Why 2016 May Be the Year of Real Estate on the Bitcoin Blockchain

By Kyle Torpey Dec 4, 2015 8:50 PM EST

Real Estate Smart Property

Ragnar Lifthrasir is a real estate fintech entrepreneur and President of the International Bitcoin Real Estate Association. He is extremely interested in the idea of using the Bitcoin blockchain to increase overall efficiency in the real estate industry, and he’ll be discussing this topic at the upcoming Blockchain Agenda Conference in San Diego.

[Read More: Mycelium’s Dmitry Murashchik: All Assets and Identities on the Blockchain Within 10 Years]

Lifthrasir recently shared some of his thoughts on Bitcoin’s future role in real estate with Inside Bitcoins. In short, he believes that the blockchain will offer many improvements over traditional options for record keeping in the real estate industry.

The Blockchain Can Save the Real Estate Industry Significant Amounts of Money

When discussing the advantages of the Bitcoin blockchain for property title management, Ragnar Lifthrasir was quick to point out the current costs associated with title insurance and title fraud:

“Putting property titles on the Bitcoin blockchain will bring the real estate industry out of its existing 18th century technology. Title insurance is a $20 billion industry. It’s estimated that the total annual cost of fighting and resolving title fraud is $1 billion.”

Lifthrasir also noted how easy it is for a criminal to create fake documents that can cause serious issues for homeowners. In his view, the Bitcoin blockchain can offer an improved system for tracking property ownership records. He explained:

“Using Photoshop and a $15 stamp, a criminal can create a fake document that transfers ownership of your house to himself. Compare that to what it would take for that criminal to break the cryptography behind Bitcoin. I can’t predict exactly how much time and money would be saved by using the Bitcoin Blockchain for real estate titles, but clearly, it’s significant.”

Lifthrasir is a big believer in the idea of smart property, and he’s currently working with a group of individuals from the International Bitcoin Real Estate Association on an application that will streamline the entire property transfer process. He noted:

“I want to also say that uploading a deed to the blockchain is only half the solution. For full security, the actual transfer of real estate needs to be done with the Bitcoin token. By that I mean a colored coin solution similar to the one NASDAQ and Overstock are using. A couple of us at the International Bitcoin Real Estate Association are currently working on a combination title document plus property transfer app.”

[Read More: No Need to Wait for Overstock or NASDAQ, Veritaseum Already Put Wall Street on the Bitcoin Blockchain]

Don’t Waste Time Selling Blockchain Technology to Governments

Most people think about government records when it comes to titles to houses, cars, and other forms of property, and it would appear that Bitcoin could offer serious improvements over the current system. Having said that, Ragnar Lifthrasir does not believe people should waste their time teaching governments about the blockchain. He noted:

“It’d be great if the government used the Bitcoin blockchain to track property. But I don’t think it’s worth much time or effort to convince them to do it. Real estate companies and investors don’t need the government to transact amongst themselves. The clerk’s office at the county is just a central place to keep photocopies. There’s nothing magical about it.“

Lifthrasir added that the Bitcoin blockchain allows the real estate industry to avoid the inefficiencies associated with the current government record keeping structure:

“But now we have Bitcoin. At its most basic, Bitcoin is a better way for disparate parties to achieve consensus about who owns an asset, especially when one party is trying to cheat another, as happens in property titles. So, as long as people in the real estate industry start deciding to use the Bitcoin blockchain to record the transfer of properties, why bother with the delay, cost, and inefficiency of the government?”

[Read More: Nakamoto Institute’s Krawisz: Bitcoin Does Well When Governments Act Stupidly]

The Blockchain is Superior to Government Record Keeping

Many bitcoin enthusiasts find the digital commodity to be an improvement over the current fiat currency system, but the Bitcoin blockchain can be used for much more than just money. Lifthrasir described the International Bitcoin Real Estate Association’s intention to bring together professionals from the industry who would like to move various aspects of the business onto the blockchain:

“Just as bitcoin the currency offers a superior alternative to government currency, Bitcoin the blockchain offers a superior alternative to government record keeping. One of our main efforts at The International Bitcoin Real Estate Association is to connect real estate professionals who want to use Bitcoin for purchasing, escrowing, and recording the transfer of properties.”

Although many people still believe Bitcoin has not completely proved itself, Lifthrasir believes that the technology is now mature enough to be used in the real estate industry. Due to his involvement in both real estate and blockchain technology, Lifthrasir is convinced that 2016 will be the year that property title management moves onto the blockchain. He noted:

“Bitcoin is finally technologically mature enough to be used in real estate. Now what we need are more startups to produce good industry products and services. I think 2016 will be the year of Bitcoin real estate.”

If you’d like to hear more of Ragnar Lifthrasir’s thoughts on bringing the real estate industry to Bitcoin, make sure to attend the upcoming Blockchain Agenda Conference in San Diego. The conference runs from the 14th to the 16th of December.

Kyle Torpey is a freelance journalist who has been following Bitcoin since 2011. His work has been featured on VICE Motherboard, Business Insider, RT’s Keiser Report, and many other media outlets. You can follow @kyletorpey on Twitter.

Facebook Comments

  • WhatWouldYodaDo

    I agree, the master record is held by the county clerk. If you transfer money based on blockchain records, what happens if the clerk records disagree?

  • WhatWouldYodaDo

    It seems that the government record is more than just a photocopy, it is the master record. If you create a bitcoin powered repository of property ownership which contradicts the record in city hall, the courts will side with the records of city hall. How could you exchange a property using blockchain and transfer funds BEFORE the records are updated in city hall? Seriously, please explain this to me.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    If a broke government (-$18 Trillion) prints a new coin, passes a law and says it is legal tender, you think anyone will honor it? “Do you think that is air you are breathing, in this place?”

  • Milly Bitcoin

    So they create a new coin and pass a law and say it is legal tender. You can’t break this stuff down into memes and expect it happen that way.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    Sure it does – when you can print money, why do you need to balance the budget?

  • Milly Bitcoin

    Balancing government budgets has nothing to do with cryptocurrencies.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    At one point, society has used sugar as a proxy for value, sticks, tulips bulbs, coins of various metals, and so on. The concept of money is there, how it is manifested does CHANGE over time. Although we are in a digital age, we have not yet DEMANDED that our money is properly accounted for, and instead have blindly placed faith into a vague M0-M2 supply.

    Society is getting smarter via Internet, Google, etc., so as the average Joe understands and learns to care more about what they use as money (and starting realizing it is from a FIXED pie of monetary supply), people will eventually DEMAND transparency into the monetary supply.

    It will take one country, likely not the US, that sets a balanced budget and uses crypto-currency. If that works, the rest would fall as dominos. Speaking of balanced budgets, 49 states manage a balanced budget (I believe that fact is correct). The Federal Government, on the other hand, has NOT been held to a balanced budget and is using the opacity of the monetary supply as a trick to allow all of the over-spending. A day of reckoning will happen, and we may FINALLY see a seriously trimmed down federal government. If it goes totally broke, we may revert to our 50 state governments (with balanced budgets) and their national reserves for military. Not out of the realm of possibility when everyone realizes the Federal Government is not just broke, but WAY in the hole.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    Bitcoin does nothing to end inflation unless people decide to put value into Bitcoin and nothing else. That is extremely unlikely and what is more likely to happen is that the problem just manifests itself in a different way.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    A computer program that keeps a reliable, uncheatable ledger (we can argue until the cows come home on whether you think bitcoin does this or not, but for sake of argument i am saying it does) does indeed eliminate the inflation issue. Enlightened society should not rely on a single government to maintain currency (using a hidden ledger, controlled mysteriously by the Federal Reserver). All governments will cheat and print more, and not do so fairly (unlike a stock split).

    No where I know of, does the Federal Reserve / US Government allow me to see the true balance (market cap) of the dollar – it is all hidden in M0-M2 and very inaccurately kept. We should be able to see the outstanding amount of dollars down to the penny at anytime, like we can with a crypto market cap.

    If we could see this, then the next time the balance sheet is inflated (e.g. Quantitative Easing), people would start to see how that makes them poorer, as the pie grows in size, but their dollar holdings shrink.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    It is all the result of human nature and people willing to accept or support these things. A computer program that keeps a ledger can’t change all that. People have Bitcoin and they choose to put it into Mt. Gox for example.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    The post office is bankrupt, the government would be bankrupt ($18 trillion in debt), the only thing keeping it alive is the fact that the Federal Reserve can increase the monetary supply (pumping the money unfairly into the financial industry for them to loan out).

    They reduce their debt by de-valuing the currency. But when they increase the money supply, they do not go through everyone’s bank account and increase their balance to offset the dilution, unlike a stock split, you your holdings are directly adjusted. This ‘loop hole’ is WHY a de-centralized currency like bitcoin is an absolute necessity.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    People who don’t understand the BG/mining issues sometimes get sucked into insecure altcoins thinking they are all equally secure. As for government being reduced, yes. The problem with government is that it is too difficult to kill programs that are unprofitable so you still have the post office, copper penny,

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    I get your point on the BG problem – although bitcoin does indeed solve the problem from an engineering point of view, it does not perfectly solve the problem from a scientific point of view. But if we are still using bitcoin or any other consensus based crypto just fine, then for all practical purposes, the BG problem is solved. It could be said that consensus solves it.

    As for the the inefficiencies of monopolies, I do have an improvement recommendation. If we reduce the number of monopolies, we are better serving everyone. For example, the government should never be in the post-office (mail business). Let businesses compete in that space. The same should be said for nearly every business the government attempts to overtake. Rather than sole-sourcing via the government, use multiple businesses who COMPETE for the business. The provides a much better solution to the tax payers rather than having a no-competition government attempt to provide a solution. And finally, rather than offering vote-buying entitlement programs, we should be working to make it virtually free to live (exist) in the US. We need to strive for low food and energy prices. Rather than rob (tax) Peter to pay entitlements to Paul, it would be much better if Paul could easily exist on very little income because our society has advanced so well technologically, that the basics needed to live, are nearly free.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    I have already explained to you that a full solution to the BG problem means a 51% is not possible under any circumstances. A solution that allows a 51% attack is rather weak from a cryptographic standpoint because it usually takes an exponential expense of resources rather than just a majority to crack a system. This is discussed at length in the Let’s Talk Bitcoin reference I gave you.

    I never gave a “pro-government” tirade. Only a wing nut groups things into “pro” or “anti” government so your whole premise is wrong. I have also already explained that just because you have identified problem and inefficiencies does not mean the only solution is to eliminate government. That is ridiculous. I don’t have an answer to solve of all the inefficacies in monopolies but neither do you.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    Thank you for the BIO. I assume based on that information, and doing some Internet research, that you are Russell Smith (MillyBitcoin)?

    My main point above, is that bitcoin indeed solves the age-old BG problem. You have failed to point out where it does not. Point #1 – Russell, you’ve failed to provide answer here.

    As for your pro-government tirade, again if you read what you wrote, you are 100% incorrect in all of your word-rage.

    I’ve worked for the government indirectly myself for a few years (defense industry), and have a positive opinion of the government, especially as it relates to the defense industry. But even there, it is good that the government uses competing contractors, to reduce the deadweight loss.

    No where in your responses did you address the inefficiency of monopolies, like government. Point #2, Russel – no answer to inefficiency of monopolies.

  • Well Kyle, you sure lit up the disqus feed! 🙂 Great read, anyway, the obstacles to a blockchain based – non government sanctioned – land/title registry are many, and the formidable opponent is “Title insurance is a $20 billion industry. It’s estimated that the total annual cost of fighting and resolving title fraud is $1 billion.” Those attorneys will suck the cryptolife and cash out of every group seeking to take their bread and butter. Also of note is there was no mention of Factom.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    With all that experience you should be able to use Google. I have an MS in Physics from Rutgers as well as CS degree. I also have 27 years as a federal employee (9 years in DC) where I did research for explosives/weapons detection systems and later information security requirements for the FAA. Now I own some companies including Atlantic City Bitcoin. My company got that ruling from FinCEN that says US miners don’t have to register as money transmitters. I also successfully cancelled the bogus BITCOIN trademark so companies don’t get sued.

    You are a typical wing nut who has limited technical knowledge, doesn’t bother to research things, and just repeats nonsense that other wing nuts post on places like reddit. You have no idea how governments work and you just pull out a few examples of bad things that happened and claim the whole system is bad. You provide no alternatives or solutions except to say eliminate everything. That is just ignorant wing-nut nonsense and it is the reason many people are turned off by Bitcoiners.

    I got a taste of this during the first big Bitcoin conference. It was covered by that Free State Radio. All during the conference they ran promos claiming ALL government employees were “murderers.” That’s right, they claim that social security clerks, astronauts, janitors, etc. are all “murderers.” Right then and there I knew many Bitcoins were total flakes who live their lives like they are in a video game.

    It is really comical you agree with what I say about the BG problem and then you go on to say I was wrong about everything. This is the typical wing-nut bias. You claim everything I say is wrong because I don’t agree with your entire wing-nut agenda. It is really embarrassing to be associated with people like you just because I got involved with Bitcoin.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    I’ve known about the BG problem since the mid 80’s. Been in software development for 30 years. Know my way around hard CS problems.

    Again, your mental stupidity is astounding, on the order of a smooth, crenelation-free brain, knuckle-dragger.

    The FACT is, one woud need 51% of the bitcoin mining capacity to introduce false facts. Everything you say, is complete and udder stupidity.

    Earlier you said you own a Bitcoin company. What bitcoin company is that?

  • Milly Bitcoin

    You didn’t even bother to do research about Bitcoin and the BG problem or you would have seen it explained. All you do is repeat false information you hear from other cultists. Peter Todd explained in an early Let’s talk Bitcoin in about early 2013 and it was discussed on bitcointalk before that.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    The need to have 51% of the mining control to promote false facts IS what makes bitcoin work, it IS what solves the General’s problem. That is why the inventor(s) of bitcoin (Satoshi) should receive a nobel prize in economics.

    The 2nd half your response was exactly that, a circle-j.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    in the BG problem you have a fact that is supposed to be transmitted. in Bitcoin you have miners creating the facts and someone with >50% can roll back the blockchain and change the transactions. Such an attack is not possible.

    As for the other issues I have already explained why it is wrong. Cultists are like religious fundamentalists so it doesn’t matter what I say. Go around and try to explain that to random people you into instead of seeking out other cultists to engage in a circle jerk. Report back and let me know how that works out.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    Why do you say bitcoin is a partial solution to the BGs problem, not a full solution. What piece do you think is missing?

    As for throwing out the term ‘cult’, you quickly shut down any reader of your post as tossing labels around with no basis makes no points. You say other’s points are not valid (no explanation as to WHY). Again, you seem delusional in that you think that what you write must be true because you wrote it. Put facts behind your statements and emotionally-charged labels.

    All the rest of your points are drivel, point-less labels, and further B.S.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    Bitcoin is a partial solution to the BG problem, not a full solution. The rest of your discussion is just cult nonsense that does not apply to the real world. Not that some of the issues you raise are not valid but they are presented in such an extreme that most people will never go along with it. Governments are a collection of good and bad things and most people want the services they provide in spite of all the bad things. You are using Bitcoin technology to try to promote this political agenda and you don’t want to accept Bitcoin for what it is when it doesn’t match the goals of your agenda. The anarcho-whatever market is saturated as far as Bitcoin is concerned so you need to start attracting normal people and not the people who sit around listening to Alex Jones.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    I think you waste a lot of your time and energy in your perceptions that bitcoiners are cultist, think of bitcoin as religion, etc. That is just nonsense, rubbish. Wasted thought space.

    What has the programmer geeks excited is that there has been a solution to the Byzantine Generals problem (2008-2009 with Bitcoin). Rarely are such difficult problems solved in our lifetime.

    Similarly, never before has a digital scarcity been created. If it were so easy to break the blockchain cryptography, people would do it, and then the value of bitcoin would go to 0. It would be like having 10 million people win the lottery and then the pay is negligible. Instead, the SHA-256 hash function is one-way (unless you ha God’s quantum computers), and because of that, the digital scarcity is safe. That, at its core, is one of the pillars of bitcoins appeal. Obviously, because it is built on the Internet, the scarcity can be easily transferred, (unlike naturally scarce resources like gold).

    Those of us who understand this (you included) would prefer the security of the SHA-256 algorithm protecting information, than say, a single particular government just ‘saying so’. Do you really want, for example, a government like Honduras with known corruption problems, saying ‘who owns what’ or would you rather trust the information recording on the blockchain?

    Governments are a monopoly for the area they serve, and all possess some amount of corruption. A study in economics will prove that Monopolies under-serve their intended customer base (know as the ‘dead weight triangle’). It is why ironically, the government goes after companies like Microsoft who have apparent monopolies in industry. Knowing that monopolies under-serve, an ideally managed society has the minimal amount of government (minimize underserving monopolies). An enlightened society should be reducing their food prices to as nearly as free as possible, their energy costs to as near as free, so that it takes very little ‘money’ to survive. Those that want more than the minimum can work harder and get more ‘stuff’ and those that do not want to work or work very little, can still survive because of low food and energy prices. This is much better than a bully, monopoly government stepping in, and forcefully transferring wealth from the richer to the poorer, via taxes.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    Your reply is a perfect example of cult nonsense. The ‘faith” in the blockchain has to do both with cryptography (Bitcoin does not use encryption, it uses cryptography) and the fact that miners built the blockchain. Bitcoin proof of work is only a partial solution to the Byzantine General problem because the “facts” are supplied by the miners and the miners have the ability to change the “facts.” Bitcoin is not secure or trustless until you accept that the mining system works as intended. major problems have surfaced with altcoins who have a low hash rate.

    Bitcoin 1.0 works very well if you look at it from the point of view that it was worth nothing a few years ago. However, if you try to go shopping with Bitcoin the pickings are slim. sure you have Overstock and Gift cards but it is a long way from being accepted by a large number of merchants and users. If you look at Bitcoin from the perspective of what you need to support a Bitcoin 2.0 project it has a long way to go. getting merchants to use Bitcoin is a boring task that most Bitcoiners don’t want to do. they want to talk about 2.0, property transfer, Bitcoin jet packs, etc. You can only do about 5 transactions a second and there is no way Bitcoin 1.0 can support Bitcoin 2.0 without a significant increase Bitcoin 1.o support.

    The hash rate has absolutely nothing to do with supercomputers and that comparison is more cultist nonsense. A hasher can do nothing more than work on one single problem of running sha-256 on the midstate problem. You cannot even use it to check your email and it can’t even solve a block on its own with supporting computers. as for a 51% that certainly could happen if people who have control over the chip-making facilities decide to do it. However, disruption of Bitcoin can be done much more cheaply by doing something similar to the “Bearwhale” a few months back. a system that can be disrupted by one person with $8 million cannot support Bitcoin 2.0 systems.

    As for this scaling conference that brings up another incentive issue in Bitcoin. The only incentive to bring in more developers is to influence the development of the private companies that hire the developers. Since there are so many competing interests that is very difficult and becoming more difficult as more people get involved. Achieving a consensus on changes is going to be more and more difficult. Where in life do large numbers of people agree? Politics? religion? How is this supposed to magically happen in Bitcoin? I think they should focus on deciding how to proceed in the event of not achieving a consensus.

    I think Bitcoin will eventually prosper but Bitcoiners have to start looking at these issues realistically and not treat Bitcoin like some kind of religion.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    The ‘faith’ we put in the blockchain is faith in SHA-256. Your Internet banking applications use 128-bit encryption. 129-bit encryption would be twice as difficult to crack as 128-bit encryption. 130-bit encyrption would be 4 times as difficult to hack as 128-bit encrption. Bitcoin is using 256-hashing, way beyond SHA-1 hashing, which still has no known rainbow pairs (two strings that hash to the same value). So our current online banking system would be 3,400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 weaker than Bitcoin.

    And people are using online banking (most of which sites, do not even require two-phase [SMS] authentication). so yeah, Bitcoin 1.0 works VERY well.

    As for ownership, there is no known resource that is as provable non-copy-able that I can think of, than a record in the blockchain. The current hashing power of the Bitcoin network is something like 1,000 times the top 500 supercomputers combined. So yeah, I don’t think someone is going to be able to do a 51% attack. That is old (tulip era discussion material).

    A drivers license, birth certificate, warranty deed, stock certificate – all of that paper can be forged. And has to be securely stored. As time moves forward, and say the year 2016 is the year that the mass ‘gets’ the concept of the blockchain, then the trust documents will be placed on the blockchain. As for ‘scoping’ the documents, the scoping information can be placed into the blockchain as well. By scoping, I mean territorial, geographic, and time information.

    The current issue that I see with the block chain, is moving to support larger transactions, of which is currently going to be discussed at conference in Hong Kong. Whether they vote periodically to adjust the max-size of blocks in the blockchain, or algorithmically do it, I don’t care. Average block size right now, is .5 MB (half the block size).

  • Milly Bitcoin

    When are going to grow up?

  • Milly Bitcoin

    Obviously I am not anti-Bitcoin as I own a Bitcoin company. I have news for you, Bitcoin is full of ignorant cultists who do nothing but spread misinformation because they treat Bitcoin like a religion rather than a technology. There is more misinformation that come from Bitcoiners as compared to Bitcoin critics. I am also tired of the wackos and cultists who go around calling everyone “anti-Bitcoin,” “statist,” etc. just because they point out some issue that needs to be addressed.

  • “Who is this Milly Bitcoin?”


  • Milly Bitcoin

    I didn’t say Bitcoin 2.0 would fail. I said Bitcoin 1.0 needs succeed first and people should concentrate on the success of Bitcoin 1.0 before claiming successes with bitcoin 2.0. Not that it can’t be successful but there is a lot of work that needs to be done.

    Ownership in the blockchain depends on people putting faith in the records in the blockchain (actually the records are kept by a centralized entity that just puts a has in the blockchain so you have to depend on that centralized entity as well). If you put ownership of my house to you in the blockchain that is meaningless since my local jurisdiction does not care what is in the blockchain and they go by the County clerk’s records. How a blockchain would interact with the real world is a big issue that was not addressed in the article.

    I did not say the Bitcoin blockchain was hacked. I said various blockchains (of altcoins) have been hacked by things such as the 51% attack. To keep the Bitcoin blockchain secure it is very expensive and that issue was not raised in the article. Since there is still a large block reward many people just waive their hands at the expense as if it does not exists. Not that it is a show stopper but the cost is major issue when proposing these ideas.

    Like I said it is not impossible but there are many issues that need to be overcome and the article does not address them.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    As a life lesson, Milly Bitcoin, once you understand that the ‘square’ you are standing on (anti-bitcoin) is no longer a valid position, move off of it. Continuing to defend an invalid position is like banging your head against the wall.

    Being able to take in new information, and progress from the lower-rung positions of understanding (like the trolls who still compare bitcoin to tulip bulbs – which is a provably ignorant position) to the higher rung positions of enlightenment is a wonderful place to be.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    Again, you say that it is not ready until a 2.0, 3.0 but you FAIL to say WHY. Again, your throwing out base-less statements offers no value.

    As for your proof of ownership comments, again, they are baseless. If the block chain says I own such and such property, then that is it. Only I have the private keys and it absolutely proves it. Paper documents by a local (possibly corrupt) government, are just paper and can’t be trusted. Again, put an actual FACT in your comments. Everything you ever write is just anti-bitcoin trolling.

    And you say that Blockchain’s have been hacked. Show one case where the Bitcoin blockchain has been hacked. Companies that hold bitcoin for you for trading (e.g. Mt Gox) may have been hacked, but again, the bitcoin block chain was not hacked.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    there are too many issues to put them in a comment system. First of all attempting to make fun of governments, like the author always does, is irrelevant to the issues. as for putting assets on the blockchain, Bitcoin cannot come close to doing that in its current form. bitcoin “2.0” “3.0”, “killer apps”, etc. are not possible until Bitcoin 1.0 is a success which is a long way from being the case. The other issue is that the blockchain is merely a leger and property right occur in the real world in real jurisdictions. If it says I own a car on the blockchain and the local jurisdiction says I don’t then how is this resolved? Further, blockchains can he hacked and have been so many times. it is the network effect that has prevented the Bitcoin blockchain from being hacked and it requires a large amount of work and expense to keep it that way. Not that these are not good invention or that they cannot be done it is just that people bandy about all these ideas without any consideration of what is needed to use such a system. Right now many Bitcoin2.0 projects are crashing because they see no immediate market to defray the investment expense. when companies do try to improve things they end up in developer gridlock. A good article would address all these issues but the author feels that posting silly pictures and making fun of governments is sufficient.

  • John DeRegnaucourt

    Who is this Milly Bitcoin that always posts negative comments with nothing specific in them. Could you explain your point further? What do you mean ‘does not even come close to addressing the pertinent issues?’

    The block chain is a add-to-only, unbreakable record keeping log. It’s a write-to centralized database that cannot be hacked. Only once a decade or so does an invention come-along (like carbon nanotubes) that changes how things work. The blockchain solves an age old computer science problem, once and for all.

  • Milly Bitcoin

    More cultist nonsense that does not even come close to addressing the pertinent issues.

Read previous post:
Sean Neville Bitcoin
Circle’s Sean Neville: Blockchain vs Bitcoin Debate is a ‘Little Bit Silly’

Circle, a mobile payments company, has received a bit of criticism in the Bitcoin community lately due to a perceived...