The OP is an idiot and don't really care to participate in the rantings and ravings of loos.
If you feel general dissatisfaction about someone's posts but can't or do not want to form coherent argument than you can use "Ignore" button, and so am I.
Topic: Executive Director of Bitcoin Foundation is incompetent and dangerous to Bitcoin - page 2. (Read 6088 times)
September 29, 2012, 01:26:31 AM
If you feel general dissatisfaction about someone's posts but can't or do not want to form coherent argument than you can use "Ignore" button, and so am I.
September 29, 2012, 01:18:39 AM
Satoshi was actually hugely anti-establishment, anti-bank with libertarian tendencies but noooooo, Bitcoin is somehow non-political regardless of why Satoshi made it.
He did say "attractive to the libertarian perspective" as if he wasn't one, frankly. It could be he only needed the anarchists and libertarians for the early adoption benefit.
September 29, 2012, 01:12:53 AM
What's the big deal about anonymity, anyway? If you're so concerned about anonymity, then you're going to have a problem when you go to...oh, I don't know...the store?
Do you know what I do when a Bitcoin transaction gets complicated or shady? I call the person. We talk. We work things out. It's fine.
The 'anonymity' side of Bitcoin isn't really about anonymity at all -- it's about making sure that you're in control of your financial identity instead of a 3rd party controlling it for you.
Anonymity is important to many users. Some perhaps for legality reasons but also in many cases because of political reasons or cases where something shouldn't be illegal. Contributing to organizations that are blacklisted, eg. wikileaks is only one such example. Trading in places like Argentina or China or Iran. While these may not be very workable in many cases today I think people want Bitcoin to be useful for that in the future. Throwing it away because some group wants to monetize Bitcoin today is something I'm very much against.Do you know what I do when a Bitcoin transaction gets complicated or shady? I call the person. We talk. We work things out. It's fine.
The 'anonymity' side of Bitcoin isn't really about anonymity at all -- it's about making sure that you're in control of your financial identity instead of a 3rd party controlling it for you.
Part of the whole reason for Bitcoin was to ensure people could transact without restraint, everywhere. In many places there are no guarantees of freedom to do so and anonymity is the only way to allow it to happen. By not taking it seriously we once again misconstrue the needs of the general USA user with those of the worldwide Bitcoin users. The comments of the foundation director make it clear he sees Bitcoin thru the needs of Coinbase and US based money transfer. Perhaps the foundation should be called The American Bitcoin Foundation?
September 29, 2012, 12:48:45 AM
What's the big deal about anonymity, anyway? If you're so concerned about anonymity, then you're going to have a problem when you go to...oh, I don't know...the store?
Do you know what I do when a Bitcoin transaction gets complicated or shady? I call the person. We talk. We work things out. It's fine.
The 'anonymity' side of Bitcoin isn't really about anonymity at all -- it's about making sure that you're in control of your financial identity instead of a 3rd party controlling it for you.
Do you know what I do when a Bitcoin transaction gets complicated or shady? I call the person. We talk. We work things out. It's fine.
The 'anonymity' side of Bitcoin isn't really about anonymity at all -- it's about making sure that you're in control of your financial identity instead of a 3rd party controlling it for you.
September 29, 2012, 12:46:09 AM
WRT Tor and anonymity, it is still not easy:
1) Protocol fingerprint shows you are using the bitcoin protocol
2) If coins are not mixed perfectly, you can be vulnerable to network analysis.
September 29, 2012, 12:41:08 AM
The OP is an idiot and don't really care to participate in the rantings and ravings of loos.
Still I thought I would correct a factual mistake by BkkCoin. The Satoshi client doesn't send change back to an existing address, it always sends change to an unused address from the address pool.
Still I thought I would correct a factual mistake by BkkCoin. The Satoshi client doesn't send change back to an existing address, it always sends change to an unused address from the address pool.
September 29, 2012, 12:26:37 AM
It is pretty easy to both create wallet addresses and generate transactions completely offline. Then all you need to do is push a transaction and if done with a site where minimal if any logs are kept then use is completely anonymous. Just make sure it is not a honeypot. Pandora's box has been opened.
Not entirely true. You need to also be very careful about how you use your addresses. Any time you pay to or receive from another person you need to be aware they could be identified and queried about the transaction. Any cross-links between your own addresses will tie them to such a possibly known transaction as well. Right now most clients don't provide a good indication of address connectedness. You have to manage this yourself.As an example, the std client will send change back to one of your addresses when you pay someone. So if you want to be anonymous you need to ensure the change doesn't get returned to an address that was used in some other identifiable transaction. Advanced users previously used coin-control for this (not in the std client), or blockchain.info has features for address selection as well.
Being careless with addresses can lead to identity leakage.
Plus, Matonis being on the board is going to be a big loud and mean privacy pitbull with both bark and bite.
I really hope he is. 
September 29, 2012, 12:11:26 AM
In order to be anonymous using Bitcoin, you need to use Tor...thats a very true statement.
Tor is ancillary and overboard when it comes to Bitcoin privacy.
It is pretty easy to both create wallet addresses and generate transactions completely offline. Then all you need to do is push a transaction and if done with a site where minimal if any logs are kept then use is completely anonymous. Just make sure it is not a honeypot. Pandora's box has been opened.
Plus, Matonis being on the board is going to be a big loud and mean privacy pitbull with both bark and bite.
September 28, 2012, 11:57:07 PM
Honestly, you may be able to claim what Satoshi's vision was because he wrote it out for us, but you don't know what Peter's vision is. Furthermore if you did, Peters vision is not the same of the foundations.
I sure hope it is otherwise he shouldn't be executive director. It would clearly be a self-declared conflict of interest. 
September 28, 2012, 10:58:28 PM
Honestly, you may be able to claim what Satoshi's vision was because he wrote it out for us, but you don't know what Peter's vision is. Furthermore if you did, Peters vision is not the same of the foundations.
Very true, and unless he clarifies we can only make educated guess. And I would like to point that I do not imply that his opinion shared by the rest of the people involved in Bitcoin Foundation who I deeply respect.Good point, he should clarify this ASAP!
Thanks for pointing that out, you did not have to, but you did and I respect you for that.
-Charlie
September 28, 2012, 10:55:26 PM
Honestly, you may be able to claim what Satoshi's vision was because he wrote it out for us, but you don't know what Peter's vision is. Furthermore if you did, Peters vision is not the same of the foundations.
Very true, and unless he clarifies we can only make educated guess. And I would like to point that I do not imply that his opinion shared by the rest of the people involved in Bitcoin Foundation who I deeply respect. September 28, 2012, 10:41:26 PM
I've already explain this, but he did not respond yet
I am actually a human being with only one head.Satoshi never said Bitcoins were anonymous
Satoshi said "Participants can be anonymous."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09959.html
Satoshi said "Participants can be anonymous."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09959.html
And satoshi's vision was to help Participants to be anonymous
For that level of anonymity you need to connect through TOR, which will be possible with version 0.2, which is only a few weeks away. I'll post TOR instructions at that time.
But Peter Vessenes doesn't share that vision.
Sorry I did not give you enough time to respond.
Honestly, you may be able to claim what Satoshi's vision was because he wrote it out for us, but you don't know what Peter's vision is. Furthermore if you did, Peters vision is not the same of the foundations.
September 28, 2012, 10:39:37 PM
Satoshi was actually hugely anti-establishment, anti-bank with libertarian tendencies but noooooo, Bitcoin is somehow non-political regardless of why Satoshi made it.
September 28, 2012, 10:37:21 PM
I've already explain this, but he did not respond yet
I am actually a human being with only one head.Satoshi never said Bitcoins were anonymous
Satoshi said "Participants can be anonymous."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09959.html
Satoshi said "Participants can be anonymous."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09959.html
And satoshi's vision was to help Participants to be anonymous
For that level of anonymity you need to connect through TOR, which will be possible with version 0.2, which is only a few weeks away. I'll post TOR instructions at that time.
But Peter Vessenes doesn't share that vision.
September 28, 2012, 10:36:16 PM
Quote
Executive Director of Bitcoin Foundation is incompetent and dangerous to Bitcoin
so.... what are you going to do about it?
I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way.
This is not my quote, I didn't say it.
This is not my quote, I didn't say it.
I know. I quoted it to back up what he was saying based on Satoshi's paper.
maybe it is implying something
I implied nothing. I plainly stated that your title is inflammatory and immature.
Perhaps you need to re-read the white paper and show me exactly where Satoshi said that your anonymity was of concern to the network.
Quote from: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10mezg/iam_peter_vessenes_executive_director_of_the/c6eruux
The Foundation's core values include openness and transparency. I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way. Every bitcoin transaction links two addresses; often people can be determined from those addresses.
At any rate, we wish to make sure you can't stuff the ballot box during voting, and we wish civil productive discourse among our members, so we need real names and addresses.
If you just want to support us without joining, you can always send money to our vanity donation address: 1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
The important part is in bold, it suggests that people using Bitcoin should not expect privacy at all.At any rate, we wish to make sure you can't stuff the ballot box during voting, and we wish civil productive discourse among our members, so we need real names and addresses.
If you just want to support us without joining, you can always send money to our vanity donation address: 1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
Read https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity
What is dangerous is telling an activist in an authoritarian country "bitcoin is anonymous" without further detail. They believe you, and then get arrested or worse.
Satoshi never claimed bitcoins were anonymous. They are pseudonymous, and with a lot of work, can be mostly anonymous.
September 28, 2012, 09:56:24 PM
If Bitcoin went up in price and adoption increased while privacy remained unimproved, would that be bad for Bitcoin? Seems like that's the agenda...
September 28, 2012, 09:54:23 PM
Quote from: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10mezg/iam_peter_vessenes_executive_director_of_the/c6eruux
The Foundation's core values include openness and transparency. I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way. Every bitcoin transaction links two addresses; often people can be determined from those addresses.
At any rate, we wish to make sure you can't stuff the ballot box during voting, and we wish civil productive discourse among our members, so we need real names and addresses.
If you just want to support us without joining, you can always send money to our vanity donation address: 1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
The important part is in bold, it suggests that people using Bitcoin should not expect privacy at all.At any rate, we wish to make sure you can't stuff the ballot box during voting, and we wish civil productive discourse among our members, so we need real names and addresses.
If you just want to support us without joining, you can always send money to our vanity donation address: 1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
Read https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity
What is dangerous is telling an activist in an authoritarian country "bitcoin is anonymous" without further detail. They believe you, and then get arrested or worse.
Satoshi never claimed bitcoins were anonymous. They are pseudonymous, and with a lot of work, can be mostly anonymous.
I've already explain this, but he did not respond yet
I actually anticipated that kind of reply, this is exactly the same thing you are doing in another thread, replying to only part of the post you are comfortable with,
Satoshi never said Bitcoins were anonymous
Satoshi said "Participants can be anonymous."
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg09959.html
Therefore, how can Peter be wrong about something that is true?
In order to be anonymous using Bitcoin, you need to use Tor...thats a very true statement.
-Charlie
September 28, 2012, 09:47:27 PM
Quote from: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/10mezg/iam_peter_vessenes_executive_director_of_the/c6eruux
The Foundation's core values include openness and transparency. I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way. Every bitcoin transaction links two addresses; often people can be determined from those addresses.
At any rate, we wish to make sure you can't stuff the ballot box during voting, and we wish civil productive discourse among our members, so we need real names and addresses.
If you just want to support us without joining, you can always send money to our vanity donation address: 1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
The important part is in bold, it suggests that people using Bitcoin should not expect privacy at all.At any rate, we wish to make sure you can't stuff the ballot box during voting, and we wish civil productive discourse among our members, so we need real names and addresses.
If you just want to support us without joining, you can always send money to our vanity donation address: 1BTCorgHwCg6u2YSAWKgS17qUad6kHmtQW
Read https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity
What is dangerous is telling an activist in an authoritarian country "bitcoin is anonymous" without further detail. They believe you, and then get arrested or worse.
Satoshi never claimed bitcoins were anonymous. They are pseudonymous, and with a lot of work, can be mostly anonymous.
September 28, 2012, 09:44:21 PM
Your thread title is a bit overblown. Theres nothing stopping you making a version of bitcoin that aims for more anonymity.
September 28, 2012, 09:43:59 PM
I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way.
This is not my quote, I didn't say it.
This is not my quote, I didn't say it.
I know. I quoted it to back up what he was saying based on Satoshi's paper.
maybe it is implying something
I implied nothing. I plainly stated that your title is inflammatory and immature.
Perhaps you need to re-read the white paper and show me exactly where Satoshi said that your anonymity was of concern to the network.
Jump to: