Not $249, not $379, not $300. I expect all of it, 100%. That's one of the main reasons I stayed in the bar business for a large portion of my employment years (i.e. working for other people instead of myself), because I knew where the clubs were that would pay me under the table in cash, 100%. Of course the government wouldn't like it, but fuck them. They weren't doing the work, they weren't liable for my rent or expenses, they weren't paying my bills, and THEY earned no rights to my money.

Ask anyone who is rational and sane which way they want to get paid - give them an option: $10hr and WE take out this tax, that tax, this fee, that fee and you get the rest OR $10 and you get 100%.

Which one will they choose when they have the freedom of choice of a viable option?

My personal opinion is that if there was a huge bug in the code it would hurt btc a lot, but tons of government regulations will irreversibly damage btc.

Well, I prefer to get the 100%. :P

BTC and other alt coins are having minimal transfer fees and right that no "income tax" yet on it.

You seriously believe that?
You really think alt coins have done more harm than endless scams, thefts, hacks, negative media, and Gox?

I would say that the Bitcoin community is the biggest threat to Bitcoin.

Nearly all discussions turn into circular firing squads. Reaching consensus on any major protocol changes will be extremely difficult. I fear Bitcoin will be consumed by infighting, and that the protocol/code will stagnate. Alts, meanwhile, are a greenfield for innovation.

Diehards proclaim that Bitcoin is virtually flawless, despite areas where it is already losing valuable ground, such as transactions per second. Bitcoin zealots prevent change, despite their best intentions, and push potential contributors away from the community when all criticism starts to be interpreted as an extension of a vast international conspiracy.

Even minor changes can become extremely difficult to make in decentralized systems, and this is especially true with such a deeply divided community. I love all of the passion, and wish it was could be effectively harnessed to keep Bitcoin at the forefront of the cryptocurrency landscape, but without cultural change---I see the Bitcoin community itself as the largest threat to the future of Bitcoin.

Disagree. Bitcoin is close enough to perfect that stagnation is a non-sequitir. Is the design of the common pencil stagnant? Hasn't been changed in over a century - perhaps two centuries. Once something is good enough, it is good enough.

And we have seen that the community rallies when needed. As an existence proof, see the QT v.8 (?) debacle.

As for the only thing that I see that merits modification....


Transactions per second is a limit that we will need to deal with. Some day when there are more transactions per second. Until then, it is a non-issue. And a well-understood one. The limit now -- as a compromise between TPS on the one hand, and potential spamming of the blockchain on the other -- looks just fine to me.

How many transactions have you personally had thwarted by the TPS limit? I know of absolutely no one who has. I am not claiming that, as I know not of such, that means that none has ever occurred. But I am skeptical that this is any issue whatsoever.


I personally don't see the Bitcoin community as a threat. What is the alternative? Not having a Bitcoin community? Regardless, your points don't seem to support your argument.

 Bitcoin will survive everything for the foreseeable future but an ELE.


ELE - *an earth extinction level event*


 The entire works has hit Bitcoin in it's face and body with one seemingly deadly blow after another since early 2014.

 Yet Bitcoin itself just keeps rolling along no matter what.


 Doubters doubt, Doom & Gloomers Pout, Fear Mongers Grumble, and Competitors Scream and Shout.

 Another 1000+ have declared it dying, doomed or even dead rather recently to be sure.

 The shit keeps hitting the Bitcoin with lethal level blows for anything else, and yet Bitcoin just keeps laughing and laughing, never so much as flinching, it just keeps on functioning like it always has. A tweak here, and and a bit of adjustment there, and Bitcoin just keeps humming it's tunes.


 Only longer term sheer neglect of it's Development and Security could ever cause Bitcoin's compromise from the looks of things in these tired old eyes standing back and looking at the Big Picture. And I would stake my own life and the all the readers of this lives on the fact that the Bitcoin Developers wont ever let that occur no matter what.

 
Re: What are the biggest threats to Bitcoin?  There is nothing to be concerned about, nothing at all, all things considered it's already won the future.

 Take a deep breath and relax; Bitcoin has already Won the Future. Congradulations Bitcoin, you even won me over, and I am a damn tough sell when it comes to monetary issues.


 Maybe in 25, 50, 75, 100+, or 200+ years someone finally builds a vastly superior product to finally start to outpace and out distance Bitcoin, and finally ever so slowly, or even more quickly than slowly Bitcoin finally begins to fade out. But baring that, or an E.L.E. I can't imagine the next several generations have anything to fuss over concerning Bitcoin.

 I also believe firmly that the Developers will fuss over the Bitcoin-Qt Core Client almost non-stop to be certain it's A-Okay until it's last rights have been given to it in the very distant future, and well over at least 100 to 400 years from now. etod: 233 years.

 The typical Fiat currency last mere decades. Bitcoin is a vastly superior product in every way possible in this Digital Information Age.

 Quit worrying. Nothing can stop Bitcoin for the foreseeable future that anyone needs to concern themselves with, the Developers will make certain of this.

 I am declaring Bitcoin The Official Winner of The Future. And if I say so then it must be true since 'I am far too  honest for my own good'.



Bitcoin is Freedom.

awsome
flawless argument! i'm in! :D

edit: "when truth is not free, freedom is not true." ;)
trad. from french author: "Quand la vérité n'est pas libre, la liberté n'est pas vraie." J. Prévert

It could be a book.

Lots of moonie-eyed people around here who evidence little connection with reality.

this is probably the largest threat....

One word:

Proxies.

"Bitcoin is freedom" - That itself is controversial.  8)

biggest threat to Bitcoin?

'compliance'

I would disagree.

A small amount of regulation can be good for any industry. Having to comply with minor regulations can help weed out scammers, which would make the masses more likely to be comfortable with bitcoin.

The scammers are the biggest threat to Bitcoin

My typical answer would be anything that can prevent the widespread use of Bitcoin. Including governments and traditional financial institutions that have a lot to lose from cryptocurrencies and can regulate and/or tax it to the point where Bitcoin's use would cost more than it's worth.

Agreed. Do you think it would improve fungibility if we could, say, give Paypal some serious competition?

Biggests threats to Bitcoin is a total ban from all of World government.

Then, every problem and every bad news can be beat. ;)

In a nutshell, i think big banks (and their lobbying power), and governments are the biggest threats to Bitcoin. We know that they can't stop BTC,  but that can make it harder and harder to grow and use if they lay the hammer down as hard as they can.

I think most of us can agree that we want each BTC to be worth as much as possible, and govts and big banks can have the largest influence on preventing that from happening.

No.

The biggest threat to Bitcoin is the large number of halfwits who have gotten involved in crypto.

Any serious effort to block the FBI seized coins from being stolen would be a huge blow

Not to mention that it would be stupidity on wheels.

IMO , at best they can only don't recognize bitcoin but they can't ban it .

Banks don't like bitcoin cos they can't tax it ?

Human beings, or, a lesser known Digital age, or, perhaps, a mass loss of power in a country or state.

How would that be possible to 'block' them? Theyre getting sold either way at the end of the month

i think the 51% attack is bitcoin's biggest concern.. because its nature is supposed to be completely decentralized, but if there were a 51% attack, power would be held in the hands of a certain few.

The biggest threat is surely running out of Bitcoin addresses. :P

A 51% attack is not a major concern now. Anyone who possess 51%+ hash power would have already invested hundreds of millions of USD in to mining rigs. If such an attack happens, all that mining power will become useless. Similar to this:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-zhbg775W7Gc/ToGs4HTVw2I/AAAAAAAAAts/o7yjJcCpa4k/s320/cutting-off-branch.jpg

If miners were to change their TX policy to not accept any TXs from the FBI address. They would also not build on a chain that includes TXs with the FBI address. IMO it would be very unlikely that this would happen but if it did it would not be good for Bitcoin.

The main idea behind the creation of Bitcoin is, that the system of virtual money that are beyond the control of any central force. Bitcoin system works based network communication between computer users that will confirm each transaction and the issuance of new money. However, in reality it is not entirely true. GHash.IO which is a joint consortium of various Bitcoin miners, now control more than half of the mining activity, a phenomenon which by some circles assessed would be a threat to the system.
 
Bitcoin is the creation of new money through a series of mathematical puzzle solving is increasingly dominated by a few groups of miners known as a collection. Various miners and then unify the computing power of sharing successful Bitcoin obtained. Combining the power of computing to give greater opportunities to solve mathematical puzzles in every Bitcoin transaction verification. GHash.IO is a collection of the most successful miners who controls nearly 51% of the computing power of Bitcoin mining (hashing power), theoretically has enough power to cheat the system.

Exactly what i was thinking.  And maybe banks also.

The biggest threat is people. Hackers, mad bankers, stupid people, etc.

Goverment! Look, friggin Bolivia banned Bitcoin!!

:p Don't worry about that..! the chances of humans not existing on the planet earth are higher then we running out of bitcoin addresses  :p

No problem.

Offshore corporations, offshore bank accounts.................

Screw the Bolivian government!

Been gone for a while due to health issues but everything is OK now.

Just kind of took a break from the madness of crypto!

Well besides quantum and bugs and centralized mining as you mentioned can't think of anything else other than new competition that supersedes Bitcoin, or death by regulation and legal systems.

Thinking centralized nodes and 50% are around the same concept but if not worth a distinction as well.

Now that is funny.  Do have even the foggiest idea how big 2¹⁶⁰ is?  No, you don't (and really, I don't either).

Bolivia?  Really?  You are concerned about Bolivia?  Really?

I remember when the DeepBit mining pool was the 51% boogie man and everyone was sooooo concerned about them.  Where is DeepBit now?  Anyone seen them?  No.  Same thing will happen to GHash.io eventually.

Biggest threat is probably government regulations and banks. They can make it very frustrating to deal with Bitcoin, if they wanted to- which would probably prevent Bitcoin from going fully mainstream.

1.) Unscrupulous bitcoiners.  Thieves basically.
2.) Mining centralization
3.) Net Neutrality being compromised.

I dont think bitcoin can run out of address. Can they?

True enough but there is little we can do about the thieves so we need to just go on and do the best we can.

As in any other industry.

Yes, in the year 9999 we'll run out.

51% attack is the only big problem that Satoshi didnt think of

Yeah but wouldn't you like to be the person who could execute that one?

Actually, he did think about it. Read the white paper.

There are actually more possible addresses then there are possible bitcoin (21 million bitcoin broken up into satoshis)

Idiots are the biggest threat to Bitcoin.

number 1 on my list

Screw'em!

Go around them!

This is the internet, after all!

LOL tell that to the mass sheeple

No shit!

- the scammers/hackers
- limit of its use and legality issues cause the more it becomes popular, the more it becomes hot to the authorities. :P

This is actually a true threat to Bitcoin as more people use bitcoin, a lot of people who are not security conscious/tech savvy will use it and ultimately somehow lose their coins, either by theft or looking their keys. This could give bitcoin a bad rep

It's people's ambitions. This is very true. Sometimes people get blind with ambition and it's never a bad idea to have different views collaborating

Right, those who have ambition to get all the BTC they could get no matter what is a threat.

Well, now I don't know about that.

Could you elaborate a bit?

I mean those who will scam/steal or willing to do anything just to get BTC.

Butterfly Labs.

I think lot of altcoin are the biggest threat to Bitcoin.

This is a big threat to the bitcoin economy as people will be afraid to deal in bitcoin with others as they are afraid they are going to be scammed.

I'll sell you insurance against getting scammed.
I just need to see your private keys so that I can inspect how much entropy was used in their generation.... ;) :P

(for those who can't figure it out, this is not serious)

I think this is a problem. Although you were not serious, many people could very well think that this would be a legit request of selling insurance. As a result they would likely get scammed.

There are two risks here; 1 - people who will attempt to scam newer users out of their coins and 2 - the advanced nature of bitcoin and the lack of education available to new users to help then secure their coins.

This, for all intensive purposes is not going to happen.

centralized mining and loss of the open source development community

Na altcoins are there to develop Bitcoin as separate experiments
Sidechains will probably start to replace those though, or work alongside it as it takes one big cryto to succeed for others to follow in its footsteps.

The biggest threat is ignorance on the behalf of lawmakers and central bankers, and privacy concerns although mining centralization and lack of nodes are also big factors in addition to the above.