Bitcoin: A Picture Less Than Pretty

 | Jul 13, 2018 05:04AM ET

The move up seemed to be continuing and the first impression was that we were seeing a first period of appreciation in some time. But the operative word here is “seemed.” If we take a closer look at what the current environment really is, the picture is far less pretty.

Bitcoin has been around for close to a decade now. Yet we haven’t seen much in the way of research on the Bitcoin network and the principles governing it. Sure, there have been studies analyzing the system from an economic point of view, but their number has been low relative to other topics covered by economic research. In other words, Bitcoin hasn’t been researched that much by people from academia. Against such a backdrop, it is interesting to see new papers taking on the problem of incentives in the Bitcoin network. In an article on the MIT Technology Review website, we read:

The discussion of digital money thus far haas been dominated by libertarians and computer geeks, but the massive popularity of crypto-tokens has gotten the attention of academics such as the University of Chicago’s Eric Budish. In a new paper, Budish examines Bitcoin’s incentive system and concludes that there are “intrinsic economic limits to how economically important it can become.”

Bitcoin’s security arises from a competition between members of the blockchain network called “miners.” Each miner is in pursuit of chances to add new transactions to the blockchain and earn bitcoins in return. Miners use large amounts of computing power in a race to solve a complicated math problem. An attacker couldn’t defeat this system unless it coordinated enough computing power to overwhelm the network and manipulate the record of transactions in such a way that it could spend the same bitcoins repeatedly. A strike of that sort, called a “majority attack,” is Bitcoin’s biggest threat, but for now, mining coins is more profitable than trying to overthrow the network, so the network stays safe. (...)

However, writes Budish, this protection is very expensive (the Bitcoin network uses about as much power as Ireland to run). And although Bitcoin’s value could theoretically increase almost without end, the blockchain’s security can increase only linearly, as more mining power is added to the network. That’s unlike other forms of security, such as the cryptography used in the traditional financial system, which, like adding a lock to a door, adds protection for a relatively low cost.

The long-story-short version of the above is that in the future, there might be disconnect between Bitcoin’s value and the security of the network should the currency appreciate. This might be a limiting factor as far as the growth of the Bitcoin market is concerned.

Get The News You Want
Read market moving news with a personalized feed of stocks you care about.
Get The App

This analysis is generally interesting in that it presents a rigorous approach to arrive at its conclusions and is not very hand-wavy. So, while we can’t be absolutely sure about the trajectory of Bitcoin, we now have an analysis suggesting the as Bitcoin grows, the market might be under stress from majority attacks.

The practical implications of this might be that in the case of serious Bitcoin appreciation, we might experience instability in the system or the costs of defending Bitcoin might grow, decreasing the attractiveness of the currency. But all this doesn’t necessarily mean that Bitcoin can’t grow – it’s rather a suggestion that in order for it to grow, the Bitcoin community will have to figure out a way to deflect majority attacks.

Appreciation Still in Place

On BitStamp, we are seeing a move to the upside. And a move above the April 1 low. On the face of it, this might look very bullish. But by now, we should know better.