Why am I so late on the Bitcoin train?

I've been somewhat of a Bitcoin sceptic for quite some time. When it first became a thing I was worried that governments would legislate it out of existence.

It has had a pretty bad rap of being associated with the dark web and it is definitely the choice of currency for malware authors.

In its normal usage Bitcoin is more transparent than cash. If I give you a cash note there is no permanent record of the transaction and the tax man can't get a sniff into our business.

Governments hate transactions they can't tax or police and so in the beginning there was a concern that Bitcoin would be outlawed.

In contrast to cash, if I transfer you Bitcoin then there is a record of the transaction that anybody in the world can inspect. It's possible to trace the coins in your Bitcoin wallet back through the various people who owned them. Anybody in the world can watch the contents of your wallet and see where you spend your money.

This is exactly the sort of thing that governments love.

Of course not everybody wants to share their transactions with the world and so there are Bitcoin laundering services that attempt to anonymise the coins in your wallet. This puts us back to square one with Bitcoin being very convenient for criminals to use in order to evade financial intelligence controls.

I suspect that the process of banning Bitcoin transactions would impinge too much on the freedom of citizens. Some governments are talking about banning cryptography in order to maintain surveillance on their citizens so it's not a stretch to imagine them being displeased with Bitcoin laundering services. *sigh*.

Anyway, back to my killer app for Bitcoin... I've recently emigrated and am still paying debt in South Africa. Sending money back to South Africa costs about £30 and takes 2-4 days if I use the banking system. If I use Bitcoin the process costs around £ 3 and I can have the money in my South African bank account on the very same day.

Bitcoin costs one tenth the price of using banks and is at least twice as fast.

My transaction is not at all anonymous and a government can trace the funds to me on either end of the transaction where copies of my passport are stored with the exchanges. If I wanted to hide this from thieves, the government, spear-phishers, and other people who want to take my money without giving anything in return then I would use a Bitcoin laundry service.

Comments

Using Fail2Ban to protect a Varnished site from scrapers

I'm using Varnish to cache a fairly busy property site. Varnish works like a bomb for normal users and has greatly improved our page load speed. For bots that are scraping the site, presumably to add the property listings to their own site, though the cache is next to useless since the bots are sequentially trawling through the whole site. I decided to use fail2ban to block IP's who hit the site too often. The first step in doing so was to enable a disk based access log for Varnish so that fail2ban will have something to work with. This means setting up varnishncsa. Add this to your /etc/rc.local file: varnishncsa -a -w /var/log/varnish/access.log -D -P /var/run/varnishncsa.pid This starts up varnishncsa in daemon mode and appends Varnish access attempts to /var/log/varnish/access.log Now edit or create /etc/logrotate.d/varnish and make an entry to rotate this access log: /var/log/varnish/*log { create 640 http log compress ...

Translating a bit of the idea behind domain driven design into code architecture

I've often participated in arguments discussions about whether thin models or thin controllers should be preferred. The wisdom of a thin controller is that if you need to test your controller in isolation then you need to stub the dependencies of your request and response. It also violates the single responsibility principal because the controller could have multiple reasons to change. Seemingly, the alternative is to settle on having fat models. This results in having domain logic right next to your persistence logic. If you ever want to change your persistence layer you're going to be in for a painful time. That's a bit of a cargo cult argument because honestly who does that, but it's also a violation of the single responsibility principal. One way to decouple your domain logic from both persistence and controller is to use the "repository pattern". Here we encapsulate domain logic into a data service. This layer deals exclusively with imple...

Separating business logic from persistence layer in Laravel

There are several reasons to separate business logic from your persistence layer. Perhaps the biggest advantage is that the parts of your application which are unique are not coupled to how data are persisted. This makes the code easier to port and maintain. I'm going to use Doctrine to replace the Eloquent ORM in Laravel. A thorough comparison of the patterns is available here . By using Doctrine I am also hoping to mitigate the risk of a major version upgrade on the underlying framework. It can be expected for the ORM to change between major versions of a framework and upgrading to a new release can be quite costly. Another advantage to this approach is to limit the access that objects have to the database. Unless a developer is aware of the business rules in place on an Eloquent model there is a chance they will mistakenly ignore them by calling the ActiveRecord save method directly. I'm not implementing the repository pattern in all its ...

Adventures in IT

Search This Blog