Could Bitcoin use a parallel Internet?

[Jet Cash]

This is a topic I've thought about for many months, and with increasing restrictions on current Internet usage, it is becoming more relevant. The thought was triggered by a personal project by @JackG and I'd be interested to know how he got on with it. He was attempting to find a new block using a pencil and paper. Obviously this was just done to improve his understanding of Bitcoin, and not in the expectation of making any gains. I suspect that submitting a new block via the postal services may not be the most efficient way to claim a reward. However, it is my understanding that the essential mechanism of Bitcoin is not based on the Internet. The Internet is just used as a convenient method of communication between nodes and miners. The mining is done on local machines, and the blockchain is also stored on thousand of local machines. The Internet is just a fast and convenient way to communicate between nodes. I did look at LoRa to see if there were possibilities there in the even of an Internet outage, but it is too local and slow.. Satellite services may provide a better alternative. However if those were to be used in parallel with the existing Internet, then nodes would need to monitor two channels to keep the blockchain synchronised.
Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

[Bitcoin_Arena]

What I think could happen is other superpowers such as China and their alliances will create their own alternate Internet infrastructure away from the US and the west like they are already doing with different things such as EVs, Operating systems, global navigation satellite systems etc

This definitely becomes tricky for Bitcoin on which internet system to use and which one not to use, but it would actually become much better if it uses both. Perhaps, we shall figure it out when that time comes.

As for a global internet outage or restrictions. I don't see it happening and when it does, it means that I would maybe happen during the times of apocalypse and this implies all other systems such as the banking systems will also be out.

I don't think all Governments worldwide would Unite to fight against Bitcoin, I think it's too late for them now.

[₿itcoin]

Yeah it is builtin feature the network has full potential to survive totally offline, there is no connection to the internet.. you know Blockstream satellite could broadcast the entire blockchain globally for free avoiding censorship or outages, I am not denying that internet is the fastest communications layer, but BTC is not Immobile without it.    Bitcoin TXs could still travel by mail, SMS or radio during blackout situations.  you know Bitcoin transactions & blocks are just text and transperent, not magic so governments are powerless to stop it by saying fairy tale.  Even if the web fails infrastructure layer resilience will not.

[Lucius]

~snip~
I don't think all Governments worldwide would Unite to fight against Bitcoin, I think it's too late for them now.

Why fight against something that can be monetized? Just look at how much money spot BTC ETFs have attracted in the US and everything will become clear to you.

I wouldn't agree that it's ever too late for the world's most powerful governments to crack down on Bitcoin - they have the ways and means to do so at any time. What would happen if the US, EU, UK, Japan, India, Canada and some other countries agreed to declare Bitcoin illegal and ban all CEXs? They wouldn't literally kill BTC, but I suspect that within 48 hours the price would drop by 80% or even more.

~snip~
I suspect that submitting a new block via the postal services may not be the most efficient way to claim a reward. However, it is my understanding that the essential mechanism of Bitcoin is not based on the Internet.

I think that such a slow method of block confirmation would not make sense, it would completely kill the idea that BTC is a cryptocurrency. Perhaps in the future there will be some alternatives for data transfer that are not exclusively related to the internet, but I think that until then Bitcoin cannot survive without the internet, nor can most of the things we take for granted today.

[FortuneFollower]

The feasibility of using alternative communication methods for Bitcoin, such as satellite services, is a topic of ongoing discussion. While such methods could provide resilience against internet outages, their widespread adoption would face significant challenges, including the need for new infrastructure and potential regulatory hurdles from governments. It remains to be seen if these parallel systems will become a viable option, but their development highlights the decentralized nature of Bitcoin's core protocol.

It's more of a plan B than anything else, imo, because it would mean that the chain would be not as fast as it could of been on the web tracks..

[mak013]

~snip~
I don't think all Governments worldwide would Unite to fight against Bitcoin, I think it's too late for them now.

Why fight against something that can be monetized? Just look at how much money spot BTC ETFs have attracted in the US and everything will become clear to you.

Because no one country will be happy to have money plant they can`t control.

But of course they can use it for getting profit and one moment they:

I wouldn't agree that it's ever too late for the world's most powerful governments to crack down on Bitcoin - they have the ways and means to do so at any time. What would happen if the US, EU, UK, Japan, India, Canada and some other countries agreed to declare Bitcoin illegal and ban all CEXs? They wouldn't literally kill BTC, but I suspect that within 48 hours the price would drop by 80% or even more.

as result someone get BTC and someone has fiat money(stocks, bonds, plants, etc).

As for me, i think that they would make something like it one moment. And that`s why i always recommend not to invest all the money in cryptocurrencies.

[Doan9269]

Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

The blockchain technology is what will always remain relevant and applicable to every usage, which I also see as a more better alternative to the use of other centralized central server systems developed and being controlled by the government, when we talk about the use of satellite in this regard, very soon, we are going to see the way the entire world will start to deviate by developing their own satellite which can be sufficient enough in serving its purpose within their own coverage, countries like China and Russia will always want theirs separately and been controlled by themselves, it's not also safe for bitcoin to go by the use of these parallel networks, because everything about bitcoin should point at decentralization.

[nemesis_incarnate]

Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

The blockchain technology is what will always remain relevant and applicable to every usage, which I also see as a more better alternative to the use of other centralized central server systems developed and being controlled by the government, when we talk about the use of satellite in this regard, very soon, we are going to see the way the entire world will start to deviate by developing their own satellite which can be sufficient enough in serving its purpose within their own coverage, countries like China and Russia will always want theirs separately and been controlled by themselves, it's not also safe for bitcoin to go by the use of these parallel networks, because everything about bitcoin should point at decentralization.

They do it for the control, unfortunately, not for the sake of what BTC pursues

So I would sway such a possibility for BTC away as for now, because everybody is eager to go into it and adopt it into their own chains of operations on different levels.

[hd49728]

This is a topic I've thought about for many months, and with increasing restrictions on current Internet usage, it is becoming more relevant. The thought was triggered by a personal project by @JackG and I'd be interested to know how he got on with it. He was attempting to find a new block using a pencil and paper.

It is too long time and that thread was created in 2018 so your memory is very good.
Pen and paper mining.

It is far beyond Bitcoin mining lottery like NERDMINER.

Something more with pencil and paper.
How can I generate a Bitcoin address using a pen and a paper?
Mining bitcoin with pencil and paper.

[pancelot]

This is a topic I've thought about for many months, and with increasing restrictions on current Internet usage, it is becoming more relevant. The thought was triggered by a personal project by @JackG and I'd be interested to know how he got on with it. He was attempting to find a new block using a pencil and paper. Obviously this was just done to improve his understanding of Bitcoin, and not in the expectation of making any gains. I suspect that submitting a new block via the postal services may not be the most efficient way to claim a reward. However, it is my understanding that the essential mechanism of Bitcoin is not based on the Internet. The Internet is just used as a convenient method of communication between nodes and miners. The mining is done on local machines, and the blockchain is also stored on thousand of local machines. The Internet is just a fast and convenient way to communicate between nodes. I did look at LoRa to see if there were possibilities there in the even of an Internet outage, but it is too local and slow.. Satellite services may provide a better alternative. However if those were to be used in parallel with the existing Internet, then nodes would need to monitor two channels to keep the blockchain synchronised.
Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

It's true that Bitcoin currently uses the internet as the primary means of communication between nodes, but technically, we can see that Bitcoin isn't solely dependent on the internet. Its underlying mechanisms are Proof of Work, consensus, and blockchain storage, all of which are distributed across thousands of nodes worldwide. This means that Bitcoin can operate on any communication layer as long as the protocol can deliver transactions and blocks between nodes.
Here are some technical perspectives that I believe support this:

• Independence from a Single Infrastructure
  Bitcoin itself only requires a communication network; it doesn't have to use the current public internet. It can be via radio, LoRa, satellite, mesh network, or even offline (sneakernet) connections. Experiments with Blockstream Satellite have already been conducted, allowing nodes to receive blockchain data without a conventional internet connection. You can read it here:https://www.wired.com/story/cypherpunks-bitcoin-ham-radio/?utm_
• How to Deal with a Parallel Internet or "Splinternet"
  If China, Russia, or another bloc of countries were to develop a separate Internet, Bitcoin would still be able to adapt. Due to its open protocol, nodes can operate on multiple networks simultaneously. This dual use (global Internet + alternative networks) could further strengthen Bitcoin's resilience.
• Decentralization as a Key Strength
  The threat of government control over the parallel network does exist, but I believe that technically, Bitcoin nodes can still maintain global consensus. As long as these nodes continue to communicate across networks (gateways between systems), the blockchain cannot be "monopolized" by a single party.
• Extreme Restriction Scenarios
  Even under national or global internet restrictions, Bitcoin can still survive longer than traditional financial systems. If the internet were to shut down completely, banking, payment systems, and government servers would also cease to exist. In fact, Bitcoin's resilient peer-to-peer nature will allow it to continue offering alternative communication options that aren't dependent on it.

So, technically, I don't think Bitcoin's future will be determined by whether we continue to use the current global internet or a parallel internet created by a superpower. Bitcoin can run on both, and is even more robust if run in parallel. While governments may try to restrict it, I don't think it will be able to stop it, as each decentralized layer of Bitcoin's communication network and implementation is agnostic to the medium used.

[dkbit98]

Satellite services may provide a better alternative. However if those were to be used in parallel with the existing Internet, then nodes would need to monitor two channels to keep the blockchain synchronised.
Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

Everything related with so called satellites is centralized, closed sourced and owned by government or big corporations, so it would be impossible to create any alternative with that.
If some real alternative for internet would ever be invented than I think bitcoin code would need to have hardfork and update.
However, we could have more use of Bitcoin over I2P, if that become more popular instead of Tor network we could at least have better privacy.

[ABCbits]

FWIW, services such as Blockstream Satellite exist. But it's not very popular and require you to setup it, so IMO it's not very viable alternative to internet connection.

If some real alternative for internet would ever be invented than I think bitcoin code would need to have hardfork and update.

I don't think hard fork is needed since Bitcoin protocol don't care what communication medium you use. What needed is to update communication logic of Bitcoin full node software.

[Rustam Meraj]

You are right that Bitcoin main technology does not need internet. Internet is just fast way for it to communicate. Core of Bitcoin is math problem that can be solved offline. Some projects like Blockstream Satellite are already building way for Bitcoin to work without internet by using satellites to send information. This would be big help in places with bad internet or during outage. However whether this system becomes widely used depends on if governments will allow it. Since independent network could let people get around censorship and government control it could lead to big fight between decentralized technology and power of governments.

[DISCMAN]

You are right that Bitcoin main technology does not need internet. Internet is just fast way for it to communicate. Core of Bitcoin is math problem that can be solved offline. Some projects like Blockstream Satellite are already building way for Bitcoin to work without internet by using satellites to send information. This would be big help in places with bad internet or during outage. However whether this system becomes widely used depends on if governments will allow it. Since independent network could let people get around censorship and government control it could lead to big fight between decentralized technology and power of governments.

Yes, you’re right. Bitcoin can work properly even without the internet, and it will never completely off in the future. The internet is just a tool that improves our quality of life and speeds things up, but bitcoin doesn’t directly depend on internet. Bitcoin is driven by mathematical calculations. So, there are alternative ways to keep it running. Such as blockstream Satellite, radio technology, sneakernet and other similar satellite systems can transmit bitcoin data. Now all developed countries are already adopting bitcoin and electricity is rarely a problem.

[Bitcoin_Arena]

Why fight against something that can be monetized? Just look at how much money spot BTC ETFs have attracted in the US and everything will become clear to you.

I mean, they would have done it back then when it was still not of any much value and when it was not as decentralized as it is today.

Now that the institutions have joined the game, the whole world going against it is close to impossible. Someone or some governments will always defy the directive.

I wouldn't agree that it's ever too late for the world's most powerful governments to crack down on Bitcoin - they have the ways and means to do so at any time. What would happen if the US, EU, UK, Japan, India, Canada and some other countries agreed to declare Bitcoin illegal and ban all CEXs? They wouldn't literally kill BTC, but I suspect that within 48 hours the price would drop by 80% or even more.

The price would go down, but I don't think It would be that much… and, that would not mean that the Bitcoin network would just stop operating/working Come on 

Secondly, do you think all those nations would unite at once? I don't think so. We are already having some group (The BRICS) trying to have their own monetary system away from the US dollar dominated economy, and you think they would gladly unite with the US?

[Synchronice]

This is a topic I've thought about for many months, and with increasing restrictions on current Internet usage, it is becoming more relevant. The thought was triggered by a personal project by @JackG and I'd be interested to know how he got on with it. He was attempting to find a new block using a pencil and paper. Obviously this was just done to improve his understanding of Bitcoin, and not in the expectation of making any gains. I suspect that submitting a new block via the postal services may not be the most efficient way to claim a reward. However, it is my understanding that the essential mechanism of Bitcoin is not based on the Internet. The Internet is just used as a convenient method of communication between nodes and miners. The mining is done on local machines, and the blockchain is also stored on thousand of local machines. The Internet is just a fast and convenient way to communicate between nodes. I did look at LoRa to see if there were possibilities there in the even of an Internet outage, but it is too local and slow.. Satellite services may provide a better alternative. However if those were to be used in parallel with the existing Internet, then nodes would need to monitor two channels to keep the blockchain synchronised.
Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

The internet is really a convenient method in case of Bitcoin and is no different from real life examples. You use Facebook to send and receive messages instantly. Could you do it without Facebook? Yes, you could send and receive letters, that's how it was working before but it's a very clumsy service and internet is the most convenient method of communication between users.
I don't think that we have to be afraid of internet usage restriction and have to find other solutions. If the government restricts your internet usage, then they'll also restrict satellites and any other option is super clumsy and impractical.

[purple_sparkles]

This is a topic I've thought about for many months, and with increasing restrictions on current Internet usage, it is becoming more relevant. The thought was triggered by a personal project by @JackG and I'd be interested to know how he got on with it. He was attempting to find a new block using a pencil and paper. Obviously this was just done to improve his understanding of Bitcoin, and not in the expectation of making any gains. I suspect that submitting a new block via the postal services may not be the most efficient way to claim a reward. However, it is my understanding that the essential mechanism of Bitcoin is not based on the Internet. The Internet is just used as a convenient method of communication between nodes and miners. The mining is done on local machines, and the blockchain is also stored on thousand of local machines. The Internet is just a fast and convenient way to communicate between nodes. I did look at LoRa to see if there were possibilities there in the even of an Internet outage, but it is too local and slow.. Satellite services may provide a better alternative. However if those were to be used in parallel with the existing Internet, then nodes would need to monitor two channels to keep the blockchain synchronised.
Do you guys think that this will be a viable option in the future, or will governments refuse to allow it to happen?

The internet is really a convenient method in case of Bitcoin and is no different from real life examples. You use Facebook to send and receive messages instantly. Could you do it without Facebook? Yes, you could send and receive letters, that's how it was working before but it's a very clumsy service and internet is the most convenient method of communication between users.
I don't think that we have to be afraid of internet usage restriction and have to find other solutions. If the government restricts your internet usage, then they'll also restrict satellites and any other option is super clumsy and impractical.

Right now, we are going through a period when the governments of many countries are trying to impose maximum total control over their citizens, and the internet and digital technologies are helping them do this. That’s why I don’t think governments are interested in restricting the internet, since any operation that leaves a digital trace is always easier to track.

[Lucius]

~snip~
Secondly, do you think all those nations would unite at once? I don't think so. We are already having some group (The BRICS) trying to have their own monetary system away from the US dollar dominated economy, and you think they would gladly unite with the US?

You forget that great powers have something in common that never changes, and that is to keep as much control as possible over those they rule. If Bitcoin ever became a problem that stood in their way, I personally have no doubt that they would easily agree on anything.

BRICS is something completely different, incomparable to Bitcoin, because it is still a centralized project that can hardly succeed, given that most of the countries that support it are largely dependent on the markets of those countries that they want to oppose.

[Synchronice]

~snip~
Secondly, do you think all those nations would unite at once? I don't think so. We are already having some group (The BRICS) trying to have their own monetary system away from the US dollar dominated economy, and you think they would gladly unite with the US?

You forget that great powers have something in common that never changes, and that is to keep as much control as possible over those they rule. If Bitcoin ever became a problem that stood in their way, I personally have no doubt that they would easily agree on anything.

Not every government tries to gain as much power as possible. There is a difference between mentality, there is a reason why Norway isn't a North Korea. Can they? Sure, they can but instead they choose a different strategy. Gaining a total control on your society is not a good idea, living in a 3rd world country doesn't bring any good to the leaders in reality. It happened that the people of these countries like Norway, Sweden and so on, have a good mentality and it lead them to the level where they are now. I don't think that they'll try to gain total control over their citizens because it's not the way they live, they are pretty evolved compared to some other nations (no disrespect).

[Lucius]

Not every government tries to gain as much power as possible. There is a difference between mentality, there is a reason why Norway isn't a North Korea. Can they?
~snip~

There are exceptions, Scandinavian countries and maybe Switzerland are a good example when it comes to Europe, but most countries in the world are obsessed with controlling their citizens as much as possible. But the largest countries in the world, such as China, Russia, India and most of the EU countries, often go to extremes with their laws that undermine basic human rights and freedoms.

Some of them actually have a parallel internet in the sense that they filter/ban everything they consider unsuitable for their citizens, but even though these are populous countries, I haven't seen people rebel too much against such laws, as was the case recently in Nepal.

It is definitely the mentality of the people in question that determines their reactions to any issue, no matter how serious the issue may be.