The attack on Twitter highlights Bitcoin’s qualities as an Internet currency. Despite there being anonymous alternatives like Monero, hackers chose Bitcoin.
The historic and abominable attack that the social network Twitter suffered in recent days made clear the dangers that centralized platforms pose. The hackers compromised the accounts of many users, who included prominent personalities such as former US President Barack Obama, Tesla, and SpaceX founder Elon Musk, and tycoon Warren Buffet.
When comparing the hack to other episodes involving cryptocurrencies, it is evident that this scam was not as successful, since the criminals only stole 28 BTC (around USD 250,000). The most striking thing is that they chose Bitcoin as a payment method.
They did not use the US dollar because it is centralized and easy to censor. Apart from cash trading, there is no other way to transfer US dollars without the risk of freezing, reversal, and confiscation. Banks, payment platforms like Paypal and card processors like Visa work together with governments.
There are characteristics of the system that may make Bitcoin’s qualities as digital cash questionable (such as the potential reduction in fungibility in the face of stained transactions/coins). However, The hacker knew that no one can stop a legitimate transaction with the first cryptocurrency. The term “legitimate” simply refers to a transaction valid for the consensus rules of this network.
By transferring Bitcoin from address Z to address H, the owner of Z is giving money to the owner of H (who can be himself). In this case, the intermediary (the network) is open, electronic, automated, and follows specified rules since its creation. These are difficult to change and ensure the effectiveness of transactions. Thus, stopping Bitcoin transactions means stopping its network.
Unlike bank accounts, traditional financial platforms, and even renowned stablecoins, Bitcoin has no mechanisms that allow a government, company, or individual to freeze and/or appropriate someone else’s money. The way to confiscate Bitcoin comes down to using physical force, the same as with cash.
No other digital currency, or copy of Bitcoin, has been able to reach the critical mass of users that the first cryptocurrency has been able to accumulate. Only Bitcoin, the Internet’s currency, would be able to draw everyone’s attention to something known and plausible, giving more importance to the scam on Twitter and allowing the hackers to produce some real victims.
Although Monero could have provided hackers with anonymity by default, its use would have nullified the effectiveness of the theft. Any other cryptocurrency would have raised skepticism and reduced the number of possible victims since none has the network effect or global recognition of Bitcoin, much less its market liquidity.
Other cryptocurrencies did not qualify for such an attack simply because of their centralization, be it code- or community-related. Tether and other stablecoins would have confiscated the funds, while Ethereum and other altcoins would have forked the network. Only Bitcoin provided the certainty that the transactions made would be final and no one would invalidate them.
In conclusion, Bitcoin is the most successful, recognized, safe, and valuable digital currency in the world. Government currencies in their physical form are no match for one that was born on the Internet. While other cryptocurrencies may have superior technical qualities, none has achieved a global status as a currency.
By Willmen Blanco
