network and you tokenize the goods and
services and enable it with a blockchain, it
can become very efficient.”
Facilitating trades between distinct
digital assets would require a whole eco-
system of innovations. For assets that live
on separate blockchains, there will need to
be reliable ways to transfer tokens on one
chain at exactly the same moment that
another token moves elsewhere. Third
parties will need to quickly match buy-
ers and sellers—if your grocer doesn’t
accept Apple stock, for example, you’ll
need to find someone to broker that deal
and deliver a coin your grocer will accept.
“Without a network, you have to find
the person that wants to trade four goats
for the cow. That’s very difficult, to find that
person. But with a network and with col-lateralization of blockchain-based tokens,
it’s much easier,” says Harvey. “We’re not
there yet in this world, but that’s where
we’re headed.”
What’s left for Bitcoin to do?
So under those scenarios, would there
be advantage left to the original Bitcoin?
Maybe it’s the one thing Bitcoin enthusiasts tout as the technology’s greatest
strength: Bitcoin transactions are anonymous and impossible to censor. These
qualities would disappear the moment
transactions were yielded to the Federal
Reserve, or to Facebook, or to a network
of brokers coordinating the sale of bartered assets.
But if all Bitcoin can offer in our hypo-
thetical future is privacy and censorship
resistance, then we have to ask—is it actu-
ally giving us those things right now?
There are no real names stored on the
Bitcoin blockchain, but it records every
transaction you make, and every time you
use the currency, you risk exposing infor-
mation that can tie your identity to those
actions. We know from documents leaked
by Edward Snowden that the US National
Security Agency has sought ways of con-
necting activity on the Bitcoin blockchain
to people in the physical world. The NSA
has been tapping fiber-optic cables, moni-
toring internet activity, and luring people
onto compromised platforms by falsely
promising to secure their privacy—all in an
effort to collect every bit of data that might
link addresses to names and real identities.
Should governments seek to create
and enforce blacklists, they will find that
the power to decide which transactions to
honor lies in the hands of just a few Bit-
coin miners. Some of these crucial players
are already feeling the pressure of travel
bans imposed by the Chinese government,
though it remains unclear whether any
specific demands have been made.
Bitcoin’s early adopters have held fast
to the dream of a single world currency
that is private, free for all to use, and under
the control of the masses. But the seven bil-
lion people not yet using Bitcoin might not
care about any of that. With networks, con-
venience wins, and convenience is based
on size. It’s the reason you’re on Facebook
rather than some other social-media site—
because everyone else is. If cryptocurren-
cies are to be widely used, it will be the
habits of the masses, not the wishes of Bit-
coin’s early adopters, that determine what
becomes of Satoshi Nakamoto’s vision.
Morgen Peck is a freelance writer based
in New York City. Her work has appeared
in Wired, Scientific American, and
IEEE Spectrum.
