2012-09-18 JoeCascio.net - Do bitcoins actually exist?

[joecascio]

Just published this post on my blog in response to a Twitter conversation I had yesterday.

"Do bit coins actually exist?" http://joecascio.net/joecblog/2012/09/18/do-bitcoins-actually-exist/

[hazek]

I liked it, especially the first half.

[grondilu]

Not only they exist, but you can actually verify they do.

I mean, the bitcoin database is public and every single transaction is stored on every user's computer.

Someone sends you a bitcoin, and your computer verifies that this bitcoin exists by looking at the transactions it points to, all the way back to when it was created by a miner.

There is nothing of the sort with any other currency.

So yeah, they do exist.  Not in the physical sense but hey, does an email exist in the physical sense?  Does this forum message exit in the physical sense??  Why would electronic money scare anyone more than any other electronic stuff they use on internet?

[hazek]

Well there are two distinctions here I think:
1) bitcoins don't really exist, they are a concept we all agree to use
2) but entries into the blockchain ledger we call bitcoins most certainly exist

[grondilu]

Well there are two distinctions here I think:
1) bitcoins don't really exist, they are a concept we all agree to use
2) but entries into the blockchain ledger we call bitcoins most certainly exist

I think the problem is that the verb "exist" has a long history of being used with a physical meaning.  It is obviously confusing in information technology.

Isn't there any word to make this distinction clearer?

[hazek]

Hah! No, I don't think there is.

Btw try defining "to exist" without making a circular definition.. 

[justusranvier]

Btw try defining "to exist" without making a circular definition.. 

existence: an identifiable arraignment of matter and/or energy.

[hazek]

Btw try defining "to exist" without making a circular definition.. 

existence: an identifiable arraignment of matter and/or energy.

What is matter and what is energy?

[Gabi]

You can print them on a QR Code and you will have a bitcoin banknote. 

[Dan The Man]

Btw try defining "to exist" without making a circular definition.. 

existence: an identifiable arraignment of matter and/or energy.

What about imaginary arrangements like unicorns. Your definition would imply that unicorns and bizzarro superman exist

[justusranvier]

What about imaginary arrangements like unicorns. Your definition would imply that unicorns and bizzarro superman exist

The idea of a unicorn is different than an actual unicorn standing in front of you. Existance is subject to all the same rules for proof than any other statement is subject.

[hazek]

What about imaginary arrangements like unicorns. Your definition would imply that unicorns and bizzarro superman exist

The idea of a unicorn is different than an actual unicorn standing in front of you. Existance is subject to all the same rules for proof than any other statement is subject.

And yet you dodged my question, why is that?

[scribe]

Been reading a bit about semiotics and myth recently, and have realised that signs and symbols are actually a *really* useful way of thinking about what "exists". In a zen kind of way (does a falling tree in a forest make a sound, yadda yadda), all symbols only exist if/when they can be tied back to some original "value" - i.e. Bitcoins "exist" if you can spend/sell them.

Technology - and language, marketing, etc - is all about symbols. Does a Facebook "Like" exist? Perhaps it "exists" if it gives me emotional feedback, in the same way that a sunset "exists" as an emotional thing. Can I buy food with a "Like"? No. Well, not directly. Can I buy food with a Bitcoin? Yes - because it enforces scarcity and therefore ownership and therefore is equivalent, in terms of physicality, to a "real" food "object".

So Bitcoins exist, but their existence is tied not to the "belief" in them, but to supply and demand. They exist, like any unit of currency, as a representation of desire to swap stuff.

Or something.

[grondilu]

Been reading a bit about semiotics and myth recently, and have realised that signs and symbols are actually a *really* useful way of thinking about what "exists". In a zen kind of way (does a falling tree in a forest make a sound, yadda yadda), all symbols only exist if/when they can be tied back to some original "value" - i.e. Bitcoins "exist" if you can spend/sell them.

Symbols and beliefs do exist in their own way.

Superman does exist, in the sense that we all know about him:  it's a character that has an accurate, known representation in comics, cinema and all.

On the opposite, there is, for instance, no such thing as a bitcoin super-heros.  I mean: a super-heros whose super-power consists in being able to magically solve a block for any difficulty in an instant.  This super heros would be called "bitcoinman", and he would look like a typical superheros:  he would have a cape and tight pants (black and yellow, for anarcapism), a mask and a big bitcoin sign shield on his chest.

Well, now that I've just imagined him, he does exist.  But just before that, he did not.