Topic: Changing signature scheme in bitcoin. (Read 336 times)

Bitcoin as an anarchist means of economic freedom, that is, being able to exchange what you want, without state and law imposing conditions, forbidding it, and taking away taxes from it.   Being able to provide services without being 50% or more taxed on it, or having to have 20 different types of authorisations, licenses, permits etc... and being able to get paid for it, and to pay for it without anyone else, or the state, putting his nose into it, in a kind of parallel, underground economy of dark markets of goods and services, that is too hard and mostly also too small for authorities to penetrate or to bring down.  Being able to finance (subversive) political action through it, being able to entirely corrupt state agents with it, hardly traceable.  The last thing I expected it to become, was a speculative tool for finance !
So I wanted to find out how that happened.  I think I'm slowly getting the picture.  I was visibly blinded too much by my own world picture, delusions and desires to see this, because when I discovered bitcoin for good (somewhere in 2014 - I had heard of it before, but never looked into it) and I talked to a few people around me, they said "ah, yes, that funny speculator's stuff on internet, with which you can make or lose much more money than by gambling on the stock market !".

Just by curiousity, what attracted you to bitcoin, and what would you value in blockchain / coin, or what was your original idea of it ?

To @iamnotback (now BitNet):

I'm not going to reply again to your erroneous "rebuttals" of my arguments, but there was one point you made which is very pertinent, and where I learned something (at last) from those discussions:


This, I recognise, is smart, and I didn't think of the fact that a hashed *public* key, can also serve as a (symmetric) *secret* key in a hash-based signature scheme, without any asymmetric cryptography.  

That doesn't alter much of what I said about the clumsiness of the way that most of the crypto in bitcoin is implemented, where your "rebuttals" (often mixed with insults) weren't of sufficient pertinence for me to consider that they countered much, on the contrary. I'm going to stop discussing that, because after having explained several times, in too long posts, exactly what I meant, you don't seem to put any effort in it to understand them and eventually to point out where I might make mistakes - apart from the smart point you made here above.  As I'm now convinced that psychologically you NEED Satoshi to be an evil genius, I know that there's not much rational discussion to be had further on that topic, which is a pity.  But in any case, thanks for the above point, I (finally) learned something.

As to the future of bitcoin, nobody really knows where it will go, I don't hold a very high opinion on it, and up to now - after having been seriously enthusiastic about it, nothing of significance has convinced me of the opposite, but then, prediction is difficult, especially if it concerns the future, and of course, I can be totally wrong about that.