Topic: Bitcoin: The dream of Cypherpunks, libertarians and crypto-anarchists - page 2. (Read 3482 times)

While many of the innovations in the space are new, they’re built on decades of work that led to this point. By tracing this history, we can understand the motivations behind the movement that spawned bitcoin and share its vision for the future.

Thanks cygan for this friendly bump and also for the short movie!

I believe this is the shortest Bitcoin documentary I ever watched  It has only 4 minutes and 37 seconds yet it managed to capture some interesting parts from history of Bitcoin! That was fun to watch 

Thank you for your suggested links, BitcoinFX! As usual, you bring a lot of precious information for all those interested about Bitcoin, its history and about remarkable figures of the past which contributed one way or another for bringing to light what came to be known as Bitcoin!

[...]

we are human and are allowed to have different opinions, views and choices,  now you said you have cut off with bank since 2018 but from 2017 or so downward the banks have served you and provide you with all financial services at the time when you needed them most.... now you don't need them anymore it is your choice.

One of the reason why many people criticise banks and payment system like PayPal is because of their high fees...

You are in vain to rejoice at this PayPal announcement, because this announcement does not carry anything useful for the crypto. You read their announcement in general, they offer centralized storage of cryptocurrency, without providing private keys, and this is contrary to the principles of cryptocurrency. They are also going to provide educational materials for those who are newbie to cryptocurrency. And what happens: PayPal will breed a huge number of misguided newbies who will think that centralized storage of cryptocurrencies is okay. This not normal. So PayPal at this stage cannot bring any benefit to Bitcoin and its community, in principle, benefit only to Bitcoin holders, because the price is flying up against the background of this announcement.

PayPal did not give a damn about the rule for any crypto user: Not your keys, not your coins and is developing another centralized trash heap in which your funds can be blocked or censored. They have such a reputation, they often did this in the field of traditional payments.

if all individuals in the world have absolute control over their funds i can't imagine what it will result to

Yes, I finished with banks in 2018 and no longer have to deal with them, I have cards of services that support cryptocurrency and are available for most ATMs. Yes, they have higher fees, but the card will not be blocked along with the funds, as I had before when I tried to withdraw cryptocurrency to bank cards. And a person will learn cryptocurrency if he wants to understand what cryptocurrency is for, who created it, etc..  And most people are not interested in it at all, they see bitcoin as a means of profit, that's all. As a means of speculation.. And they don't want to get to the bottom of it at all, it's easier for them to give their coins to someone than to know about wallets, transactions and so on.

PayPal custodian service will be calculated for such. And in training, of course, there is a threat, it's better for beginners to study independent sources of information than from interested centralized guys from PayPal, who can answer: Nothing personal is a business.

Awareness comes during the learning of new information, and let these newcomers study the right information than prepared by such as PayPal.

You are in vain to rejoice at this PayPal announcement, because this announcement does not carry anything useful for the crypto. You read their announcement in general, they offer centralized storage of cryptocurrency, without providing private keys, and this is contrary to the principles of cryptocurrency. They are also going to provide educational materials for those who are newbie to cryptocurrency. And what happens: PayPal will breed a huge number of misguided newbies who will think that centralized storage of cryptocurrencies is okay. This not normal. So PayPal at this stage cannot bring any benefit to Bitcoin and its community, in principle, benefit only to Bitcoin holders, because the price is flying up against the background of this announcement.

PayPal did not give a damn about the rule for any crypto user: Not your keys, not your coins and is developing another centralized trash heap in which your funds can be blocked or censored. They have such a reputation, they often did this in the field of traditional payments.

This is basically the beginning of the end for Paypal, and this move serves as their confession that they know it too

You read their announcement in general, they offer centralized storage of cryptocurrency, without providing private keys, and this is contrary to the principles of cryptocurrency.

And what happens: PayPal will breed a huge number of misguided newbies who will think that centralized storage of cryptocurrencies is okay.

So PayPal at this stage cannot bring any benefit to Bitcoin and its community, in principle, benefit only to Bitcoin holders, because the price is flying up against the background of this announcement.

PayPal did not give a damn about the rule for any crypto user: Not your keys, not your coins

...snip...

Seriously i think the days of banning crypto are behind us, with this new development of PayPal providing crypto service to it's customers starting with USA customers, i want to believe the negative perception about crpto in general is reducing otherwise while will a company like PayPal decide to support crypto, now they have realize that the use of digital currency is inevitable, the more government device a means to eradicate crypto the more the awareness grow,
it really doesn't matter what the government do or say, the fact remains crypto is here and not going anywhere, it is time they start to have a re-think, make plans towards crypto acceptance, it is said "if you cant beat the you join them"  government are losing control.

Of course, I'm interested in this theme. I'll do it soon.

And about freedom, yes, governments clearly do not like this idea of ​​decentralization, what they are not subject to, they are trying to ban. I am convinced that all these bans on cryptocurrencies with the explanation that cryptocurrencies contribute to terrorism and the sale of drugs are just an excuse, the real reason is that governments are losing control and banks too, and it is not beneficial for them. After all, it is clear that terrorism, financial fraud and the sale of drugs interact much more with traditional finance, then let's ban fiat. I support the idea of ​​decentralizing and storing my funds with me with my keys, and not with some third-party who can take my money at any time.

If we are to neuter government power still further, removing their controlling grasp on ID systems is essential. While PGP is not perfect, it is highly functional and proven in several important ways, and over a huge stretch of time (essentially since the modern commercialization of the internet in the 1st half of the 1990's). If we are to continue the manifestation of crypto-anarchy and cypher punk culture into the mainstream (in which Bitcoin is the 1st major success), then understanding the need for decentralized IDs, that allow us to prove who we are and that our messages are authentically our own, then PGP (or some successor tech) will be inevitably a part of it.

All this KYC nonsense is based on the idea of the Four Horsemen of Infocalypse. Which are money launderers, drug lords, terrorists and pedophiles. The idea is greatly debated by Julian Assange in his book Cypherpunks: Freedom and the Future of the Internet. Other great minds are also part of the book, such as Jacob Appelbaum (TOR developer), Andy Müller (a hacker which is a member of Chaos Computer Club (CCC)) and Jérémie Zimmermann (co-founder of La Quadrature du Net).

Governs are emphasizing that all these decisions are based on combating these four horsemen, but it's a lie. The problems determined by the horsemen of infocalypse can be mitigated with other ways, not with KYC. Besides, make sure to read also 1miau's topic Why KYC is extremely dangerous – and useless which is complementary to OP.

...snip...

If we are to neuter government power still further, removing their controlling grasp on ID systems is essential. While PGP is not perfect, it is highly functional and proven in several important ways, and over a huge stretch of time (essentially since the modern commercialization of the internet in the 1st half of the 1990's). If we are to continue the manifestation of crypto-anarchy and cypher punk culture into the mainstream (in which Bitcoin is the 1st major success), then understanding the need for decentralized IDs, that allow us to prove who we are and that our messages are authentically our own, then PGP (or some successor tech) will be inevitably a part of it.

Already government power is weakening, and that of their self-emancipated neo-serfs increasing (hence their desperate attempts to reassert that power in exploiting the circumstances of the 2020 pandemic). They are clearly afraid of what will happen. Trust between people is being attacked, and cryptographic tools (like Bitcoin or PGP) are among many powerful tools we can use to make sure they cannot attack decentralized power.

This is a very interesting topic.  If a solution was found, a much better, easier, more convenient implementation of Bitcoin would be possible.

Originally, a coin can be just a chain of signatures.  With a timestamp service, the old ones could be dropped eventually before there's too much backtrace fan-out, or coins could be kept individually or in denominations.  It's the need to check for the absence of double-spends that requires global knowledge of all transactions.

The challenge is, how do you prove that no other spends exist?  It seems a node must know about all transactions to be able to verify that.  If it only knows the hash of the in/outpoints, it can't check the signatures to see if an outpoint has been spent before.  Do you have any ideas on this?

It's hard to think of how to apply zero-knowledge-proofs in this case.

We're trying to prove the absence of something, which seems to require knowing about all and checking that the something isn't included.

Technology offered a great weapon to the govern and it started to use it at full capacity, in order to have full control, mainly through agencies such as NSA. Governs' permanent hunger for information about citizen became a hunger for big data: each individual is conditioned by govern-issued documents. You can not give birth without a govern-issued ID, you can not get married without a govern-issued ID, you can not die without a govern-issued ID, you can not prove your identity without a govern-issued ID, you can not access hospitals without a govern-issued ID and so on. And all this information is recorded in databases, which are controlled by various arms of the state; ultimately, they are controlled by the state.

During these harsh times, in 1975, Whitfield Diffie invented the public-key cryptography, bringing the brilliant tool to the public. The govern reacted, offering its help to "keep secure" people's private keys. This never happened and from these moment the crypto wars have begun. In 1977 RSA encryption algorithm was invented by Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Leonard Adleman; the algorithm was using the public-key cryptography. NSA's next move was to ban public access to Diffie's invention and the export of encryption algorithms outside the US. NSA director Bobby Inman became worried because people could access encryption technology which, until that point in time, was used only by the agencies. A 1993 article from Wired leaked an address sent by Inman in 1979, warning that "non-governmental cryptologic activity and publication [...] poses clear risks to the national security". The encryption algorithms were considered classified information and protected by Federal Regulations, such as ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations, 22 CFR 121-128). Exporting them could lead to 10 years in jail. As a response, the public printed a few lines of the RSA code on t-shirts and the agency warned that wearing these kind of t-shirts while traveling outside the US or exporting them would mean jail time for the "offenders", as these kind of t-shirts were considered "munitions". Those wearing tattoos with RSA algorithm were also considered as offenders. Maybe that was the first time when the govern feared that it may lost the control. This fear can be seen in the name of the address issued by Inman: "iSky is falling".

John Gilmore, a brave young man, stood tall in front of the agency. The same Wired article quotes him emphasizing: "Show us. Show the public how your ability to violate the privacy of any citizen has prevented a major disaster. They're abridging the freedom and privacy of all citizens—to defend us against a bogeyman that they will not explain. The decision to literally trade away our privacy is one that must be made by the whole society, not made unilaterally by a military spy agency."

I am sometimes frightened by messages from newcomers to the crypto industry, when they are happy that another bank has started accepting cryptocurrencies for storage. This contradicts the idea of ​​a nascent movement where people were against banks and government surveillance for the monetary system to be independent. I honestly don't understand why they are again trying to carry their funds to centralized storage facilities.