A recent social media missive from Congressman Brad Sherman, unfairly branding Bitcoin enthusiasts as “tax evaders”, typifies how Bitcoin has broken into the mainstream consciousness. It seems paradoxical that elected officials like Sherman, who pledge to uphold the Constitution and the presumption of innocence, readily tarnish Bitcoin advocates as outlaws sans substantiation. Such baseless accusations erode the bedrock principles of fairness and justice which our legal system champions.

When public figures such as Sherman rail against Bitcoin, they inadvertently draw attention to this “freedom currency” that persistently battles assault from those ensnared by antiquated systems. Even those condemning Bitcoin may inadvertently fuel its success and widespread adoption. It appears that politicians anticipate Bitcoin users to bear a unique tax load not imposed on others.

Suppose a politician sought to tax individuals for using computational power for mathematical computations or English to voice their perspectives. Such an absurd policy would attract mockery, given that these aspects are fundamental to societal functioning.

Rather than imposing arbitrary taxes, the government’s focus should be on creating regulatory frameworks that foster innovation and economic growth. Unfortunately, this straightforward principle stands at odds with the Biden administration’s proposed 30% tax on Bitcoin mining. This proposition not only flouts fairness but also belies the very values that make the United States exceptional.

If a participant has paid for their energy, their usage should be at their discretion. Why then is Bitcoin mining in the crosshairs when other sectors, including pornography, video gaming, or gambling, also consume energy to fuel online indulgences? I’m not advocating for a tax on other industries, but rather highlighting this proposal as a clear demonstration of governmental overreach and interference in the private sector.

NAVIGATING THROUGH TRANSITION

Bitcoin mining isn’t the sole target; the entire Bitcoin network is under scrutiny. Whenever innovative ideas disrupt established norms, resistance or acceptance can follow, mimicking biological and technological responses. Established industries may resist novel technologies to safeguard their interests, much like our immune system responds to foreign entities. However, just as humans adjust to changing environments, technology can adapt and evolve to better meet our needs. People can resist or embrace Bitcoin, but either way, this technology is revolutionizing the world rapidly.

New technologies like Bitcoin aren’t inherently malevolent; they’re tools with the potential for both positive and negative applications. Instead of resisting progress, we should seize the opportunities that technological advances offer, working collectively to shape a brighter future. Sherman’s tweet may not earn him any political points, but it does highlight his misapprehension and disregard for his constituents’ rights.

The analogy between technological networks and human biology may seem peculiar, but it offers valuable insights into the evolution and expansion of emerging technologies like Bitcoin. Kevin Kelly’s book “What Technology Wants” sheds light on this aspect. There are three quotes that truly resonated with me:

“Technologies are not solitary entities, but exist within networks that augment their influence and reach.”

“Innovation is a collective endeavour, with the most groundbreaking innovations arising from networks of collaborative effort.”

“As our technologies become increasingly interconnected, they exhibit more emergent properties, becoming progressively unpredictable and uncontrollable.”

Technology constantly evolves in response to human needs. A tiny spark of an idea can swell into something far beyond our wildest imaginations. This evolution isn’t always a straight path; new technologies frequently spring from existing ones. These networks expand at an exponential pace, enabled by innovations we never previously envisioned. To someone from a century ago, FaceTime would seem magical, much like how a device capable of limb regeneration would astound us today. I anticipate that such technology will eventually materialize, bringing a host of unimagined innovations with it.

However, just like humanity, technology operates within a framework of rules and laws. To truly harness the potential of technology, we must abide by these rules. For instance, if someone branded a TCP/IP conference as a “gang members’ meetup”, it would sound ludicrous. Especially so if it came from a politician whose duty should be to encourage innovation within their jurisdiction.

Casting aspersions on people for their preference for a specific protocol is irrational. But if one’s role is to preserve legacy technology, with the emergence of new technology posing a threat to their relevance, an adverse reaction to the new technology seems plausible.

WELCOMING TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES

Ultimately, we all contribute to the technological network, whether we choose to or not. We must welcome the evolution of technology and comprehend its potential to reshape the world for the better. We are at the inception of all that will be constructed atop these new protocols. Thus, it is incumbent upon us to harness their power and maximize their potential.

While I can’t assert with absolute certainty that Bitcoin will exceed $1 million, I believe it’s highly probable. As more network effects take root, both in the physical and digital realms, this likelihood increases.

As Robert Breedlove, author of “The Number Zero And Bitcoin” states, “When zero arrived in Europe approximately 300 years later during the High Middle Ages, it encountered significant ideological resistance. Users of the well-established Roman numeral system opposed zero, hindering its adoption in Europe.”

Today, the concept of mathematics without zero is inconceivable. I anticipate Bitcoin will follow a similar trajectory, rendering the idea of not using Bitcoin and its derivatives absurd. Nostr serves as a prime example. The protocol wouldn’t have flourished without the value Bitcoin and Bitcoin users added to the network.

I envision this effect pervading further innovations globally, irrespective of whether regulators understand Bitcoin.