저자: CryptoRamble진행자 · 외국인
요약 보기
Peter Schiff이 비트코인 지갑 접근 실패를 트윗한 사건을 계기로, 비트코인 기술과 지갑 시스템을 혼동하는 대중의 학습곡선 문제를 짚는 영상이다. 사건 개요: Schiff는 블록체인 지갑의 비밀번호가 무효가 되어 보유 비트코인 전부를 잃었다고 주장했으나, 지갑사(blockchain.com)는 자금이 안전하다고 답했다. 진행자는 그가 기술과 지갑 시스템을 혼동한 것으로 본다. 기술 대중화 사례: 이메일은 1965년 MIT에서 도입돼 1982년 명칭이 생기고 1988년 상용화, 1990년대 초 스팸 등장, 2007년 Gmail로 대중화됐다. 신용카드 번호 입력 같은 것도 처음엔 낯선 기술이었다는 점을 들어, 블록체인도 비슷한 시간이 걸릴 것이라 주장한다. 자기주권과 편의성 논쟁: 원칙적으로는 자기 자산을 스스로 책임지는 자기주권이 맞지만, 현실적으로는 많은 사람이 이를 따르지 않을 것이므로 지갑 기술의 편의성 개선이 필요하다는 입장이다. CZ가 개인 키 보관보다 거래소가 더 안전하다고 한 발언을 언급하며 우려를 표했다. 상속 문제: 사망 시 자산 상속 문제가 가장 큰 고민이며, 현재 해법들은 제3자에게 자산을 맡겨야 해서 받아들이기 어렵다고 말한다. 암호화와 생체인증이 대안이 될 수 있으나 생체정보의 고유성·신뢰성 한계가 있다고 본다. 결론: 대중이 암호화 기술에 익숙해지려면 아직 갈 길이 멀다. 영상은 특정 자산의 가격 전망이나 매매 권유를 담고 있지 않다.
다듬은 글
hi welcome to my cryptid channel captor ramble I'm busy I'm sure you've heard about Peter Schiff the person who hates Bitcoin and thinks it's a Ponzi scheme but loves gold and how he thought that he had lost access to all of his Bitcoin because he couldn't unlock his wallet I think it was at blockchain calm hair was his initial tweets he said that he lost all the Bitcoin he ever owned and his wallet somehow got corrupted and his password was no longer valid he really stresses the point that he didn't actually lose his password it was probably something with the wallet itself and the wallet was from blockchain comm and they reached out to him and said that his funds were secure but here's the thing that's interesting about Peter ships tweet he was confusing Bitcoin the technology in the blockchain itself with the wallet system and that says a lot about the kind of people out there who might be interested in Bitcoin which Peter Schiff actually is and them not being able to use the technology so I have a couple questions and I also wanted to relate it to the evolution of other technology that we think is so simple to use now but there was actually a population learning curve that occurred and now we're just so used to these standards that we don't think of how new and novel it might have been at the very beginning specifically I was thinking about email or credit cards because it actually takes knowledge to know what you're supposed to put in the subject line what you're supposed to put to the the to and from how I suppose to format the addresses that's something that people never knew about at the beginning and now we have email clients that do it for us but at the beginning I think all of that had to be entered manually and credit cards are another example you have these I think it's sixteen digit codes on the back of your card that's aligned with your name and you have to enter all this information we're so used to doing it but think about when these first came out that's not something that would have been new to people I found this handy article from the Atlantic that talks about the evolution of it 1965 email was introduced at MIT email specifically they're talking about the more modern version of it not even the core technology behind it which came about through I think it's something called ARPANET and US Department of Defense so that's something even older email introduced in 965 that's so long ago and then in 1977 the United States Postal Service saw it as a potential threat and then in 1982 that's when the word email was first used and before it was e - mail but now we just call it email and it got the lexicon became entered into the English dictionary that is almost 20 years later from the first introduction of it outside of the military and then the first commercial email products came in 1988 and then in the early 1990s email spam begins and then there was a movie called you got mail and then the Federal Trade Commission codified email spam laws kind of funny how much later that came about versus them trying to regulate cryptocurrencies because they can't necessarily tax people and now in 2007 there's Gmail and this is how we know of email today but think about how long that took from 1965 to 2011 that email is like everybody uses it all the time that's going to happen with blockchain technology and specifically Bitcoin and we shouldn't be mad at Peter Schiff but he's probably not the only one that doesn't understand the difference between Bitcoin and how Bitcoin is delivered now the funny thing about Peter Schiff specifically said he should probably know just because he matches it so much but let's just say that he's representative of many other people out there who we really want to learn about blockchain technology and learn about Bitcoin learn about how they can be their own bank and be self sovereign speaking of being self sovereign questions I have are should we make better a wallet tech for people knowing that that's against the principle of you taking responsibility for yourself and your assets including your money which Bitcoin and blockchain makes possible in principle I would say no you should be self sovereign and you should figure it out but in practicality I'm gonna say yes I think there are going to be many people who never get on board with the whole self sovereign idea behind cryptocurrencies blockchain Bitcoin right I saw a scary tweet from cz Shang Kings out of Finance saying that exchanges are more secure than people having their own private keys and it depends on the person maybe for someone like Peter Schiff but again I'm pointing out this learning curve thing because if it was just more widely adopted everybody would figure it out just like sending email and just like using a credit card but another question is what about people dying I don't really know how to answer that because that's something I worry about and I've seen solutions out there but all of them require that you hand over your money basically in essence to a third party and I don't really like the sound of that and so I don't really know how to solve that dilemma but it's an issue and I hope someone solves it soon I really don't know how they would something that involves encryption maybe biometrics although I think the way that technology works it's not always a fail-safe you're not always gonna get it right when you want to match biometrics of someone else and people don't actually have individual biometrics they're not as unique as people really think they are especially with like fingerprints for example I'm not sure about irises I've heard brain waves are very very unique so maybe we don't have the technology yet but biometrics could be a good way to solve this issue like if we could assign custody to certain people based on their biometrics while we're still alive something like that that's only that's the only thing that I would trust everything else that we have now I just don't want to hand over my teeth to anyone you know I'm not like that and also bitcoiners and twenties yes are not like that so I thought that this incident with praetorship could teach us about the evolution of technology and make us aware of how early we are in the stages of the population the general populations learning curve you know all the people who are encrypted now they weren't around when it was mostly all the devs talking about it and I guess really nerdy people with their GPUs so we have a long way to go thanks for watching I'll talk to you soon have a great day bye
댓글 0