Topic: Bitcoin: The Digital Kill Switch - page 8. (Read 55236 times)

Right?

This thread has a scary sounding to it.

That is an interesting application. By the way, having considered it a bit further, I am moderately concerned with the "cartelization" attack. I am not sure how it might play out in the real world, and some of your descriptions rely on certain conspiracy theories, which make it harder for some in the thread to consider your perspective, but the technical flaw is real enough.

Detractors may do well to note that this is a variant on a known potential flaw:


(From https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses)

Cancer nodes

It's trivial for an attacker to fill the network with clients controlled by him. This might be helpful in the execution of other attacks.

For example, an attacker might connect 100,000 IP addresses to the IRC bootstrap channel. You would then be very likely to connect only to attacker nodes. This state can be exploited in (at least) the following ways:

• The attacker can refuse to relay blocks and transactions from everyone, disconnecting you from the network.
• The attacker can relay only blocks that he creates, putting you on a separate network. You're then open to double-spending attacks.
• If you rely on transactions with 0 confirmations, the attacker can just filter out certain transactions to execute a double-spending attack.
• Low-latency encryption/anonymization of Bitcoin's transmissions (With Tor, JAP, etc.) can be defeated relatively easy with a timing attack if you're connected to several of the attacker's nodes and the
  attacker is watching your transmissions at your ISP.

Bitcoin makes these attacks more difficult by only making an outbound connection to one IP address per /16 (x.y.0.0). Incoming connections are unlimited and unregulated, but this is generally only a problem in the anonymity case, where you're probably already unable to accept incoming connections.

Looking for suspiciously low network hash-rates may help prevent the second one.

Did the ignore.

Perhaps the end of the following linked comment qualifies to demonstrate the capacity to abstract a problem to grasp the generative essence:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2165884

Essentially we can't violate Coase's Theorem.

I'm liking this thread more and more, as we get away from the elephant of cartelization, which I believe less relevant, and move toward the things like allowing for drastically more peers (your HDD ideas) and best of all, better blockchain anonymity.

Green folks, read before talking in here... (probably still just watch for a long while): https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses ... If at least 95% of that isn't pretty crystal clear, read more.

AnonyMint, I still haven't quite decided your ratio of crazy to smart yet, but in any case, don't worry about Sigma tests and stuff. If it helps, I'm an ISPE Fellow... No need for people to prove things. Colorblind folks cannot have the color red PROVEN to them, no matter the credentials of the individual telling them. Anyhow, there is an awesome little IGNORE link in the forum avatar section of posters. Click it. I clicked it for mobodick a week ago, because he was shitting up the thread and making it unreadable -- feels good, man.

Carry on good sir...

Okay I am are good. Thank you.

I believe it to be impossible to force in any protocol that can be imagined.

See, this is exactly why it is impossible to have a normal discussion with you.
You claim a fact, then link information that does not support that fact and then you point out "See, it's right there!".

Nowhere in the article are robots or computers mentioned and according to this article it is indias failure to educate their new workers to normal standards (skilled worker) so they at least can prosper in simple factory work.
They didn't so the conditions in those factories are bad.
But not a hint about robots or computers taking over.

Moreover, you do not present clear proof for your obsessions, you create your own personal 'proof' from fragments of media (mostly opinion blogs, it seems). Only your brain makes the connections and as i said before it is acting very selectively about what information it cosiders. It seems like you haven't trained your internet-bullshit detector well enough and have fallen into the informational schemes of internet weirdos. In my view this makes you miss the actual complexities and you obsess over (sometimes minor) influences of parts of the whole.

You see only statist control without seing the benefits it brought to society.
You see computers and robots as a threat without seing the benefits it brought to society.
You see mass production as a threat without seing the benefits to society.
You say that there is this 78 year cycle that ends in war without seing that war was conducted throughout the perceived 78 year cycle.

One thing you COMPLETELY miss is that disruptive technologies are a normal thing that happen every few years.
The actual technological cycles at the moment are severely compressed due to the exponential nature of scietific development. Technological development doesn't follow these 78 year cycles. It used to take centuries for anything significant to come through. Now you can read about scientific breakthroughs on a weekly basis.

So of course we will need to adjust. We are in a constant state of change and have been for decenia. Every generation has a different world presented to them. And the changes are accelerating. This is completely unknown territory. Never before in history did humanity have it so well, for instance. Go back only a few hundred years and you are at the end of centuries of shit life for almost all people. Work hard for your lord untill you die and be glad that you got some food underway. Wife is pregnant from the land lord and your life expectany about 30 years. Normal life for a commoner in the past.
Things have gotten a lot better since we started with the technological revolutions and despite the challenges and (various) social disruptions we managed to make society better with every step.

For someone claiming to have near genius IQ you sure as hell fail to see important movements while obsessing on others.

In addition to anonymizing the IP of the injection point using MUTE concepts in every peer that transmits transactions, there is an idea to anonymize the blockchain:

http://blog.cryptographyengineering.com/2013/04/zerocoin-making-bitcoin-anonymous.html

I have perhaps revived my interest in my harddisk space Proof-of-Work, in marriage to a simplified Decrit's proposal:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2151850
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.2140631

(read two consecutive posts of mine at each of above links)

The point is we don't eliminate every chance for the socialization (cartels/govt) of money (don't require Utopia). We improve Bitcoin in every facet instead, including marking cartelization more difficult (99% versus 51% attack).

The point of scolding the dolt, was to admonish him to ask a question instead of asserting his technical ignorance as fact. Go through the entire thread, I was very careful to be humble and not assert my ego, but mobodick is testing my patience with his spamming of the thread. Mobodick is encouraging the other dolts to come out of the woodwork and make idiotic proclamations with no technical justification nor correctness, because dolts tend to think other dolts are winning the debate, because none of them comprehend.

The technical explanation is that only the winning peer for each block can add transactions, and every peer must respect this, otherwise there is no consensus and thus there could be multiple versions of the record of spends. Multiple records of spends, means spenders can spend more than once. If the cartel has made mining unprofitable by driving difficulty to insane levels, then they will win all the blocks (or at least so often that your transactions are delayed for say days or weeks by those miners who offer resources at a loss as a charity to society).

That is so elemental that anyone who doesn't understand that, doesn't even understand the basic theory of the Bitcoin algorithm. Thus they shouldn't dare try to make any proclamation about it. Novices should ask questions instead.

I base my IQ measurements on tests such as the following one:

http://www.sigmasociety.com/sigma_teste/sigma_teste_eng.asp

For example, I rapidly solved question #22.

It is instructive that you missed the part about the manufacturing is leaving China back to USA where it is now highly automated.

I wish you wouldn't spam the thread with so many multiple instances of low comprehension.

Your new questions are valid, but not where you want to force me repeat arguments already made.


I already pointed out to you on the prior page of this thread, that it is the shift from old employment skills to new ones and statism delaying that adjustment by feeding people debt, that is the cause of the decades of unemployment, war and destruction.

Then the statism is destroyed (debt is erased) and the youth rebuild with their skills in the new technology. This will happen now until the reset in 2033.

Happens every 78 years. I am not going to explain it further. It is up to you to go do some research. I provided the pointers.

A supporting sliver of data is that very high youth unemployment (especially in Europe) because the boomers have the statism captured and award themselves government jobs and aid.

The youth will win after 2033, when the boomers will be put down into debt implosion.

Note I am not asserting that there is only one cycle, or one phenomenon. There surely exists a plurality of overlapping cycles and phenomena. And I am not asserting that the CLEARLY REPEATING THROUGHOUT HISTORY 78 year real estate boom+bust cycle (which I have associated with technological shift) is proven unequivocally-- almost everything in life is a theory backed by reasonable evidence, until disproven. Macro economics is particularly complex, because most likely is a multivariate solution space.

Note it is 52 years boom, followed by 26 years bust. In the USA, that was bust 1929 to 1955 (reset after WW2), then boom to 2007, now bust to 2033. (we have a 3-5 year bounce now due to global capital confidence cycle model where capital is rushing into the dollar as Europe and Japan near implosion first). The cycle repeats going back to 1700s at least. I didn't check it before that, but Martin Armstrong claims he has.

Here again is the link to the Case-Schiller housing price chart for past century, to illustrate this:

http://www.coolpage.com/commentary/economic/shelby/Housing%20Recovery%20Illusion.html

Note the dates don't exactly agree with the 1929 to 1955, because the USA was not in isolation. Europe had its cycle start earlier and capital was fleeing Europe into the USA after WW1 which caused the bounce before the crash again after 1929.

Also I am not sure if we can trust the price action in dollars in 1910 as comparative to the price action after the Fed was created in 1913. Before that the money was gold and after that the money was fiat. When gold is money, we must usually adjust prices for deflation and vice versa when fiat is money. So this can be another reason the housing crash appears to start in 1915 instead of 1929, when the economy truly crashed. We know the 1920s were booms times, and it was because gold was flooding into the USA.

Similarly we know the USA was bleeding jobs much earlier than 2007, and it was debt that was holding the economy up and prices may have peaked sooner if we used a non-liar inflation stats such as http://shadowstats.com

And this was due to global flows of capital and jobs to China for example.

Capital tries to flow where it can earn the highest short term return.

In any case, anyone who argues that we don't have massive low skills unemployment in the world today, due to the requirement for skills being raised by the computer, is in denial.

The unemployment is not just because of too much debt and failed policies, because today I could offer them a job if they knew how to program a computer. But they don't. The debt just enabled these people to stay longer in the jobs with no future. Without the debt, they would have been forced much sooner to reeducate.

Just read this about India's low education and labor laws, means most modern manufacturing there is done by robots not human labor:

http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21577372-how-india-throwing-away-worlds-biggest-economic-opportunity-what-waste

The computer has enabled routing around these failed statist policies.

Interesting, but no.

No, but mass production created incredible amounts of opportunities for people.
The automobile was not produced by cottage industry.
Note how much the world advanced due to automobiles.

Still no figures? Thought so.

Ok, explain the technical issue then.  I'm very interested, especially the concensus block.
I don't question your intellectual capabilities.  Your IQ can be up there, your ego clearly is.

OMG so many scary stories.
You must be a GENIUS!

You link to whiners that whine about workers disappearing in the US.
Well guess what! The Chinese have your work now! Cheap chinese labor is the real disruptive force. China as an economic power is a disruptive force (as has been predicted for decenia).
Funny how you didn't notice this but instead blame computers for it. Thu tukkin mu jub!
Whine some more and maybe the chinese will employ you... if you are willing to work as hard as they do for the same wage.

Most of the US labour that disappeared in recent years is now in chinese hands.
China owns the US. It has nothing to do with computers taking over.
US sold its ass and now it has nothing to sit with.
If anything then technology and computers are the only thing preventing the complete downfall of the US.
Remove hollywood, silicon valley and some other key technology players and the US becomes a husk hollowed out by years of canibalism.

Some links on the technology disruption going on now:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/the-mystery-of-the-incredible-shrinking-american-worker/273033/
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50138922n
http://www.financialsense.com/contributors/michael-shedlock/fed-cannot-win-fight-against-robots
http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4817&cpage=1#comment-395423
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/02/3d-printed-car/
http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/we-are-witnessing-the-slow-tortuous-death-of-the-american-worker
http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/148220-ibm-makes-watson-the-size-of-a-pizza-box-starts-offering-cloud-access-to-doctors
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2013/03/07/the-jobless-recovery/
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article39495.html

I AM NOT BEING PAID TO CONVINCE YOU, AND I REALLY DON'T CARE. I WILL NOT PUT MORE EFFORT INTO CONVINCING YOU. TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT.


And I already stated that upthread:

---

Are you denying that mass production destroyed cottage industry and caused massive unemployment during the first 1/3 of the 1900s?

If not, then please realize that didn't happen until the network effects kicked in from the 1st and 2nd industrial revolutions.

The network effects from the computer revolution are accelerating now.

Examples, 3D printing, completely automated distribution warehouses, voice recognition customer support bots, open source, the internet, Etc..

The unemployed in the USA were in manufacturing, paperwork, customer support, real estate related, etc.. The real estate bubble was the statist delay of adjustment (and expanding government with Fannie and Ginnie Mae, etc), by lowering interest rates to keep the economy growing while the other listed jobs were being lost.

Nice bender