Bitcoin Wiki - User contributions [en]

User:Fturco

2024-02-17T19:44:59Z

Fturco: Created page with "I'd like to delete my account on this wiki. Thank you. ~~~~"

I'd like to delete my account on this wiki. Thank you. [[User:Fturco|Fturco]] ([[User talk:Fturco|talk]]) 19:44, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page

2018-09-02T08:44:33Z

Fturco: /* Database dumps */ new section

{{Archive}}__TOC__


== Database dumps ==

The link to database dumps doesn't work anymore: http://dump.bitcoin.it/. It now redirects to the main page. [[User:Fturco|Fturco]] ([[User talk:Fturco|talk]]) 08:44, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Myths

2018-08-24T17:55:38Z

Fturco: use HTTPS for links to garzikrants.blogspot.com

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[https://www.fincen.gov/resources/statutes-regulations/administrative-rulings/application-fincens-regulations-virtual-0 Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[https://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Storing bitcoins|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:53:52Z

Fturco: fix broken external link

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[https://www.fincen.gov/resources/statutes-regulations/administrative-rulings/application-fincens-regulations-virtual-0 Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Storing bitcoins|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:47:51Z

Fturco: use HTTPS for links to arstechnica.com

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Storing bitcoins|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:47:04Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Storing bitcoins|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:44:52Z

Fturco: fix capitalization

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:40:55Z

Fturco: update external link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_rigidity sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:35:37Z

Fturco: fix external link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition perfect market]. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:32:47Z

Fturco: fix external link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:30:32Z

Fturco: fix typo

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truly in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:27:28Z

Fturco: use HTTPS for links to bitcoin.stackexchange.com

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:25:38Z

Fturco: update internal link

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_illegal_because_it.27s_not_legal_tender|Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:23:28Z

Fturco: improve internal link

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

This is true: see [[Weaknesses#Attacker has a lot of computing power]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:21:24Z

Fturco: fix grammar

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folks, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:15:51Z

Fturco: fix capitalization of "Ponzi scheme"

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant Ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a Ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:12:23Z

Fturco: fix spelling of "SHA-256" (same as on Wikipedia)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA-256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA-256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:10:38Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm|ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:09:28Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect + fix capitalization)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[block]]s are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:08:10Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[block chain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[Blocks]] are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T17:05:24Z

Fturco: update external link

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.earn.com/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[blockchain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[Blocks]] are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T16:57:48Z

Fturco: use HTTPS for links to en.wikipedia.org

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[blockchain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[Blocks]] are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T16:53:19Z

Fturco: use HTTPS for links to nakamotoinstitute.org

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [https://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[blockchain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[Blocks]] are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T16:47:16Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect)

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[blockchain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[Blocks]] are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Myths

2018-08-24T16:46:14Z

Fturco: update external link

Let's clear up some common Bitcoin misconceptions.

== Bitcoin is just like all other digital currencies; nothing new ==

Nearly all other digital currencies are centrally controlled. This means that:
* They can be printed at the subjective whims of the controllers
* They can be destroyed by attacking the central point of control
* Arbitrary rules can be imposed upon their users by the controllers

Being decentralized, Bitcoin solves all of these problems.

== Bitcoins don't solve any problems that fiat currency and/or gold doesn't solve ==

Unlike gold, bitcoins are:
* Easy to transfer
* Easy to secure
* Easy to verify
* Easy to granulate

Unlike fiat currencies, bitcoins are:
* Predictable and limited in [[Controlled_Currency_Supply|supply]]
* Not controlled by a central authority (such as [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The United States Federal Reserve])
* Not debt-based

Unlike electronic fiat currency systems, bitcoins are:
* Potentially anonymous
* Freeze-proof
* Faster to transfer
* Cheaper to transfer

== Miners, developers or some other entity could change Bitcoin's properties to benefit themselves ==

Bitcoin's properties cannot be illegitimately changed as long as most of bitcoin's [[economic majority|economy]] uses [[full node]] wallets. Transactions are irreversible and uncensorable as long as [[Majority_attack|no single coalition of miners has more than 50% hash power]] and the transactions have an [[Confirmation#How_Many_Confirmations_Is_Enough|appropriate number of confirmations]].

Bitcoin requires certain properties to be enforced for it to be a good form of money, for example:

# Nobody ever created money out of nothing (except for [[Mining|miners]], and only according to a [[Controlled supply|well-defined schedule]]).
# Nobody ever spent coins without knowing their [[private key]].
# Nobody spent the same coin twice
# Nobody violated any of the other tricky rules that are needed to make the system work ([[difficulty]], [[proof of work]], DoS protection, ...).

These rules ''define'' bitcoin. A [[full node]] is software that verifies the rules of bitcoin. Any transaction which breaks these rules is not a valid bitcoin transaction and would be rejected in the same way that a careful goldsmith rejects fool's gold.

Full node wallets should be used by any intermediate bitcoin user or above and especially [[Why_Your_Business_Should_Use_a_Full_Node_to_Accept_Bitcoin|bitcoin businesses]]. Therefore anybody attempting to create bitcoins with invalid properties will find themselves being rejected by any trading partners. Note that lightweight wallets and web wallets do not have the low-trust benefits of full node wallets. Lightweight (SPV) wallets will blindly trust the miners, meaning if 51% of miners printed infinite coins or spent the same coin twice then lightweight wallet users would happily accept these fake bitcoins as payment. Web wallets blindly trust the web server which could display anything at all.

[[Mining|Miners]] are required to choose between multiple ''valid'' transaction histories. A coalition of more than 50% of miner power is able to (at great expense to themselves) [[Majority_attack|rewrite transaction history]], so miner decentralization is necessary to keep transactions irreversible. Miners burn a lot of electrical power in the mining process so they must constantly be trading their bitcoin income in order to pay bills. This makes miners utterly dependent on the bitcoin economy at large and therefore gives them a strong incentive to mine ''valid'' bitcoin blocks that full nodes will accept as payment.

Influential figures in the community (such as developers, politicians or investors) may try to use their influence to convince people to download and run modified full node software which changes bitcoin's properties in illegitimate ways. This is unlikely to succeed as long as counterarguments can freely spread through the media, internet forums and chatrooms. Many bitcoin users do not follow the bitcoin forums on a regular basis or even speak English. All appeals to run alternative software should be looked at critically for whether the individual agrees with the changes being proposed. Full node software should always be open source so any programmer can examine the changes for themselves. Because of the co-ordination problem, there is usually a strong incentive to stick with the status quo.

See also: [[Full_node#Economic_strength]]
See also this blog post: [http://nakamotoinstitute.org/mempool/who-controls-bitcoin/ Who Controls Bitcoin?]

== Bitcoin is backed by processing power ==

It is not correct to say that Bitcoin is "backed by" processing power. A currency being "backed" means that it is pegged to something else via a central party at a certain exchange rate yet you cannot exchange bitcoins for the computing power that was used to create them. Bitcoin is in this sense not backed by anything. It is a currency in its own right. Just as gold is not backed by anything, the same applies to Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin currency is ''created'' via processing power, and the integrity of the block chain is ''protected'' by the existence of a network of powerful computing nodes from certain [[Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power|attacks]].

== Bitcoins are worthless because they aren't backed by anything ==

One could argue that gold isn't backed by anything either. Bitcoins have properties resulting from the system's design that allows them to be subjectively valued by individuals. This valuation is demonstrated when individuals freely exchange for or with bitcoins. Please refer to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjective_theory_of_value Subjective Theory of Value].

See also: the "[[#Bitcoin_is_backed_by_processing_power|Bitcoin is backed by processing power]]" myth.

== The value of bitcoins are based on how much electricity and computing power it takes to mine them ==

This statement is an attempt to apply to Bitcoin the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value labor theory of value], which is generally accepted as false. Just because something takes X resources to create does not mean that the resulting product will be worth X. It can be worth more, or less, depending on the utility thereof to its users.

In fact the causality is the reverse of that (this applies to the labor theory of value in general). The cost to mine bitcoins is based on how much they are worth. If bitcoins go up in value, more people will mine (because [[Mining|mining]] is profitable), thus [[difficulty]] will go up, thus the cost of mining will go up. The inverse happens if bitcoins go down in value. These effects balance out to cause mining to always cost an amount proportional to the value of bitcoins it produces<ref>[https://www.bitcoinmining.com Bitcoin Mining]</ref>.

== Bitcoin has no intrinsic value (unlike some other things) ==

This is simply not true. Each bitcoin gives the holder the ability to embed a large number of short in-transaction messages in a globally distributed and timestamped permanent data store, namely the bitcoin blockchain. There is no other similar datastore which is so widely distributed. There is a tradeoff between the exact number of messages and how quickly they can be embedded. But as of December 2013, it's fair to say that one bitcoin allows around 1000 such messages to be embedded, each within about 10 minutes of being sent, since a fee of 0.001 BTC is enough to get transactions confirmed quickly. This message embedding certainly has intrinsic value since it can be used to prove ownership of a document at a certain time, by including a one-way hash of that document in a transaction. Considering that electronic notarization services charge something like $10/document, this would give an intrinsic value of around $10,000 per bitcoin.

While some other tangible commodities do have intrinsic value, that value is generally much less than its trading price. Consider for example that gold, if it were not used as an inflation-proof store of value, but rather only for its industrial uses, would certainly not be worth what it is today, since the industrial requirements for gold are far smaller than the available supply thereof.

In any event, while historically intrinsic value, as well as other attributes like divisibility, fungibility, scarcity, durability, helped establish certain commodities as mediums of exchange, it is certainly not a prerequisite. While bitcoins are accused of lacking 'intrinsic value' in this sense, they make up for it in spades by possessing the other qualities necessary to make it a good medium of exchange, equal to or better than [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_money commodity money].

Another way to think about this is to consider the value of bitcoin the global network, rather than each bitcoin in isolation. The value of an individual telephone is derived from the network it is connected to. If there was no phone network, a telephone would be useless. Similarly the value of an individual bitcoin derives from the global network of bitcoin-enabled merchants, exchanges, wallets, etc... Just like a phone is necessary to transmit vocal information through the network, a bitcoin is necessary to transmit economic information through the network.

Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.

== Bitcoin is illegal because it's not legal tender ==
In March 2013, the U.S. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crimes_Enforcement_Network Financial Crimes Enforcement Network] issues a new set of guidelines on "de-centralized virtual currency", clearly targeting Bitcoin. Under the new guidelines, "a user of virtual currency is not a Money Services Businesses (MSB) under FinCEN's regulations and therefore is not subject to MSB registration, reporting, and record keeping regulations." <ref>[http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/03/us-regulator-bitcoin-exchanges-must-comply-with-money-laundering-laws/ US regulator: Bitcoin exchanges must comply with money-laundering laws | Ars Technica]</ref> [[Mining|Miners]], when mining bitcoins for their own personal use, aren't required to register as a MSB or Money Transmitter. <ref>[http://fincen.gov/news_room/rp/rulings/html/FIN-2014-R001.html Application of FinCEN’s Regulations to Virtual Currency Mining Operations | Fincen]</ref>

In general, there are a [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency number of currencies] in existence that are not official government-backed currencies. A currency is, after all, nothing more than a convenient unit of account. While national laws may vary from country to country, and you should certainly check the laws of your jurisdiction, in general trading in any commodity, including digital currency like Bitcoin, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BerkShares BerkShares], game currencies like WoW gold, or Linden dollars, is not illegal.

== Bitcoin is a form of domestic terrorism because it only harms the economic stability of the USA and its currency ==

According to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_terrorism#United_States the definition of terrorism in the United States], you need to do violent activities to be considered a terrorist for legal purposes. Recent off-the-cuff remarks by politicians have no basis in law or fact.

Also, Bitcoin isn't domestic to the US or any other country. It's a worldwide community, as can be seen in this [https://bitnodes.21.co/nodes/live-map/ map of Bitcoin nodes].

== Bitcoin will only enable tax evaders which will lead to the eventual downfall of civilization ==

Cash transactions offer an increased level of [[anonymity]], yet are still taxed successfully. It is up to you to follow the applicable tax laws in your home country, or face the consequences.

While it may be easy to transfer bitcoins pseudonymously, ''spending'' them on tangibles is just as hard as spending any other kind of money anonymously. Tax evaders are often caught because their lifestyle and assets are inconsistent with their reported income, and not necessarily because government is able to follow their money.

Finally, the Bitcoin [[blockchain]] is a permanent record of all transactions, meaning it can be mined for info at any time in the future making investigation, tracing of funds, etc much easier than with other forms of payment.

== Bitcoins can be printed/minted by anyone and are therefore worthless ==

Bitcoins are not printed/minted. Instead, [[Blocks]] are computed by miners and for their efforts they are awarded a specific amount of bitcoins and transaction fees paid by others. See [[Mining]] for more information on how this process works.

== Bitcoins are worthless because they're based on unproven cryptography ==

SHA256 and [[ECDSA]] which are used in Bitcoin are well-known industry standard algorithms. SHA256 is endorsed and used by the US Government and is standardized (FIPS180-3 Secure Hash Standard). If you believe that these algorithms are untrustworthy then you should not trust Bitcoin, credit card transactions or any type of electronic bank transfer. Bitcoin has a sound basis in well understood cryptography.

== Early adopters are unfairly rewarded ==

Early adopters are rewarded for taking the higher risk with their time and money. The capital invested in bitcoin at each stage of its life invigorated the community and helped the currency to reach subsequent milestones. Arguing that early adopters do not deserve to profit from this is akin to saying that early investors in a company, or people who buy stock at a company IPO (Initial Public Offering), are unfairly rewarded.

This argument also depends on bitcoin early adopters using bitcoins to store rather than transfer value. The daily trade on the exchanges (as of Jan 2012) indicates that smaller transactions are becoming the norm, indicating trade rather than investment. In more pragmatic terms, "fairness" is an arbitrary concept that is improbable to be agreed upon by a large population. Establishing "fairness" is no goal of Bitcoin, as this would be impossible.

Looking forwards, considering the amount of publicity bitcoin received as of April 2013, there can be no reasonable grounds for complaint for people who did not invest at that time, and then see the value (possibly) rising drastically higher.

By starting to mine or acquire bitcoins today, you too can become an early adopter.

== 21 million coins isn't enough; doesn't scale ==

One Bitcoin is divisible down to eight decimal places. There are really 2,099,999,997,690,000 (just over 2 quadrillion) maximum possible atomic units in the bitcoin system.

The value of "1 BTC" represents 100,000,000 of these. In other words, each bitcoin is divisible by up to 108.

As the value of the unit of 1 BTC grew too large to be useful for day to day transactions, people started dealing in smaller [[Units|units]], such as milli-bitcoins (mBTC) or micro-bitcoins (μBTC).

== Bitcoins are stored in wallet files, just copy the wallet file to get more coins! ==

No, your wallet contains your secret keys, giving you the rights to spend your bitcoins. Think of it like having bank details stored in a file. If you give your bank details (or bitcoin wallet) to someone else, that doesn't double the amount of money in your account. You can spend your money or they can spend your money, but not both.

== Lost coins can't be replaced and this is bad ==

Bitcoins are divisible to 0.00000001, so there being fewer bitcoins remaining is not a problem for the currency itself. If you lose your coins, indirectly all other coins are worth more due to the reduced supply. Consider it a donation to all other bitcoin users.

A related question is: Why don't we have a mechanism to replace lost coins? The answer is that it is impossible to distinguish between a 'lost' coin and one that is simply sitting unused in someone's wallet. And for amounts that are provably destroyed or lost, there is no census that this is a bad thing and something that should be re-circulated.

== It's a giant ponzi scheme ==
In a [[Wikipedia:Ponzi_scheme|Ponzi Scheme]], the founders persuade investors that they’ll profit. Bitcoin does not make such a guarantee. There is no central entity, just individuals building an economy.

A Ponzi scheme is a zero sum game. In a ponzi scheme, early adopters can only profit at the expense of late adopters, and the late adopters always lose. Bitcoin can have a win-win outcome. Earlier adopters profit from the rise in value as Bitcoin becomes better understood and in turn demanded by the public at large. All adopters benefit from the usefulness of a reliable and widely-accepted decentralized peer-to-peer currency.<ref name=Jeff_Tucker>cf. {{cite news | author-link = Wikipedia:Jeffrey_Tucker | url = http://libertarianstandard.com/2013/12/01/ponzi-logic-debunking-gary-north/ | title = Ponzi Logic: Debunking Gary North | last = Tucker | first = Jeffrey | date = 1 December 2013 | work = The Libertarian Standard | accessdate = 2015-04-11}}</ref>

It is also important to note that [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], creator of bitcoin, has never spent a bitcoin (other than giving them away when they were worthless) which we can verify by checking the blockchain.

== Finite coins plus lost coins means deflationary spiral ==
As deflationary forces may apply, economic factors such as hoarding are offset by human factors that may lessen the chances that a [[Deflationary spiral]] will occur.

== Bitcoin can't work because there is no way to control inflation ==

Inflation is simply a rise of prices over time, which is generally the result of the devaluing of a currency. This is a function of supply and demand. Given the fact that the supply of bitcoins is fixed at a certain amount, unlike fiat money, the only way for inflation to get out of control is for demand to disappear. Temporary inflation is possible with a rapid adoption of Fractional Reserve Banking but will stabilize once a substantial number of the 21 million "hard" bitcoins are stored as reserves by banks.

Given the fact that Bitcoin is a distributed system of currency, if demand were to decrease to almost nothing, the currency would be doomed anyway.

The key point here is that Bitcoin as a currency can't be inflated by any single person or entity, like a government, as there's no way to increase supply past a certain amount.

Indeed, the most likely scenario, as Bitcoin becomes more popular and demand increases, is for the currency to increase in value, or deflate, until demand stabilizes.

== The Bitcoin community consists of anarchist/conspiracy theorist/gold standard 'weenies' ==

The members of the community vary in their ideological stances. While it may have been started by ideological enthusiasts, Bitcoin now speaks to a large number of regular pragmatic folk, who simply see its potential for reducing the costs and friction of global e-commerce.

== Anyone with enough computing power can take over the network ==

CONFIRMED, see [[Weaknesses]].

That said, as the network grows, it becomes harder and harder for a single entity to do so. Already the Bitcoin network's computing power is quite ahead of the world's fastest supercomputers, together.

What an attacker can do once the network is taken over is quite limited. Under no circumstances could an attacker create counterfeit coins, fake transactions, or take anybody else's money. An attacker's capabilities are limited to taking back their own money that they very recently spent, and preventing other people's transactions from receiving confirmations. Such an attack would be very costly in resources, and for such meager benefits there is little rational economic incentive to do such a thing.

Furthermore, this attack scenario would only be feasible for as long as it was actively underway. As soon as the attack stopped, the network would resume normal operation.

== Bitcoin violates governmental regulations ==

There is no known governmental regulation which disallows the use of Bitcoin.

See also: the "[[#Bitcoins_are_illegal_because_they.27re_not_legal_tender|Bitcoins are illegal because they're not legal tender]]" myth.

== Fractional reserve banking is not possible ==

It is possible. See the main article, [[Fractional Reserve Banking and Bitcoin]]

== After 21 million coins are mined, no one will generate new blocks ==

When operating costs can't be covered by the block creation bounty, which will happen some time before the total amount of BTC is reached, miners will earn some profit from [[transaction fees]]. However unlike the block reward, there is [http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/876/how-much-will-transaction-fees-eventually-be/895#895 no coupling between transaction fees and the need for security], so there is less of a guarantee that the amount of [[Mining|mining]] being performed will be sufficient to maintain the network's security.

== Bitcoin has no built-in chargeback mechanism and this is bad ==

Bitcoin base-layer transactions are [[Irreversible Transactions|final and irreversible by design]], but consumer protection can still built into bitcoin in other layers on top. The most practical way of doing this is [[Multisignature|multisig]] escrow. For example when trading over-the-counter, [[Secure_Trading#Use_an_Escrow_Service|using an escrow]] is essential protection.

It's worth noting that virtually all successful consumer-facing bitcoin businesses do indeed already implement some kind of consumer protection; Routine escrow was used by Localbitcoins, Silk Road and the bitcoin ebay-site Bitmit. Others such as online bitcoin casinos rely on their long-standing reputation, while others such as Coinbase.com rely on the legal and regulatory system.

The bitcoin method of routinely using escrow has benefits over competitors like credit cards. The security of credit cards is not very good which results in higher costs overall and the possibility of payments being reversed for months afterwards. By contrast when bitcoins have been released to the seller from escrow, they cannot be reversed as the coins are truely in the seller's possession. The requirement to use real-life names for credit cards and PayPal also excludes unbanked people and those from countries with less developed financial infrastructure. There are also downsides like bitcoin is not yet as widely accepted as credit cards and is not a front for providing lines of credit.

== Quantum computers would break Bitcoin's security ==

While ECDSA is indeed not secure under quantum computing, quantum computers don't yet exist and probably won't for a while.
The DWAVE system often written about in the press is, even if all their claims are true, not a quantum computer of a kind that could be used for cryptography.
Bitcoin's security, when used properly with a new address on each transaction, depends on more than just ECDSA: Cryptographic hashes are much stronger than ECDSA under QC.

Bitcoin's security was designed to be upgraded in a forward compatible way and could be [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography upgraded] if this were considered an imminent threat (cf. Aggarwal et al. 2017, "[https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.10377 Quantum attacks on Bitcoin, and how to protect against them]").

See the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Potential implications of quantum computers on public key cryptography].

The ''risk'' of quantum computers is also there for financial institutions, like banks, because they heavily rely on cryptography when doing transactions.

== Bitcoin makes self-sufficient artificial intelligence possible ==
[[StorJ]]<ref>[http://garzikrants.blogspot.com/2013/01/storj-and-bitcoin-autonomous-agents.html StorJ And Bitcoin Autonomous Agents]</ref>, a theorized autonomous agent which utilizes humans to build itself and issues autonomous payments for improvement work done, is not a conscious entity. Whatever AI is possible, is not going to be magically more possible simply because it could incentivize human behaviour with pseudonymous Bitcoin payments.

== [[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a waste of energy and harmful for ecology ==
No more so than the wastefulness of mining gold out of the ground, melting it down and shaping it into bars, and then putting it back underground again. Not to mention the building of big fancy buildings, the waste of energy printing and minting all the various fiat currencies, the transportation thereof in armored cars by no less than two security guards for each who could probably be doing something more productive, etc.

As far as mediums of exchange go, Bitcoin is actually quite economical of resources, compared to others.

'''Economic Argument 1'''

[[Mining|Bitcoin mining]] is a highly competitive, dynamic, almost [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_market perfect], market. Mining rigs can be set up and dismantled almost anywhere in the world with relative ease. Thus, market forces are constantly pushing mining activity to ''places'' and ''times'' where the marginal price of electricity is low or zero. These electricity products are cheap for a reason. Often, it’s because the electricity is difficult (and wasteful) to transport, difficult to store, or because there is low demand and high supply. Using electricity in this way is a lot less wasteful than simply plugging a mining rig into the mains indiscriminately.

For example, Iceland produces an excess of cheap electricity from renewable sources, but it has no way of exporting electricity because of its remote location. It is conceivable that at some point in future Bitcoin mining will only be profitable in places like Iceland, and unprofitable in places like central Europe, where electricity comes mostly from nuclear and fossil sources.

Market forces could even push mining into innovative solutions that have an effective electricity consumption of ''zero''. Mining always produces heat equivalent to the energy consumed - for example, 1000 watts of mining equipment produces the same amount of heat as a 1000 watt heating element used in an electric space heater, hot tub, water heater, or similar appliance. Someone already in a willing position to incur the cost of electricity for its heat value alone could run mining equipment specially designed to mine bitcoins while capturing and utilizing the heat produced, without incurring any energy costs beyond what they already intended to spend on heating.

(Note that this is just an example; mining will not always produce heat equivalent to the energy consumed because some energy is inevitably released as electromagnetic radiation, among others.)

'''Economic Argument 2'''

When the environmental costs of mining are considered, they need to be weighed up against the benefits. If you question Bitcoin on the grounds that it consumes electricity, then you should also ask questions like this: Will Bitcoin promote economic growth by freeing up trade? Will this speed up the rate of technological innovation? Will this lead to faster development of green technologies? Will Bitcoin enable new, border crossing [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_grid smart grid] technologies? …

Dismissal of Bitcoin because of its costs, while ignoring its benefits, is a dishonest argument. In fact, any environmental argument of this type is dishonest, not just pertaining to Bitcoin. Along similar lines, it could be argued that wind turbines are bad for the environment because making the steel structure consumes energy.

'''Economic Argument 3'''

Bitcoin is designed as a deflationary currency. This means that the purchasing power of a bitcoin will generally increase over time, as opposed to fiat currencies that are designed to lose value over time. This in turn will make people more willing to hold on to their bitcoins, rather than use them for consumption. This reduction in consumption will probably contribute to a net reduction in pollution. However, this is a speculative argument that hasn't been proven right or wrong.

'''Ratio of Capital Costs versus Electrical Costs'''

The BFL Jalapeno hashes at 5.5 Gh/s using 30W. That device consumes about $40 per year in electricity (using U.S. residential average of about $0.15 per kWh.) But the device costs over $300 including shipping. Thus, just about a quarter of all costs over a two-year useful life goes to electricity. This compares to GPUs where more than 90% of costs over a two-year life went to electricity. Even more efficient designs can be expected in the future.

== Shopkeepers can't seriously set prices in bitcoins because of the volatile exchange rate ==

The assumption is that bitcoins must be sold immediately to cover operating expenses. If the shopkeeper's back-end expenses were transacted in bitcoins as well, then the exchange rate would be irrelevant. Larger adoption of Bitcoin would make prices [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sticky_%28economics%29 sticky]. Future volatility is expected to decrease, as the size and depth of the market grows.

In the meantime, many merchants simply regularly pull the latest market rates from the exchanges and automatically update the prices on their websites. Also you might be able to buy a put option in order to sell at a fixed rate for a given amount of time. This would protect you from drops in price and simplify your operations for that time period.

== Like Flooz and e-gold, bitcoins serve as opportunities for criminals and will be shut down ==

* Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, and cash all serve as opportunities for criminals as well, but society keeps them around due to their recognized net benefit.
* Hopefully Bitcoin will grow to the point where no single organization can disrupt the network, or would be better served by helping it.
* Terrorists fly aircraft into buildings, but the governments have not yet abolished consumer air travel. Obviously the public good outweighs the possible bad in their opinion.
* Criminal law differs between jurisdictions.

== Bitcoins will be shut down by the government just like Liberty Dollars were ==

Liberty Dollars started as a commercial venture to establish an alternative US currency, including physical banknotes and coins, backed by precious metals. This, in and of itself, is not illegal. They were prosecuted under counterfeiting laws because the silver coins allegedly resembled US currency.

Bitcoins do not resemble the currency of the US or of any other nation in any way, shape, or form. The word "dollar" is not attached to them in any way. The "$" symbol is not used in any way.

Bitcoins have no representational similarity whatsoever to US dollars.

Of course, actually 'shutting down' Liberty Dollars was as easy as arresting the head of the company and seizing the offices and the precious metals used as backing. The decentralized Bitcoin, with no leader, no servers, no office, and no tangible asset backing, does not have the same vulnerability.

== Bitcoin is not decentralized because the developers can dictate the software's behavior ==

The Bitcoin protocol was originally defined by Bitcoin's inventor, [[Satoshi Nakamoto]], and this protocol has now been widely accepted as the standard by the community of miners and users.

Though the developers of the original Bitcoin client still exert influence over the Bitcoin community, their power to arbitrarily modify the protocol is very limited. Since the release of Bitcoin v0.3, changes to the protocol have been minor and always in agreement with community consensus.

Protocol modifications, such as increasing the block award from 25 to 50 BTC, are not compatible with clients already running in the network. If the developers were to release a new client that the majority of miners perceives as corrupt, or in violation of the project’s aims, that client would simply not catch on, and the few users who do try to use it would find that their transactions get rejected by the network.

There are also other [[:Category:Clients|Bitcoin clients made by other developers]] that adhere to the Bitcoin protocol. As more developers create alternative clients, less power will lie with the developers of the original Bitcoin client.

== Bitcoin is a pyramid scheme ==

Bitcoin is nearly opposite of a [[Wikipedia:Pyramid_scheme|pyramid scheme]] in a mathematical sense. Because Bitcoins are algorithmically made scarce, no exponential benefit is derived from introducing new users to use of it. There is a quantitative benefit in having additional interest or demand, but this is in no way exponential.<ref name="Jeff_Tucker" />

== Bitcoin was hacked ==

In the history of Bitcoin, there has never been an attack on the [[block chain]] that resulted in stolen money from a confirmed output. Neither has there ever been a reported theft resulting directly from a vulnerability in the [[Original Bitcoin client|original Bitcoin client]], or a vulnerability in the protocol. Bitcoin is secured by standard cryptographic functions. These functions have been peer reviewed by cryptography experts and are considered unlikely to be breakable in the foreseeable future.

It is safe to say that the currency itself has never been 'hacked'. However, several major ''websites'' using the currency have been hacked, often resulting in high profile Bitcoin heists. These heists are misreported in some media as hacks on Bitcoin itself. An analogy: Just because someone stole US dollars from a supermarket till, doesn’t mean that the US dollar as a currency has been 'hacked'.

Most bitcoin thefts are the result of inadequate [[Securing your wallet|wallet security]]. In response to the wave of thefts in 2011 and 2012, the community has developed risk-mitigating measures such as [[Wallet_encryption|wallet encryption]], support for [[BIP_0011|multiple signatures]], [[How_to_set_up_a_secure_offline_savings_wallet|offline wallets]], [[Paper_wallet|paper wallets]], and [[Hardware_wallet|hardware wallets]]. As these measures gain adoption by merchants and users, the number of thefts drop.

==References==
<references/>

[[de:Mythen]]
[[ru:Мифы о биткоине]]

Help talk:Getting started

2018-01-27T13:42:30Z

Fturco: fix title of discussion

==Upgrading links http → https==

I want to upgrade http → https for links to sites I know support it: Bitcointalk.org, Stack Exchange, etc. However, this page is protected (for obvious reasons). Would somebody with the appropriate privileges please either make this minor edit, or let me do so? Thanks.

[[User:Nullius|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius|talk]]) 16:33, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

== Fix redirects ==

The following internal links should be fixed in order to avoid redirects:
* [[Introduction]] --> [[Help:Introduction]]
* [[Getting started installing bitcoin-qt]] --> [[Help:Installing Bitcoin Core]]
* [[Buying Bitcoins (the noob version)]] --> [[Buying Bitcoins (the newbie version)]]
* [[FAQ]] --> [[Help:FAQ]]

[[User:Fturco|Fturco]] ([[User talk:Fturco|talk]]) 13:41, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Help talk:Getting started

2018-01-27T13:41:25Z

Fturco: /* Fix redirects */ new section

=Upgrading links http → https=

I want to upgrade http → https for links to sites I know support it: Bitcointalk.org, Stack Exchange, etc. However, this page is protected (for obvious reasons). Would somebody with the appropriate privileges please either make this minor edit, or let me do so? Thanks.

[[User:Nullius|Nullius]] ([[User talk:Nullius|talk]]) 16:33, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

== Fix redirects ==

The following internal links should be fixed in order to avoid redirects:
* [[Introduction]] --> [[Help:Introduction]]
* [[Getting started installing bitcoin-qt]] --> [[Help:Installing Bitcoin Core]]
* [[Buying Bitcoins (the noob version)]] --> [[Buying Bitcoins (the newbie version)]]
* [[FAQ]] --> [[Help:FAQ]]

[[User:Fturco|Fturco]] ([[User talk:Fturco|talk]]) 13:41, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Gentoo

2018-01-27T13:34:03Z

Fturco: add link to bitcoin article on gentoo wiki

== Bitcoin under Gentoo Linux ==

Check out the [https://gitlab.com/bitcoin/gentoo overlay] for ebuilds. Setup instructions can be found [https://gitlab.com/bitcoin/gentoo/blob/master/README here] or simply type "layman -a bitcoin" to add the overlay.

== Available software ==

=== app-crypt ===
* opentxs

=== app-misc ===
* [[Moneychanger|moneychanger]]

=== dev-libs ===
* libbacktrace
* libbase58
* libsecp256k1
* msgpack
* univalue

=== dev-python ===
* amodem
* anynumber
* bitcoinrpc
* pbkdf2
* [[Pycoin|pycoin]]

=== dev-util ===
* bitcoin-tx

=== net-libs ===
* [[Libbitcoin Consensus|libbitcoinconsensus]]
* libblkmaker
* libwally-core
* opendht
* opentxs-proto

=== net-mail ===
* bmwrapper

=== net-misc ===
* [[BFGMiner|bfgminer]]

=== net-p2p ===
* Sia
* [[Armory|armory]]
* bitcoin-cli
* [[Bitcoin Core|bitcoin-qt]]
* [[bitcoind]]
* c-lightning
* [[Libbitcoin|libbitcoin]]
* namecoin
* opentxs-sequencer
* pushpool
* [[Bitmessage|pybitmessage]]
* pybitmessage-daemon
* rippled
* twisterd

=== virtual ===
* bitcoin-leveldb
* python-serviceproxy

=== x11-libs ===
* amd-adl-sdk

== Ebuild development ==
Come to Freenode #bitcoin-gentoo and indicate your GitLab account name if you would like commit access.

== See also ==
* [https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Bitcoin Bitcoin] - article on Gentoo Wiki

Gentoo

2018-01-27T13:32:06Z

Fturco: replace Gitorious with GitLab

Gentoo

2018-01-27T13:30:13Z

Fturco: update list of available software

== Bitcoin under Gentoo Linux ==

Check out the [https://gitlab.com/bitcoin/gentoo overlay] for ebuilds. Setup instructions can be found [https://gitlab.com/bitcoin/gentoo/blob/master/README here] or simply type "layman -a bitcoin" to add the overlay.

== Available software ==

=== app-crypt ===
* opentxs

=== app-misc ===
* [[Moneychanger|moneychanger]]

=== dev-libs ===
* libbacktrace
* libbase58
* libsecp256k1
* msgpack
* univalue

=== dev-python ===
* amodem
* anynumber
* bitcoinrpc
* pbkdf2
* [[Pycoin|pycoin]]

=== dev-util ===
* bitcoin-tx

=== net-libs ===
* [[Libbitcoin Consensus|libbitcoinconsensus]]
* libblkmaker
* libwally-core
* opendht
* opentxs-proto

=== net-mail ===
* bmwrapper

=== net-misc ===
* [[BFGMiner|bfgminer]]

=== net-p2p ===
* Sia
* [[Armory|armory]]
* bitcoin-cli
* [[Bitcoin Core|bitcoin-qt]]
* [[bitcoind]]
* c-lightning
* [[Libbitcoin|libbitcoin]]
* namecoin
* opentxs-sequencer
* pushpool
* [[Bitmessage|pybitmessage]]
* pybitmessage-daemon
* rippled
* twisterd

=== virtual ===
* bitcoin-leveldb
* python-serviceproxy

=== x11-libs ===
* amd-adl-sdk

== ebuild Development ==
Come to Freenode #bitcoin-gentoo and indicate your gitorious account name if you would like commit access.

Gentoo

2018-01-27T13:10:32Z

Fturco: fix capitalization

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T13:08:17Z

Fturco: use HTTPS instead of HTTP

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>https://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Trading bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [https://www.bitstamp.net/ Bitstamp] web site
* [https://twitter.com/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T13:07:07Z

Fturco: use HTTPS instead of HTTP

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>https://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Trading bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [https://www.bitstamp.net/ Bitstamp] web site
* [https://twitter.com/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T13:06:20Z

Fturco: update internal links (avoid redirects)

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Trading bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [https://www.bitstamp.net/ Bitstamp] web site
* [https://twitter.com/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T13:05:12Z

Fturco: update external links

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [https://www.bitstamp.net/ Bitstamp] web site
* [https://twitter.com/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T13:03:41Z

Fturco: remove broken link

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T13:02:46Z

Fturco: remove broken link

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==Data Services==

===Web===
* [https://www.tradeacacia.com/ Acacia Trading Bot]

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T12:59:35Z

Fturco: fix grammar + replace HTTP with HTTPS

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing its website with an online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: https://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==Data Services==

===Linux===
* [https://github.com/3M3RY/Dojima Dojima] market client

===Web===
* [https://www.tradeacacia.com/ Acacia Trading Bot]

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T12:56:26Z

Fturco: fix punctuation

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing website with online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: http://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==Data Services==

===Linux===
* [https://github.com/3M3RY/Dojima Dojima] market client

===Web===
* [https://www.tradeacacia.com/ Acacia Trading Bot]

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T12:55:53Z

Fturco: fix punctuation + remove br tag

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee(minimum fee = $15)

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing website with online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: http://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==Data Services==

===Linux===
* [https://github.com/3M3RY/Dojima Dojima] market client

===Web===
* [https://www.tradeacacia.com/ Acacia Trading Bot]

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T12:55:02Z

Fturco: fix punctuation

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee (minimum fee: $15).

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee(minimum fee = $15) 

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee(minimum fee = $15)

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing website with online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: http://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==Data Services==

===Linux===
* [https://github.com/3M3RY/Dojima Dojima] market client

===Web===
* [https://www.tradeacacia.com/ Acacia Trading Bot]

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bitstamp

2018-01-27T12:53:47Z

Fturco: fix sentences

A "Big Four" bitcoin exchange<ref>http://www.coindesk.com/price/ Coindesk BPI</ref> in the world, which operates a BTC/USD market with support for various currencies for deposit and withdrawal.

==Trading==
*Buying/selling

A buy/sell order is executed partially or in full when the price bid can be matched against a sell/buy order that is at or below the bid amount.

==Adding funds==

===BTC===
There are no fees incurred when transferring bitcoins for deposit. Funds are available once confirmed (3 confirms), a process that can take roughly 30 minutes.

===EUR===
Exchange accepts EUR deposits via SEPA transfers, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. '''No deposit fees!''' 

===GBP===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in GBP, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee(minimum fee = $15)

===USD===
Exchange accepts international wire transfers in USD, charging 0.1% deposit fee(minimum fee = $15) 

===CHF===
Exchange accepts wire transfers in CHF, then converts them to USD and credits them to online account. 
Charging 0.1% deposit fee(minimum fee = $15)

==Withdrawing funds==

===EUR===
SEPA withdrawals are charged with fixed 0.90€ fee once your funds are converted to EUR. Minimum amount for SEPA withdrawal is $10,00.

===GBP===
GBP wire deposits and withdrawals in GBP are supported. 

===USD===
International wire withdrawals in USD will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

===CHF===
International wire withdrawals in CHF will be charged with 0.09% fee, minimum fee is $15,00. Minimum amount for international withdrawal is $50,00. 

==Fees==
Bitstamp charges a trading fee from each party of successful trades made through the market. The amount of the fee will vary based on a 30 day trading history. The rate for new accounts and those with the lowest volume is 0.5%. Refer to the [https://www.bitstamp.net/fee_schedule fee schedule] to determine discount levels. The fee that was charged appears in the account history next to each trade.

==Localization==
Bitstamp is localizing website with online collaborative online translating tool. Feel free to join and help with translation to your native language.

Link: http://crowdin.net/project/bitstamp

==Account Security==

Access to an account may be protected with the optional Google Authenticator utility.

==Language Support==

The site has support for various languages:

* English
* Dutch
* Italian
* Polish
* Slovenian
* Finnish
* Czech
* Russian

==API==
API is available https://www.bitstamp.net/api/

==Data Services==

===Linux===
* [https://github.com/3M3RY/Dojima Dojima] market client

===Web===
* [https://www.tradeacacia.com/ Acacia Trading Bot]

==History==

The exchange was announced on August 22, 2011<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=38711.0 www.BITSTAMP.net Bitcoin exchange site for USD/BTC]</ref>. Bitstamp.net is owned and operated by Bitstamp Ltd and based in United Kingdom.

On May 12, 2012 the exchange began offering volume discounts for trading fees<ref>[http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=81519.0 Bitstamp introduces volume discount program]</ref>.

Bitstamp is one of the four exchanges that determine [https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/CoinDesk#CoinDesk_Bitcoin_Price_Index CoinDesk Bitcoin Price Index] BPI.

==See Also==

* [[Buying bitcoins]]
* [[Selling bitcoins]]
* [[Full Reserve Banking]]

==External Links==

* [http://www.bitstamp.net Bitstamp] web site
* [http://twitter.com/#!/BitStamp @Bitstamp] Twitter

==References==
<References />

[[Category:Exchanges]]
[[Category:EWallets]]
[[ru:Bitstamp]]
{{wp}}

Bit (unit)

2018-01-27T12:52:39Z

Fturco: add reference

{{seealso|Units}}

Some people advocate the term '''bit''' to refer to one microbitcoin (a millionth of a bitcoin).

==History==

==Criticism==

Many people think this term is confusing. For example "bit" is also a portmanteau of "binary digit", a basic unit of information used in computing that can have only one of two values (either 0 or 1).<ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit</ref>

==References==
<references/>

{{stub}}

Bit (unit)

2018-01-27T12:50:05Z

Fturco: add reference to binary digits

{{seealso|Units}}

Some people advocate the term '''bit''' to refer to one microbitcoin (a millionth of a bitcoin).

==History==

==Criticism==

Many people think this term is confusing. For example "bit" is also a portmanteau of "binary digit", a basic unit of information used in computing that can have only one of two values (either 0 or 1). See [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bit this] Wikipedia article for details.

==References==
<references/>

{{stub}}

Bitcoin Core

2018-01-26T19:13:42Z

Fturco: remove outdated external link

'''Bitcoin Core''' (formerly '''Bitcoin-Qt''') is the third [[Bitcoin]] [[Clients|client]], developed by [[Wladimir van der Laan]] based on the original reference code by [[Satoshi Nakamoto]].<ref>https://gavintech.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/full-disclosure-bitcoin-qt-on-windows.html, Full disclosure: Bitcoin-Qt on Windows vulnerability, 21st October 2012</ref><ref>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-4682, Vulnerability Summary for CVE-2012-4682, 21st October 2012</ref> It has been bundled with [[bitcoind]] since version 0.5. Bitcoin-Qt has been rebranded to '''[[Bitcoin Core]]''' since version 0.9.0 <ref name="Rebranding to Bitcoin Core">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin Core version 0.9.0 released|url=https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.9.0|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=19 March 2014}}</ref>.

==History==

Bitcoin Core can be used as a desktop client for regular payments or as a server utility for merchants and other payment services.

===Current version===
Source code (and build instructions for supported platforms) can be found at the [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Bitcoin GitHub page].

==Features==
* Compatibility with Linux (both GNOME and KDE), Mac OS X and Windows
* All functionality of the original wxWidgets client
* Asks for confirmation before sending coins
* CSV export of transactions
* Clearer transaction list with status icons and real-time filtering
* Progress bar on initial block download
* Languages: Dutch, English, German, Chinese and many more. Translations are being done by volunteers on [https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/ Transifex].
* Sendmany support in UI (send to multiple recipients in one transaction)
* Multiple [[Units|unit]] support, can show subdivided bitcoins (mBTC, µBTC) for users that like large numbers (only decimal units)
* Splash screen that details progress
* Debug window
* Payment requests (BIP 70)
* Coin control
* bitcoin-cli as a RPC client, instead of bitcoind executable functioning both as a server and as a RPC client

==Criticism==

===Sync time===
Bitcoin Core is often criticized for being slow in downloading and verifying the Bitcoin transaction database (the [[blockchain]]). The download may be quicker using the [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0 bootstrap method]. '''NOTE:''' As of version 0.10.0 it is now slower to download the blockchain via the torrent than it is to download the full blockchain through the P2P client.

===Bandwidth use===
It has also been criticized for "hogging" upload bandwidth when peers connect to download the blockchain (possible only when run with port 8333 accessible to outside connections).
This perceived "issue" has been [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/273 discussed extensively on GitHub].
Most modern routers support quality-of-service that can be configured to properly share the internet connection across all services, and even deprioritise Bitcoin traffic.
Bitcoin Core includes a script for Linux to configure QoS on an individual host.<ref>https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/qos, Linux QoS bash script</ref>
Windows users can also use third-party software such as [http://seriousbit.com/netbalancer/ Netbalancer] to throttle the application's upload bandwidth and ensure that one has enough upload bandwidth available for regular computer and internet use to be unaffected.

===Lack of multiwallet support; node+wallet tied together===
Wallet management is also cumbersome. Unlike clients such as [[Armory]], [[MultiBit]], [[Electrum]] and others only one wallet at a time is supported, and its location is required to be the same as the blockchain storage, making it [[Securing_your_wallet#Making_a_secure_workspace|difficult to place the wallet on an encrypted drive]]. It is recommended to backup the wallet.dat file every 50 transactions, due to the way Bitcoin Core handles [[Change|change]].

==External Links==

* [https://bitcoin.org/en/download Download link at bitcoin.org]
* [https://bitcoin.org/en/version-history Version history]
* [https://bitcoincore.org/ Bitcoin Core website]
* [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15276.0 Forum thread] (includes screenshots)
* [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Current GitHub repository shared with bitcoind]

<references

/>

==See also==

* [[QBitcoin]]
* [[bitcoind]]

[[es:Bitcoin-Qt]]

[[Category:User Interfaces]]
[[Category:Frontends]]
[[Category:Free Software]]
[[Category:Open Source]]

{{Bitcoin Core documentation}}

Bitcoin Core

2018-01-26T19:10:46Z

Fturco: update external link (avoid redirect)

'''Bitcoin Core''' (formerly '''Bitcoin-Qt''') is the third [[Bitcoin]] [[Clients|client]], developed by [[Wladimir van der Laan]] based on the original reference code by [[Satoshi Nakamoto]].<ref>https://gavintech.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/full-disclosure-bitcoin-qt-on-windows.html, Full disclosure: Bitcoin-Qt on Windows vulnerability, 21st October 2012</ref><ref>https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2012-4682, Vulnerability Summary for CVE-2012-4682, 21st October 2012</ref> It has been bundled with [[bitcoind]] since version 0.5.<ref name="Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind Releases">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind Releases|url=http://bitcoin.org/news.html|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=21 October 2012}}</ref> Bitcoin-Qt has been rebranded to '''[[Bitcoin Core]]''' since version 0.9.0 <ref name="Rebranding to Bitcoin Core">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin Core version 0.9.0 released|url=https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.9.0|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=19 March 2014}}</ref>.

==History==

Bitcoin Core can be used as a desktop client for regular payments or as a server utility for merchants and other payment services.

===Current version===
Source code (and build instructions for supported platforms) can be found at the [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Bitcoin GitHub page].

==Features==
* Compatibility with Linux (both GNOME and KDE), Mac OS X and Windows
* All functionality of the original wxWidgets client
* Asks for confirmation before sending coins
* CSV export of transactions
* Clearer transaction list with status icons and real-time filtering
* Progress bar on initial block download
* Languages: Dutch, English, German, Chinese and many more. Translations are being done by volunteers on [https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/ Transifex].
* Sendmany support in UI (send to multiple recipients in one transaction)
* Multiple [[Units|unit]] support, can show subdivided bitcoins (mBTC, µBTC) for users that like large numbers (only decimal units)
* Splash screen that details progress
* Debug window
* Payment requests (BIP 70)
* Coin control
* bitcoin-cli as a RPC client, instead of bitcoind executable functioning both as a server and as a RPC client

==Criticism==

===Sync time===
Bitcoin Core is often criticized for being slow in downloading and verifying the Bitcoin transaction database (the [[blockchain]]). The download may be quicker using the [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0 bootstrap method]. '''NOTE:''' As of version 0.10.0 it is now slower to download the blockchain via the torrent than it is to download the full blockchain through the P2P client.

===Bandwidth use===
It has also been criticized for "hogging" upload bandwidth when peers connect to download the blockchain (possible only when run with port 8333 accessible to outside connections).
This perceived "issue" has been [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/273 discussed extensively on GitHub].
Most modern routers support quality-of-service that can be configured to properly share the internet connection across all services, and even deprioritise Bitcoin traffic.
Bitcoin Core includes a script for Linux to configure QoS on an individual host.<ref>https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/qos, Linux QoS bash script</ref>
Windows users can also use third-party software such as [http://seriousbit.com/netbalancer/ Netbalancer] to throttle the application's upload bandwidth and ensure that one has enough upload bandwidth available for regular computer and internet use to be unaffected.

===Lack of multiwallet support; node+wallet tied together===
Wallet management is also cumbersome. Unlike clients such as [[Armory]], [[MultiBit]], [[Electrum]] and others only one wallet at a time is supported, and its location is required to be the same as the blockchain storage, making it [[Securing_your_wallet#Making_a_secure_workspace|difficult to place the wallet on an encrypted drive]]. It is recommended to backup the wallet.dat file every 50 transactions, due to the way Bitcoin Core handles [[Change|change]].

==External Links==

* [https://bitcoin.org/en/download Download link at bitcoin.org]
* [https://bitcoin.org/en/version-history Version history]
* [https://bitcoincore.org/ Bitcoin Core website]
* [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15276.0 Forum thread] (includes screenshots)
* [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Current GitHub repository shared with bitcoind]

<references

/>

==See also==

* [[QBitcoin]]
* [[bitcoind]]

[[es:Bitcoin-Qt]]

[[Category:User Interfaces]]
[[Category:Frontends]]
[[Category:Free Software]]
[[Category:Open Source]]

{{Bitcoin Core documentation}}

Bitcoin Core

2018-01-26T19:09:22Z

Fturco: use HTTPS instead of HTTP

'''Bitcoin Core''' (formerly '''Bitcoin-Qt''') is the third [[Bitcoin]] [[Clients|client]], developed by [[Wladimir van der Laan]] based on the original reference code by [[Satoshi Nakamoto]].<ref>https://gavintech.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/full-disclosure-bitcoin-qt-on-windows.html, Full disclosure: Bitcoin-Qt on Windows vulnerability, 21st October 2012</ref><ref>http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2012-4682, Vulnerability Summary for CVE-2012-4682, 21st October 2012</ref> It has been bundled with [[bitcoind]] since version 0.5.<ref name="Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind Releases">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind Releases|url=http://bitcoin.org/news.html|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=21 October 2012}}</ref> Bitcoin-Qt has been rebranded to '''[[Bitcoin Core]]''' since version 0.9.0 <ref name="Rebranding to Bitcoin Core">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin Core version 0.9.0 released|url=https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.9.0|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=19 March 2014}}</ref>.

==History==

Bitcoin Core can be used as a desktop client for regular payments or as a server utility for merchants and other payment services.

===Current version===
Source code (and build instructions for supported platforms) can be found at the [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Bitcoin GitHub page].

==Features==
* Compatibility with Linux (both GNOME and KDE), Mac OS X and Windows
* All functionality of the original wxWidgets client
* Asks for confirmation before sending coins
* CSV export of transactions
* Clearer transaction list with status icons and real-time filtering
* Progress bar on initial block download
* Languages: Dutch, English, German, Chinese and many more. Translations are being done by volunteers on [https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/ Transifex].
* Sendmany support in UI (send to multiple recipients in one transaction)
* Multiple [[Units|unit]] support, can show subdivided bitcoins (mBTC, µBTC) for users that like large numbers (only decimal units)
* Splash screen that details progress
* Debug window
* Payment requests (BIP 70)
* Coin control
* bitcoin-cli as a RPC client, instead of bitcoind executable functioning both as a server and as a RPC client

==Criticism==

===Sync time===
Bitcoin Core is often criticized for being slow in downloading and verifying the Bitcoin transaction database (the [[blockchain]]). The download may be quicker using the [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0 bootstrap method]. '''NOTE:''' As of version 0.10.0 it is now slower to download the blockchain via the torrent than it is to download the full blockchain through the P2P client.

===Bandwidth use===
It has also been criticized for "hogging" upload bandwidth when peers connect to download the blockchain (possible only when run with port 8333 accessible to outside connections).
This perceived "issue" has been [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/273 discussed extensively on GitHub].
Most modern routers support quality-of-service that can be configured to properly share the internet connection across all services, and even deprioritise Bitcoin traffic.
Bitcoin Core includes a script for Linux to configure QoS on an individual host.<ref>https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/qos, Linux QoS bash script</ref>
Windows users can also use third-party software such as [http://seriousbit.com/netbalancer/ Netbalancer] to throttle the application's upload bandwidth and ensure that one has enough upload bandwidth available for regular computer and internet use to be unaffected.

===Lack of multiwallet support; node+wallet tied together===
Wallet management is also cumbersome. Unlike clients such as [[Armory]], [[MultiBit]], [[Electrum]] and others only one wallet at a time is supported, and its location is required to be the same as the blockchain storage, making it [[Securing_your_wallet#Making_a_secure_workspace|difficult to place the wallet on an encrypted drive]]. It is recommended to backup the wallet.dat file every 50 transactions, due to the way Bitcoin Core handles [[Change|change]].

==External Links==

* [https://bitcoin.org/en/download Download link at bitcoin.org]
* [https://bitcoin.org/en/version-history Version history]
* [https://bitcoincore.org/ Bitcoin Core website]
* [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15276.0 Forum thread] (includes screenshots)
* [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Current GitHub repository shared with bitcoind]

<references

/>

==See also==

* [[QBitcoin]]
* [[bitcoind]]

[[es:Bitcoin-Qt]]

[[Category:User Interfaces]]
[[Category:Frontends]]
[[Category:Free Software]]
[[Category:Open Source]]

{{Bitcoin Core documentation}}

Bitcoin Core

2018-01-26T19:08:14Z

Fturco: remove outdated external link

'''Bitcoin Core''' (formerly '''Bitcoin-Qt''') is the third [[Bitcoin]] [[Clients|client]], developed by [[Wladimir van der Laan]] based on the original reference code by [[Satoshi Nakamoto]].<ref>http://gavintech.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/full-disclosure-bitcoin-qt-on-windows.html, Full disclosure: Bitcoin-Qt on Windows vulnerability, 21st October 2012</ref><ref>http://web.nvd.nist.gov/view/vuln/detail?vulnId=CVE-2012-4682, Vulnerability Summary for CVE-2012-4682, 21st October 2012</ref> It has been bundled with [[bitcoind]] since version 0.5.<ref name="Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind Releases">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin-Qt/Bitcoind Releases|url=http://bitcoin.org/news.html|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=21 October 2012}}</ref> Bitcoin-Qt has been rebranded to '''[[Bitcoin Core]]''' since version 0.9.0 <ref name="Rebranding to Bitcoin Core">{{cite web|title=Bitcoin Core version 0.9.0 released|url=https://bitcoin.org/en/release/v0.9.0|publisher=Bitcoin.org|accessdate=19 March 2014}}</ref>.

==History==

Bitcoin Core can be used as a desktop client for regular payments or as a server utility for merchants and other payment services.

===Current version===
Source code (and build instructions for supported platforms) can be found at the [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Bitcoin GitHub page].

==Features==
* Compatibility with Linux (both GNOME and KDE), Mac OS X and Windows
* All functionality of the original wxWidgets client
* Asks for confirmation before sending coins
* CSV export of transactions
* Clearer transaction list with status icons and real-time filtering
* Progress bar on initial block download
* Languages: Dutch, English, German, Chinese and many more. Translations are being done by volunteers on [https://www.transifex.com/projects/p/bitcoin/ Transifex].
* Sendmany support in UI (send to multiple recipients in one transaction)
* Multiple [[Units|unit]] support, can show subdivided bitcoins (mBTC, µBTC) for users that like large numbers (only decimal units)
* Splash screen that details progress
* Debug window
* Payment requests (BIP 70)
* Coin control
* bitcoin-cli as a RPC client, instead of bitcoind executable functioning both as a server and as a RPC client

==Criticism==

===Sync time===
Bitcoin Core is often criticized for being slow in downloading and verifying the Bitcoin transaction database (the [[blockchain]]). The download may be quicker using the [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=145386.0 bootstrap method]. '''NOTE:''' As of version 0.10.0 it is now slower to download the blockchain via the torrent than it is to download the full blockchain through the P2P client.

===Bandwidth use===
It has also been criticized for "hogging" upload bandwidth when peers connect to download the blockchain (possible only when run with port 8333 accessible to outside connections).
This perceived "issue" has been [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/273 discussed extensively on GitHub].
Most modern routers support quality-of-service that can be configured to properly share the internet connection across all services, and even deprioritise Bitcoin traffic.
Bitcoin Core includes a script for Linux to configure QoS on an individual host.<ref>https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/tree/master/contrib/qos, Linux QoS bash script</ref>
Windows users can also use third-party software such as [http://seriousbit.com/netbalancer/ Netbalancer] to throttle the application's upload bandwidth and ensure that one has enough upload bandwidth available for regular computer and internet use to be unaffected.

===Lack of multiwallet support; node+wallet tied together===
Wallet management is also cumbersome. Unlike clients such as [[Armory]], [[MultiBit]], [[Electrum]] and others only one wallet at a time is supported, and its location is required to be the same as the blockchain storage, making it [[Securing_your_wallet#Making_a_secure_workspace|difficult to place the wallet on an encrypted drive]]. It is recommended to backup the wallet.dat file every 50 transactions, due to the way Bitcoin Core handles [[Change|change]].

==External Links==

* [https://bitcoin.org/en/download Download link at bitcoin.org]
* [https://bitcoin.org/en/version-history Version history]
* [https://bitcoincore.org/ Bitcoin Core website]
* [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=15276.0 Forum thread] (includes screenshots)
* [https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin Current GitHub repository shared with bitcoind]

<references

/>

==See also==

* [[QBitcoin]]
* [[bitcoind]]

[[es:Bitcoin-Qt]]

[[Category:User Interfaces]]
[[Category:Frontends]]
[[Category:Free Software]]
[[Category:Open Source]]

{{Bitcoin Core documentation}}

Template:Developers

2018-01-26T19:04:44Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect)

<noinclude>This template is for [[Bitcoin Core]] developers.
 If possible, the full names of developers should be used in this template, even if they are better known by an internet alias.
 To be listed as a contributor, the person must have made at least 50 contributions, be actively contributing, or be otherwise notable.
 
 
NOTES:
* GitHub user saracen appears to somehow be misattributed for Satoshi's commits.
* fanquake = Michael Ford
</noinclude>{{Navbox_default
|title=[[Bitcoin Core]] developers
|image=
|header=
|group1=Active
|list1=[[Wladimir van der Laan]] ([[Core maintainer|maintainer]]) • [[Gavin Andresen]] • [[Brad Andrews]] • [[Matt Corallo]] • [[Suhas Daftuar]] • [[Luke Dashjr]] • [[Cory Fields]] • [[Mark Friedenbach]] • [[Michael Ford]] • [[Jeff Garzik]] • [[Tom Harding]] • [[Mike Hearn]] • [[Pavel Janik]] • [[Philip Kaufmann]] • [[Daniel Kraft]] • [[Cozz Lovan]] • [[Gregory Maxwell]] • [[Alex Morcos]] • [[Ross Nicoll]] • [[Casey Rodarmor]] • [[Jonas Schnelli]] • [[Jorge Timón]] • [[Peter Todd]] • [[Warren Togami]] • [[Adam Weiss]] • [[Pieter Wuille]]
|group2=Retired
|list2=[[Laszlo Hanyecz]] • [[Martti Malmi]] • [[Satoshi Nakamoto]]
|footer=
}}

Gavin Andresen

2018-01-26T19:03:36Z

Fturco: fix internal link (avoid redirect)

{{infobox person|name=Gavin Andresen|image=[[File:Gavin Andresen.jpg|256px]]
|active=2010–present
|born=1966 (aged 48–49)
|residence=Amherst, Massachusetts
|twitter=gavinandresen
|reddit=gavinandresen
|bitcoinwiki=Gavinandresen
|bitcointalk=224
}}'''Gavin Andresen''' was the Chief Scientist for the [[Bitcoin_Foundation|Bitcoin Foundation]].

==References==
<references/>

{{s-start|Bitcoin [[Core maintainer]]|[[Satoshi Nakamoto]]|2011–2014|[[Wladimir van der Laan]]}}
{{developers}}{{stub}}

[[Category:Core committers]]
[[Category:Core developers]]
{{wp|Gavin_Andresen}}