[Collection] FUD Papers Debunked | Bitcointalksearch.org

ABCbits

legendary

Activity: 2870

Merit: 7490

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: takuma sato on October 04, 2022, 07:00:00 PM

Im sure there has to be papers that were released to prove if the blocksize wasn't increased BTC would collapse upon itself back then in 2014-2016. BitFury released one but at least considered pros and cons

https://bitfury.com/content/downloads/block-size-1.1.1.pdf

I read that paper long time ago and i don't see how that paper want to tell people "if the blocksize wasn't increased BTC would collapse". The critique of this paper should be it doesn't mention hardware, software and parameter used.

takuma sato

sr. member

Activity: 317

Merit: 448

Im sure there has to be papers that were released to prove if the blocksize wasn't increased BTC would collapse upon itself back then in 2014-2016. BitFury released one but at least considered pros and cons

https://bitfury.com/content/downloads/block-size-1.1.1.pdf

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

I'm not sure about classifying "bitcoin over Tor isn't a good idea" as FUD as it is at worst misguided, since the experiments they did are no longer applicable to newer versions of Bitcoin Core.

n0nce

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 5834

not your keys, not your coins!

Directly inspired by DaveF, the other day, I decided to create a new thread to collect specifically 'FUD Papers' - scientific papers written to create fear, uncertainty and doubt in Bitcoin or related topics, and have one or more links to rebuttals of the core arguments in such papers. As they are used in arguments (e.g. in Bitcoin Discussion) from time to time, this will allow to easily and quickly find the 'rebuttal link' (or quote) instead of having to type it all out over and over again.

Quote from: DaveF on September 30, 2022, 06:54:01 AM

Someone should probably put together a website with a list of links to papers like the OP posted, a one or 2 line summary of what it says, and then a link to an article / post / document as to why it is wrong.
So, when someone comes and does post about it again, all someone else has to do is say no, that's wrong here is why and here is the link.
Just saves time, and discussion and so on.
-Dave

I had no time so far to dig out more instances of such papers, but here's one to start it off. Will update once I come across such occurrences or anyone posts one below!

\|	Paper	\|	URL	\|	Debunked	\|
\|	'Bitcoin over Tor isn’t a good idea'	\|	https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.1054.9020&rep=rep1&type=pdf	\|	https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.61035748	\|
\|	'Bitcoin emissions alone could push global warming above 2°C'	\|	https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328581842_Bitcoin_emissions_alone_could_push_global_warming_above_2C	\|	https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335517778_2019-Dittmar_Praktiknjo-nclimate-supplementpdf	\|

Topic: [Collection] FUD Papers Debunked (Read 204 times)