Do you think it is just a coincidence that Satoshi and D.B. Cooper have never been seen together? The plot thickens.
And doge? It was a trap from the beginning...
Topic: Bitcoin, "Satoshi", NSA. (Read 4765 times)
Do you think it is just a coincidence that Satoshi and D.B. Cooper have never been seen together? The plot thickens.
And doge? It was a trap from the beginning...
Well this sure is an interesting thread.
Definitely makes you go "HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM".
-B-
Definitely makes you go "HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM".
-B-
MIT, NSA, private individuals, businesses, hobbyists have all over the last few decades been trying to make electronic money. but one thing that the article the OP is trying to link to bitcoin is missing, is in 5.1 the crucial part.
the part that separates egold from bitcoin.
5.1 (or any of the paper for that matter) DOES NOT mention the whole peer-to-peer decentralization of the ledger as the double spend solution. neither does it mention mining/block creation. the MIT/NSA paper simply mentions a SQL centralized database.
this decentralized blockchain is the fundamental part that separates bitcoin from any other e-currency ever invented or theorized. and as such you might as well be shouting that e-gold was an NSA invention.
its public knowledge that 'satoshi' grabbed idea's and collaborated with other people, such as collaborated with hal finney, gavin andressen etc. and they grabbed idea's and concepts from nick szabo, and others, maybe even grabbed idea's from the 1996 nsa invention. but it was 'satoshi' that used all of these idea's and the idea of bittorrent and put it all nicely together into a seamless and effective secure transaction ledger white paper.
so just because NSA talk about cryptography does not make NSA the inventors of bitcoin.
thats like saying cavemen invented the automobile, simply because they made the wheel.
the part that separates egold from bitcoin.
5.1 (or any of the paper for that matter) DOES NOT mention the whole peer-to-peer decentralization of the ledger as the double spend solution. neither does it mention mining/block creation. the MIT/NSA paper simply mentions a SQL centralized database.
this decentralized blockchain is the fundamental part that separates bitcoin from any other e-currency ever invented or theorized. and as such you might as well be shouting that e-gold was an NSA invention.
its public knowledge that 'satoshi' grabbed idea's and collaborated with other people, such as collaborated with hal finney, gavin andressen etc. and they grabbed idea's and concepts from nick szabo, and others, maybe even grabbed idea's from the 1996 nsa invention. but it was 'satoshi' that used all of these idea's and the idea of bittorrent and put it all nicely together into a seamless and effective secure transaction ledger white paper.
so just because NSA talk about cryptography does not make NSA the inventors of bitcoin.
thats like saying cavemen invented the automobile, simply because they made the wheel.
Exactly. It seems like this paper was written with the intentions of BANKS issuing digital currency, not a decentralized protocol.
MIT, NSA, private individuals, businesses, hobbyists have all over the last few decades been trying to make electronic money. but one thing that the article the OP is trying to link to bitcoin is missing, is in 5.1 the crucial part.
the part that separates egold from bitcoin.
5.1 (or any of the paper for that matter) DOES NOT mention the whole peer-to-peer decentralization of the ledger as the double spend solution. neither does it mention mining/block creation. the MIT/NSA paper simply mentions a SQL centralized database.
this decentralized blockchain is the fundamental part that separates bitcoin from any other e-currency ever invented or theorized. and as such you might as well be shouting that e-gold was an NSA invention.
its public knowledge that 'satoshi' grabbed idea's and collaborated with other people, such as collaborated with hal finney, gavin andressen etc. and they grabbed idea's and concepts from nick szabo, and others, maybe even grabbed idea's from the 1996 nsa invention. but it was 'satoshi' that used all of these idea's and the idea of bittorrent and put it all nicely together into a seamless and effective secure transaction ledger white paper.
so just because NSA talk about cryptography does not make NSA the inventors of bitcoin.
thats like saying cavemen invented the automobile, simply because they made the wheel.
the part that separates egold from bitcoin.
5.1 (or any of the paper for that matter) DOES NOT mention the whole peer-to-peer decentralization of the ledger as the double spend solution. neither does it mention mining/block creation. the MIT/NSA paper simply mentions a SQL centralized database.
this decentralized blockchain is the fundamental part that separates bitcoin from any other e-currency ever invented or theorized. and as such you might as well be shouting that e-gold was an NSA invention.
its public knowledge that 'satoshi' grabbed idea's and collaborated with other people, such as collaborated with hal finney, gavin andressen etc. and they grabbed idea's and concepts from nick szabo, and others, maybe even grabbed idea's from the 1996 nsa invention. but it was 'satoshi' that used all of these idea's and the idea of bittorrent and put it all nicely together into a seamless and effective secure transaction ledger white paper.
so just because NSA talk about cryptography does not make NSA the inventors of bitcoin.
thats like saying cavemen invented the automobile, simply because they made the wheel.
Nice to see Satoshi isnt just some random guy afterall bitcoins were invented for a different purpose than we originally thought. 
common if you really want to know and spread the message of satoshi visit here
http://www.reddit.com/r/satoshistories
http://www.reddit.com/r/satoshistories
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
NSA Chip #349097 test.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
NSA Chip #349097 test.
NSA paper, 1996: “How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash”.
Do you have a link to a place where this paper can be read that's hosted by a credible and verifiable source?
Quote
Anonymous: Fried, Frank got NSA's permission to make this report available. They have offered to make copies available by contacting them at <[email protected]> or (202) 639-7200. See: http://www.ffhsj.com/bancmail/21starch/961017.htm
Source: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
As you can see it is hosted at MIT, I believe it is a credible source.Source: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
MIT Computer Science and AI Laboratory
http://www.csail.mit.edu/
->
Project MAC ("Switzerland"), MIT Project on Mathematics and Computation
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/projects/mac/
->
Class: MIT 6.805/STS085: Ethics and Law on the Electronic Frontier, Special topic for Fall 13: Foundations of Internet Public Policy
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/
->
NSA Mint
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
NSA paper, 1996: “How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash”.
Do you have a link to a place where this paper can be read that's hosted by a credible and verifiable source?
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
MIT.EDU?
Do you think it is just a coincidence that Satoshi and D.B. Cooper have never been seen together? The plot thickens.
I cant see Satoshi jumping out of a plane, but anything is possible.
NSA paper, 1996: “How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash”.
Do you have a link to a place where this paper can be read that's hosted by a credible and verifiable source?
Edit: Found it following that link above. Here it is: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
*bump*
Do you think it is just a coincidence that Satoshi and D.B. Cooper have never been seen together? The plot thickens.
Newsflash; NSA is good at cryptography
There is another thread on this topic: Tatsuaki Okamoto = Satoshi Nakamoto?
Hmm this make my thought about bitcoin develop by NSA more concrete.
Quote
In cryptography, SHA-1 is a cryptographic hash function designed by the United States National Security Agency and published by the United States NIST as a U.S. Federal Information Processing Standard. SHA stands for "secure hash algorithm". The four SHA algorithms are structured differently and are distinguished as SHA-0, SHA-1, SHA-2, and SHA-3. SHA-1 is very similar to SHA-0, but corrects an error in the original SHA hash specification that led to significant weaknesses. The SHA-0 algorithm was not adopted by many applications. SHA-2 on the other hand significantly differs from the SHA-1 hash function.
“Doubts are the ants in the pants of faith. They keep it awake and moving.”
― Frederick Buechner
The Tor project was created by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and currently receives 80% of their funding from the US Government.
- - - -
ROOTS IN THE NSA
NSA paper, 1996: “How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash”.
- - - -
An Efficient Divisible Electronic Cash Scheme
What the fuck does this sound like? A computationally complex calculation, that anyone can easily verify, yet as it is a hash of the block other people cannot use your proof of work.
You will shit your pants if you look at who wrote this paper:
An Efficient Divisible Electronic Cash Scheme
Tatsuaki Okamoto
― Frederick Buechner
The Tor project was created by DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) and currently receives 80% of their funding from the US Government.
- - - -
ROOTS IN THE NSA
NSA paper, 1996: “How To Make A Mint: The Cryptography of Anonymous Electronic Cash”.
Quote
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1. WHAT IS ELECTRONIC CASH?
1.1 Electronic Payment
1.2 Security of Electronic Payments
1.3 Electronic Cash
1.4 Multiple Spending
2. A CRYPTOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
2.1 Public-Key Cryptographic Tools
2.2 A Simplified Electronic Cash Protocol
2.3 Untraceable Electronic Payments
2.4 A Basic Electronic Cash Protocol
3. PROPOSED OFF-LINE IMPLEMENTATIONS
3.1 Including Identifying Information
3.2 Authentication and Signature Techniques
3.3 Summary of Proposed Implementations
4. OPTIONAL FEATURES OF OFF-LINE CASH
4. 1 Transferability
4.2 Divisibility
5. SECURITY ISSUES
5.1 Multiple Spending Prevention
5.2 Wallet Observers
5.3 Security Failures
5.4 Restoring Traceability
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
INTRODUCTION
1. WHAT IS ELECTRONIC CASH?
1.1 Electronic Payment
1.2 Security of Electronic Payments
1.3 Electronic Cash
1.4 Multiple Spending
2. A CRYPTOGRAPHIC DESCRIPTION
2.1 Public-Key Cryptographic Tools
2.2 A Simplified Electronic Cash Protocol
2.3 Untraceable Electronic Payments
2.4 A Basic Electronic Cash Protocol
3. PROPOSED OFF-LINE IMPLEMENTATIONS
3.1 Including Identifying Information
3.2 Authentication and Signature Techniques
3.3 Summary of Proposed Implementations
4. OPTIONAL FEATURES OF OFF-LINE CASH
4. 1 Transferability
4.2 Divisibility
5. SECURITY ISSUES
5.1 Multiple Spending Prevention
5.2 Wallet Observers
5.3 Security Failures
5.4 Restoring Traceability
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
- - - -
An Efficient Divisible Electronic Cash Scheme
Quote
A “divisible” coin worth some amount of money, say $x, is a coin that can
be spent many times as long aa the sum total of all its the transactions does
not exceed $x. This property, divisibility, is very useful and convenient for a
be spent many times as long aa the sum total of all its the transactions does
not exceed $x. This property, divisibility, is very useful and convenient for a
Quote
Bit Commitment Schemes
Quote
Finally U proves to B that a value is correctly generated without revealing
committed information, by using some protocols to be described later.
To set up the commitment scheme, B generates prime P satisfying P - 1 =
2-Prime (Prime is a prime number), G and g whose orders in the multiplicative
group 25 are Prime. B sends P, G and g. U checks whether Prime = (P- 1)/2
is a prime by a probabilistic primality (or composite) test, and whether the orders
of G and g are Prime by checking that they are not 1 and GPrime E 1 (mod P)
U can commit to any integer s E Zprime by choosing R uniformly at random
and gPrime = - 1. (mod P).
in ZPrime and computing the commitment
committed information, by using some protocols to be described later.
To set up the commitment scheme, B generates prime P satisfying P - 1 =
2-Prime (Prime is a prime number), G and g whose orders in the multiplicative
group 25 are Prime. B sends P, G and g. U checks whether Prime = (P- 1)/2
is a prime by a probabilistic primality (or composite) test, and whether the orders
of G and g are Prime by checking that they are not 1 and GPrime E 1 (mod P)
U can commit to any integer s E Zprime by choosing R uniformly at random
and gPrime = - 1. (mod P).
in ZPrime and computing the commitment
What the fuck does this sound like? A computationally complex calculation, that anyone can easily verify, yet as it is a hash of the block other people cannot use your proof of work.
Quote
Detection of Overspending
Although, formally, the security including the detection of overspending is de-
scribed in Section 6, in this subsection, we will describe the detection procedure
of overspending.
Although, formally, the security including the detection of overspending is de-
scribed in Section 6, in this subsection, we will describe the detection procedure
of overspending.
You will shit your pants if you look at who wrote this paper:
An Efficient Divisible Electronic Cash Scheme
Tatsuaki Okamoto
Jump to: