In a dialogue on X, Jason Lowery debated the viability and way forward for Reusable Proof-of-Work (RPoW) networks—significantly whether or not nations would possibly try to create competing proof-of-work programs. The dialog was sparked by an inquiry from Rabbit Gap Investor (@rabbitholeinvst) directed at Lowery, an astronautical engineer, Main within the US Area Drive, and writer of the “Softwar” thesis. Lowery’s thesis emphasizes Bitcoin’s strategic significance for US nationwide safety.
Can Nation-States Fight Bitcoin With Their Personal PoW Network?
Rabbit Gap Investor requested Lowery, “Do you see a future where other reusable proof of work networks are created for other applications?” Lowery responded by referencing questions he beforehand obtained from the White Home Workplace of Science & Know-how Coverage.
He said that whereas he can not predict the longer term with absolute certainty, he believes there will likely be a dominant RPoW community that positive factors common acceptance in a lot the identical method that TCP/IP turned the worldwide customary for information transport: “This was one of the questions I received from the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy. […] My intuition is that a single dominant Reusable Proof-of-Work (RPoW) network will emerge as the primary standard—much like how TCP/IP became the universal protocol for data transport […] In RPoW, network size directly translates to security. […] This consolidation of all RPOW applications into one RPOW network […] is a strategic necessity.”
He elaborated on how RPoW’s safety scales with computational energy and power expenditure, making a “reinforcing cycle” that naturally incentivizes individuals emigrate to the biggest and most safe community. Lowery pointed to what he calls “Mutually Assured Preservation,” the place even adversarial nation-states (e.g., NATO and BRICS) would successfully change into “frenemies” on the identical RPoW community. In line with his evaluation: “The cost of attacking either side increases to such an extent that they become ‘frenemies,’ each strengthening the security of the other’s interests on the same network.”
Lowery’s stance leans strongly towards Bitcoin because the dominant RPoW protocol. Whereas he doesn’t label himself a “Bitcoin Maximalist,” he makes it clear that Bitcoin is the de facto world PoW customary because of market forces and community results.
Thomas Younger, Managing Companion at RUMJog Enterprises, additional probed Lowery’s thesis by asking about particular person Bitcoin possession and the monetization potential for BTC in a world the place nation-states deal with the community as “The Standard”: “Will it be practical for individuals to own privately held BTC? … Specifically, would interested nation states ‘rent’ privately held BTC to misattribute or create diversification or will they simply want to own their own BTC?”
Lowery replied: “I’m a subscriber to the belief that if Bitcoin becomes a global unit of account, its purchasing power will naturally increase as humanity grows more productive. This makes the need to chase yield obsolete—unnecessary, even. Bitcoin itself is the yield.”
He then shared a cautionary perspective on the guarantees of yield in a future the place governments would possibly undertake government orders to grab custodial BTC. In line with Lowery: “If I were a nefarious president or nation, I’d lure people into giving up self-custody of their BTC by dangling the promise of yield… Then, with a simple executive order, I’d nationalize NYDIG, Coinbase, and MSTR’s Bitcoin… This is why I don’t own MSTR. MSTR’s Bitcoin is a future president’s honeypot… When the next EO6102 inevitably comes, it will be widely supported.”
One other consumer requested Lowery whether or not sovereign entities would possibly create their very own networks—as an example, sidechains or drivechains pegged into the primary Bitcoin community—below their sovereign management. Lowery responded by contrasting PoW and Proof of Stake (PoS) when it comes to centralization: “If the goal is sovereign control over a network, then PoS is a far better design than PoW… A nation (or any entity) could simply pre-mine the tokens, distribute them to itself, and implement a vote-based PoS system… This structure would ensure that control remains centralized… while still maintaining the (false) appearance of a decentralized system.”
He acknowledged {that a} nation may create an RPoW community with centralized administrative management, however he considers this method extra advanced and fewer environment friendly in comparison with a simple proof-of-stake system for reaching centralized governance: “PoS offers a more direct and practical way to achieve centralized control over a digital asset network without the computational and energy-intensive requirements of PoW.”
The overarching theme of Lowery’s commentary is that game-theoretic pressures—each amongst people and nation-states—are likely to favor consolidation round a single, most safe PoW community. He argues that Bitcoin’s sheer scale and entrenched place give it a near-insurmountable lead. In the meantime, nations searching for management would possibly experiment with different protocols, however finally face a steep uphill battle competing in opposition to what has already been embraced by “the free and open market.”
At press time, BTC traded at $95,937.
Featured picture created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
