Quote
Executive Director of Bitcoin Foundation is incompetent and dangerous to Bitcoin
so.... what are you going to do about it?
Topic: Executive Director of Bitcoin Foundation is incompetent and dangerous to Bitcoin - page 3. (Read 6086 times)
September 28, 2012, 09:37:31 PM
so.... what are you going to do about it?
September 28, 2012, 09:31:57 PM
I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way.
Satoshi only used the word "anonymous" once his paper, and it was regarding the anonymity of the key, not the user. There's nothing in his abstract or in his conclusion that even hints that the anonymity of the user is a primary concern for the network. Your anonymity is up to you, not to the Bitcoin protocol. It's like using email and expecting SMTP itself to provide anonymity.
He did suggest that people generate a new key pair for each transaction as a way to increase privacy.
As for your inflammatory and immature title, I really don't know what to say.
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.As for your inflammatory and immature title
I do believe that the person holding the titels Executive Director, Chairman of the Board and Treasurer has to be almost impeccable otherwise he is incompetent and dangerous. As for the rest of your post it is kind of off topic because it neither contradict nor supports the original post, maybe it is implying something but you need to be more clear on that.
September 28, 2012, 09:18:25 PM
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,
My apologies, I wasn't doing that on purpose.
I just didn't think your second part warranted my response because I had no arguments with it.
However now I do.
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, 09:12:34 PM
Staying within Satoshi's vision is a clear limit on power.
Peter Vessenes has no such limit, what he said contradicts satoshi's vision that it should be easy to make anonymous Bitcoin transactionFor 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.
I am starting to see it's in Hazek's way. It is nice to have powerful organization to do things for you, but it becomes very annoying the moment its goals is different than what you think is right.
No, Peter knows exactly what mixing service is.
Basically what you just did is assume he doesent know, because he did not mention it.
He never said " because he thinks it is okay if everyone knows your financial information", again you make things up and assume.
Stop it.
Your argument is therefore stupid and has no bearing.
This is the problem of Hazek, Atlas, and the others. You all assume things without asking first and then go cry and go nuts
Everyone needs to relax, have a conversation. The world is not ending tomorrow.
-Charlie
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, what about the second part of the first bullet point, did he know about Automatic Coin Mixing Idea or P2P coin mixing proposals?
What about the contradiction to satoshi's vision?
To address your points:
No, Peter knows exactly what mixing service is.
Probably I should have word it differently: Peter Vessenes doesn't know about mixing services or suggests that it doesn't help to execute anonymous bitcoin transactionsHe never said " because he thinks it is okay if everyone knows your financial information", again you make things up and assume.
If he would have said it then I would have quoted him directly, my wording was -"because he thinks it is okay if everyone knows your financial information". This is a reasonable assumption on my part because Peter Vessenes suggested that it's okay for Bitcoin users to have no privacy. 
September 28, 2012, 09:03:59 PM
I think the Bitcoin anonymous thing is overblown and a bit of a myth, by the way.
Satoshi only used the word "anonymous" once his paper, and it was regarding the anonymity of the key, not the user. There's nothing in his abstract or in his conclusion that even hints that the anonymity of the user is a primary concern for the network. Your anonymity is up to you, not to the Bitcoin protocol. It's like using email and expecting SMTP itself to provide anonymity.
He did suggest that people generate a new key pair for each transaction as a way to increase privacy.
As for your inflammatory and immature title, I really don't know what to say.
September 28, 2012, 08:45:52 PM
Staying within Satoshi's vision is a clear limit on power.
Peter Vessenes has no such limit, what he said contradicts satoshi's vision that it should be easy to make anonymous Bitcoin transactionFor 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.
I am starting to see it's in Hazek's way. It is nice to have powerful organization to do things for you, but it becomes very annoying the moment its goals is different than what you think is right.
No, Peter knows exactly what mixing service is.
Basically what you just did is assume he doesent know, because he did not mention it.
He never said " because he thinks it is okay if everyone knows your financial information", again you make things up and assume.
Stop it.
Your argument is therefore stupid and has no bearing.
This is the problem of Hazek, Atlas, and the others. You all assume things without asking first and then go cry and go nuts
Everyone needs to relax, have a conversation. The world is not ending tomorrow.
-Charlie
September 28, 2012, 08:27:38 PM
Seems fine to me.
September 28, 2012, 08:12:43 PM
Staying within Satoshi's vision is a clear limit on power.
Peter Vessenes has no such limit, what he said contradicts satoshi's vision that it should be easy to make anonymous Bitcoin transactionFor 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.
I am starting to see it's in Hazek's way. It is nice to have powerful organization to do things for you, but it becomes very annoying the moment its goals is different than what you think is right.
Jump to: