Dan Kaminsky Quotes

Within the coming years, disrupting the Bitcoin network will become increasingly more difficult as Bitcoin wallet software and the protocol become more mature and resilient.

Think of Bitcoin as a bank account in the cloud, and it's completely decentralized: not the Swiss government, not the American government. It's all the participants in the network enforcing.

Success of bitcoin and the exchanges that deal in it could be interpreted by some to mean the demise of central banks, Wall Street, and the Washington insiders who trade on inside information and market manipulation.

To shut down Bitcoin is to shut down the Internet.

The Internet works thanks to loose but trusted connections among its many constituent parts, with easy entry and exit for new Internet service providers or new forms of expanding access.

I think anything which promotes heterogeneity on the Internet promotes stability. Diversity in services, service providers, and separating the layers of the networking stack are all important.

The big deal about the Internet design was you could have an arbitrary large number of networks so that they would all work together.

For the user, it doesn't matter whether he is getting access on Wi-Fi, 3G or 2G networks. What matters is good connectivity, and as a technology provider, our job is to hide the complexity of the technology.

I think long-term, Bitcoin is a currency of the Internet. So, even if humans don't use it, routers will use it. Web browsers will use it. Web servers will use it.

I'm a realist about how the networks work.

Bitcoin is successful only because of its potential for circumvention, lack of oversight.

Cryptocurrencies are an emergent property of the Internet - almost a fifth protocol in the Internet suite. If Satoshi Nakomoto did not exist, it would still be necessary to invent them.

Mobile was Internet 2.0. It changed everything. Crypto is Internet 3.0.

China may censor YouTube. China may censor Twitter. They won't be able to censor Bitcoin. There's no central authority. There's no one you can go to and say, 'We're going to turn Bitcoin off.'

I care a great deal about what happens to Bitcoin.

The blockchain is a distributed network that solves all the problems that we have of finance, but more broadly, it's like a philosophy. It's a way of life.

Bitcoin solved the double-spend problem. The key problem was payment confirmation without central clearing. Bitcoin's solution was ingenious but wasteful - it's fairly slow, and you can't put other things on it.

With the block chain, for the first time, we no longer need these central institutions for settlement or for guaranteeing the value of coins or for land titling. All of these functions can be replaced by a transparent public ledger that is safe from tampering and which can make value and ownership clear and open for everyone.

Over the next decade, there will be disruption as significant as the Internet was for publishing, where blockchain is going to disrupt dozens of industries, one being capital markets and Wall Street.

At the end of the day, what's going to make bitcoin successful is more people making more interesting things, just like the beginning of the Internet.

Activists need to educate themselves about the power of crypto currencies like Bitcoin, invented in 2009, and use crypto to leverage the success of their independent media gains to tip the balance of power away from the troika in ways that could never happen by backing a political candidate.

Some in the bitcoin community have always taken an anti-government, anti-fiat, anti-bank approach to their philosophy. Ripple takes the orthogonal side of each of those.

You look at Bitcoin, and it is an entirely new currency, completely decentralized, anonymous; transactions occur incredibly fast for free, all designed by the free market.

I don't see myself as the king of Bitcoin. I don't want to be the king of Bitcoin.

The interesting thing about blockchain is that it has made it possible for humanity to reach a consensus about a piece of data without having any authority to dictate it.