 Bitcoin Amsterdam: Flawed research drives harmful Bitcoin policies 
2024-10-11

Speakers at the Bitcoin Amsterdam 2024 conference have highlighted the far-reaching consequences of misinformation in academic research on Bitcoin.
During the “Beyond Resistance Money” panel discussion on day two of the conference, speakers alleged that academic inaccuracies have misled and continue to mislead the media, contributing to misguided government policies and harmful regulations.
The Bitcoin BTCUSD advocates detailed how flawed studies on BTC emissions and mining practices drive erroneous narratives in journalism and policymaking.
Flawed academia, public misperception
One key issue discussed was the role of flawed academic research in spreading misinformation about Bitcoin.
Andrew Bailey, a professor at Yale-NUS College and senior fellow at the Bitcoin Policy Institute, highlighted a specific issue in an influential academic paper that inaccurately reports BTC emissions data. He said:
Bailey pointed out that the paper contains a “unit error in the chart” that has not been corrected, even though it continues to be cited as factual. He emphasized that such mistakes can have a lasting impact on public understanding of Bitcoin.
Journalism as a loudspeaker for misinformation
Bradley Rettler, associate professor of philosophy at the University of Wyoming, added that journalists often lack the time to verify or deeply understand academic sources, further spreading these inaccuracies.
According to Rettler, the reliance on academic papers by journalists, who may not have the resources to become subject-matter experts, contributes to the problem:
Harmful regulations built on flawed data
Craig Warmke, a member of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, warned that misinformation has real-world implications, particularly in the realm of policymaking:
Warmke stated that this pattern has resulted in restrictive proposed legislation, “especially in Sweden to tax the BTC mining industry out of existence.”
He also stated that there is an “attack on software developers who are working on technologies that promote financial privacy.” 
Warmke concluded by suggesting that while academia has historically worked against Bitcoin, it is time for academia to start supporting the cryptocurrency. 