14: National Defense: Softwar + DoD Mandate
It was buried in there, but if you remember, in “5: What is bitcoin? Bitcoin vs. bitcoin,” one of the definitions I gave was that Bitcoin is a Proof of Work Cybersecurity system. So, let’s unpack that :)
However, first though, I want to give credit to Jason Lowery. This is his idea/work, and if you’re curious to learn (even) more, I would recommend his book/ thesis from MIT.
Softwar: A Novel Theory on Power Projection and the National Strategic Significance of Bitcoin
Below, I will share some snippets from Lowery. Also remember in “5: What is bitcoin? Bitcoin vs. bitcoin” how I said PoW was an invention not to be dismissed? That it was revolutionary? Here’s another example why:
“Until Bitcoin, nations have not had an effective way to physically secure their ability to freely exchange bits of information across cyberspace without resorting to kinetic (i.e. lethal) power…Thanks to proof-of-work protocols like Bitcoin, nations can now utilize special machinery to impose severe physical restrictions on other nations, in, from, and through cyberspace in a completely non-destructive and non-lethal manner” (Jason Lowery, Softwar).
One of the great analogies/stories Lowery provides in Softwar is that of gun powder. Initially, people thought it was medicine. Today, we recognize that gun powder’s use case is not as medicine but to faciliate explosiions.
Moral of the story… you may be asking? The first use-case is not always the intended or correct use-case.
Yes, bitcoin may currently store financial bits of information. However, Lowery argues that it doesn’t mean that is all that bitcoin is good for.
“At its core, Bitcoin is a computer network that transfers bits of information between computers using a zero-trust physical security design…including but not limited to financial information…Bitcoin could represent a “softwar”...defense protocol, not merely a peer-to-peer electronic cash system.”
“Bitcoin isn’t a strictly monetary protocol. Instead, Bitcoin appears to be emerging as a cyber power projection tactic for the digital age. While most software can only logically constrain computers, Bitcoin can physically constrain computers and impose severe physical costs (as measured in watts) on belligerent actors…Bitcoin’s global adoption could therefore represent a revolutionary approach to cybersecurity and…reshape how modern society secures their most valuable digital resources” (Jason Lowery, Softwar).
Furthermore, Lowery outlines how “electro-cyber warfighting is not a new idea; it’s at least 123 years old. In 1900, Nikola Tesla hypothesized that society would eventually develop such destructive kinetic power that humanity would face a dilemma and be compelled out of existential necessity to fight their wars using human-out-of-the-loop “energy delivery” competitions. He believed humans would eventually invent intelligent machines that would engage in electric power competitions to settle humanity’s disputes, while humans observe from afar” (Jason Lowery, Softwar).
Now, abstracting a bit, Lowery outlines how from the beginning of time, we’ve secured property with power, by exerting energy. The 4 dimensions (land, sea, air, space) are becoming 5 (+ cyberspace).
“Laws are energy efficient, but they are vulnerable to abuse and exploitation; we know from history they are not as effective as war. When law breaks down, war follows. War is energy in-efficient but in-vulnerable to exploitation and abuse & egalitarian” (Jason Lowery, Softwar)
“Physical power’s rulings are quick and decisive. The basis for its judgment is known equally by everyone, and its verdict is very easy to audit - making it an easy way to achieve consensus…Physical power is proof of its own merit; it doesn’t need anyone to believe in it to know it’s worthiness” (Jason Lowery, Softwar).
So, why again does this relate to PoW? To Bitcoin? How does this relate to national security?
“PoW means not having to use human life to defend monetized wealth” (Jason Lowery, Softwar).
Biden + Department of Defense
May 12, 2021, President Joe Biden signed the Executive Order on Improving the Nation’s Cybersecurity
Incremental improvements will not give us the security we need; instead, the Federal Government needs to make bold changes and significant investments in order to defend the vital institutions that underpin the American way of life. The Federal Government must bring to bear the full scope of its authorities and resources to protect and secure its computer systems, whether they are cloud-based, on-premises, or hybrid. The scope of protection and security must include systems that process data (information technology (IT)) and those that run the vital machinery that ensures our safety (operational technology (OT)).
March 9, 2022, President Joe Biden signed the Executive Order on Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets.
This became a whole-of-government effort in which the administration sought to define how the U.S. should approach digital assets. The order required multiple cabinet-level departments to conduct investigations into the risks and opportunities of digital assets to their remits.
Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2023: Department of Defense (Mandate)
“The Department of Defense (DOD) is responsible for the military forces needed to safeguard U.S. vital national interests. The President’s 2023 Budget for DOD provides the resources necessary to sustain and strengthen U.S. deterrence, advancing our vital national interests through integrated deterrence, campaigning, and investments that build enduring advantages. The Budget: supports America’s service members and their families; strengthens alliances and partnerships; preserves America’s technological edge; bolsters economic competitiveness; and combats 21st Century security threats.
Why did I share the above?
In the past couple of years, the groundwork has been laid to “make bold changes and significant investments, “investigat[e]…the…opportunities of digital assets,” and “preserv[e] America’s technological edge; bolste[r] economic competitiveness; and comba[t] 21st Century security threats.”
To not consider the ideas Lowery presents would be a failing of leadership and responsibility. More on this topic (I know this is already incredible long) in the article below.
