[politician]

> Double-spend has been solved by the financial sector.

Traditional finance offers “at-most-one spend”while blockchain protocols offer “one spend up to 1/3 malicious nodes”.

The limit on the former is government, and Byzantine Fault Tolerance sets the limit on the latter.

Government can unilaterally seize “your” funds in traditional banking, while a substantial computational attack is required to cause a loss of confidence event (double spend) on a particular blockchain.

[arethuza]

Can't governments force people to hand over control of their keys?

[Karunamon]

They can't guarantee that there is only one set of keys. They are just files after all.

[arethuza]

Doesn't seem to stop organisations like the FBI from "seizing" Bitcoins?

e.g.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/07/feds-seize-3point36-billion-...

[Karunamon]

Yep, this is called poor opsec. Had this person had someone else with a copy of that wallet's keys, they could have been moved before this happened.

[arethuza]

If you have to rely on someone else with a copy of your keys then isn't that poor opsec?

[Karunamon]

If you are in a position where losing access to a significant amount of money due to the actions of the state are likely, would it not make sense to have a backup plan?