“Bitcoin is something that really should be simple.”
This is the message that Bitcoin creator and nChain Chief Scientist Dr. Craig Wright gets across as he takes the stage during the CoinGeek London conference, currently taking place. Wright has tried to get this message across in the past, but certain damage has already been done that is difficult to reverse. Bitcoin SV (BSV) has been able to do it though, and its recent Genesis upgrade does what no other cryptocurrency project could do—implement Bitcoin the way it was initially intended.
Wright, during his Satoshi Vision: A Correct Understanding of Bitcoin presentation at CoinGeek London, reiterated what’s wrong with most blockchain projects and addressed some of the major myths that have caused confusion surrounding the crypto space.
Many early developers working on Bitcoin, which would go on to create BTC, got it wrong. Either through a lack of understanding or a lack of expertise on the subject, they incorrectly interpreted the original Bitcoin whitepaper. As Wright points out, digital signatures are part of law. A digital signature algorithm is not a signature—a signature needs an identity. Wright said, “Digital signatures cannot be anonymous as digital is simply a means of making an electronic exchange of a signature.” Bitcoin allows users to control their own information, when used properly.
Wright adds, “The need to identify individuals by definition, precludes having a digital signature algorithm act as a digital signature without some means of identifying the individuals involved.”
There is a false belief that crypto needs to rely on a third-party processor, in the way a consumer relies on a bank to handle money for transactions. While this is the case with high-dollar transactions, it is not necessary for micropayments. Still, Bitcoin was never meant to replace these middlemen or banks; instead, it makes them irrelevant for conducting small transactions.
Bitcoin was meant to be direct one user to another, a concept that is as simple as its name suggests. It never required having to be broadcast to a node first. The idea of bringing in nodes was to obfuscate and hide transactions, which goes against the initial principle design of Bitcoin and was implemented by BTC. The idea of peer-to-peer was solid and worked out in the Bitcoin white paper, allowing for money to be sent directly to someone if online through their IP address to get a public key, or, if not online, sending to the Bitcoin address, which is a hash of the public key.
"The need to identify individuals by definition precludes having a digital signature algorithm act as a digital signature without some means of identifying the individuals involved"
Dr. Craig S. Wright, Chief Scientist of @nChainGlobalhttps://t.co/fGmSddcf8A pic.twitter.com/AyVNtsSvdX
— CoinGeek (@RealCoinGeek) February 20, 2020
Bitcoin was meant to offer a solution for sending and receiving peer-to-peer micropayments, including those of less than one cent. This was the “Holy Grail” of payments, a solution that wasn’t ever made available before because of the expense related to third party involvement and standard banking charges. Bitcoin was never meant to be a monetary system that would replace current currencies.
One of the biggest myths surrounding crypto, and one that is touted constantly, is decentralization. No blockchain is decentralized—the concept doesn’t exist. Someone, somewhere has the ability to influence the decisions and the direction of the network. Simply put, Bitcoin is not “code is law,” it is not about anarchy, it is not about politics. “The myth of consensus has been promoted by people who seek to fraudulently claim that Bitcoin was designed for illicit use,” adds Wright. And this myth has been perpetuated by crypto projects like BTC and Ethereum. However, they will soon learn how wrong they were.
New to Bitcoin? Check out CoinGeek’s Bitcoin for Beginners section, the ultimate resource guide to learn more about Bitcoin—as originally envisioned by Satoshi Nakamoto—and blockchain.