Pages:
Author

Topic: "Failure to Understand Bitcoin Could Cost Investors Billions" (Bitcoin's flaws) - page 5. (Read 43189 times)

hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
And now our friendly core Bitcoin developer stoops to ad hominem even as he has lost the argument. He isn't even man enough to show respect to someone who showed him his protocol is broken.

This is not the culture of open source. This man should not be entrusted with being a core developer of our world currency.

And he won't be! I guarantee you that.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5665741

Derp.

You just can't resist the ad hominem even after I've shown you were wrong all along about DOS attacks on your protocol.

Sigh.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Appears I was correct and Bitcoin core developer gmaxell was wrong. But he proposed a way to use Zerocoin offchain instead, which might be workable.

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5663322


Two orthogonal issues.
First, an adversary could make a 1 Satoshi input and DOS on the (3) step. You ban that address but adversary has billions more at neglible cost.
I suppose you could set a minimum input amount to avoid this. But still no problem for the adversary, he passes his BTC through a mixer can comes to hit you again and again.
I am sorry to bring you bad news Gregory but with a non-atomic operation you can always be DOS-attacked.  Zerocoin may be the solution?

Transaction fees and confirmation times should slow down the attacker.

As for slowing down, the adversary can have many parallel addresses in play so I don't think so.

Transaction fees might work if they are significant enough. I haven't studied how much the tx fees are in Bitcoin much. I think I read that certain txs can be 0 for some cases?

If the adversary is mixing through CoinJoin transactions (hehe, uses what he also DOS-attacks against itself), then the blockchain tx fee is going to be shared between all parties of the CoinJoin transaction, so could it be insignificant?

Edit: I've just realized the adversary can eliminate the transaction fees too, by spending those banned amounts as he normally would (e.g. day trading), thus he doesn't incur any extra cost.

Edit#2: unless all decentralized CoinJoins share their ban lists (which is quite impractical to achieve as it is the antithesis of decentralization), adversary can just round-robin through them..

So I've won the argument. Checkmate.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Upthread I criticized DarkCoin for not realizing that CoinJoin isn't scalable in decentralized setting because it can be subject to denial-of-service attack, now time to slay another incompetent altcoin HeavyCoin:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5659782

Someone private messaged me to check out HeavyCoin.

Sorry I realize this post will make people angry at me. I am usually the messenger who brings technical reality which is usually bad news because most coin developers are not competent.

Innovations and contributions

  • HEFTY1 - a cryptographic hash function for CPU-only proof-of-work with a small memory footprint

Insufficient technical details. From what I read about their claim of SIMD as an issue. I think they fail to understand the nature of the GPU advantage.

  • Ultra-secure hashing - a secure strategy for using multiple cryptographic hash functions

From the Github page:

  • Temporal Retargeting - multipool protection that goes beyond Kimoto Gravity Well
  • Decentralized Block Reward Voting - the mining schedule and money supply are democratically decided (total supply is still bounded to 128M)

Oh great let the early investors decide to make coins even more rare. This will be a very good experiment to show why democracy is a power vacuum.  Wink
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
This Armstrong is probably the most intelligent person alive in the western world. For refusing to join the PTB, he was put to prison for 12 years in his advanced age.

And they almost killed him in SuperMax prison which in solitary confinement punishment is essentially torture. Wasn't it 7 years?

Armstrong and I (although he didn't admit it was him) debated in email briefly on the subject of if there is a conspiracy at the level of Bilderbergs. He doesn't believe so. He believes the cycle is in control, not them, and they are just dumb. I have a more nuanced view, even though I agree the cycle is control, not us.

He hadn't thought a crypto-currency could overcome the government's power, and had been pushing for term-limits instead as a political solution, but maybe he is starting to realize after he thought it through (as I have)...

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/03/11/marxism-is-a-dead-idea-but-capitalism-freedom-has-never-truly-existed/

...

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.28.4015&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Efficient Accumulators Without Trapdoor Extended Abstract
Tomas Sander

There are some assumptions made when I would need to think more deeply about.

...

On further reading, apparently UFOs are impractical because there isn't an entropy source that can be trusted to be random over such large domains. Please feel free to correct me if I am mistaken about the requirement.

We shift our unreliability of trust from unknowing if someone intercepted the computation of N = PQ to the unreliability of unknowing whether our input entropy could be attacked at any time in the future.

The research paper suggests in "2.1 On the generation of public random strings" to use stock market data, but there is hidden periodicity in the stock market data:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/03/09/research-shocking-there-is-order-in-the-chaos/

Just in case you believe that guy's model is nonsense, then you can try to explain how his cyclic model has predicted (in advance, this isn't just model that fits what happened) everything accurately:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5464897

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5642957
donator
Activity: 1722
Merit: 1036
This Armstrong is probably the most intelligent person alive in the western world. For refusing to join the PTB, he was put to prison for 12 years in his advanced age.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Ah f8ck again, it is worse than $223 trillion, as China's huge shadow economy debt isn't included:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/05/11/number-of-the-week-total-world-debt-load-at-313-of-gdp/

F8ck the coming apocalypse is worse than I previously estimated...

Soooooooooo, I read today that the world's debt amount to $100 trillion.
Wikipedia says that in 2012, the GDP was ~72 trillion. Let's suppose that it's $80 trillion now.

Debt to GDP = 125%

Incorrect. Total debt is $157 trillion in developed countries plus $66 trillion in emerging markets, because is 313% of GDP and the GDP is $72 trillion:

http://www.gfmag.com/tools/global-database/economic-data/11855-total-debt-to-gdp.html#axzz2iu5C4Y4Z

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/05/11/number-of-the-week-total-world-debt-load-at-313-of-gdp/

Chinese corporate debt is the highest in the world as a percentage of GDP:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4337574

Don't forget to add on $1000 trillion of sovereign bond derivatives, and $1000 trillion of unfunded social liabilities.

http://www.indexq.org/economy/gdp.php
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
I revealed it because it expressed a veiled threat that I should be incarcerated for expressing my logic.

Also I did not PM him. I asked him in my public post to not do ad hominem, so he sent me a PM. So I had no agreement with him to have a private discussion. In any case, I wouldn't normally reveal a PM (especially if didn't remove the author's identifying information), but when someone equates debate in a forum with jail time, that is a pattern that needs to be exposed as early as possible. I hope he didn't really mean that.

He sent me another PM and I don't need to reveal it as it was more conciliatory, yet still made a demand of me but it wasn't so unreasonable so I complied in the interest of keeping the discussion on the technical issues.

On this point of freedom-of-speech:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5656543

One of the things that intelligent people do, when they try to determine if Bitcoin is a system with a future, is to read what is written in this forum.  Diversity and variety is good.  Dishonesty and meaness is not good.  Bitcoin is more about freedom than it is about conformity.

Thanks. Good to see that some people still understand:

“Those who would give up Essential Liberty, to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin (one of our founding fathers)

For the increasingly popular viewpoint in AmeriKa:

http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2012/05/those-who-use-this-benjamin-franklin-quote-deserve-not-to-be-taken-seriously.html



It is unfortunate that you see spirited discussion as trolling. You've just provided an example of totalitarianism.

(mathematically the end-game of totalitarian regimes is to ban, i.e. destroy, themselves)

Example:

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/03/11/feinstein-get-what-she-has-dished-out-to-the-world/


True story: When I wrote the above quote, I was specifically thinking Feinstein would end up an example (with her N"s"A apparatus somehow destroying her as well). Then I went to Armstrong's blog and see it happened (but was C"i"A instead). Amazing. I anticipated the future in the blink of an eye. That is really true!
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Important...

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.5655782

The article is well written and he makes a strong point.

This is why I believe the open source code base for a successful crypto-currency needs the commit control given to a Benevolent Dictator, and all users should run the official client, so that the currency can be continually innovated to keep interest in competitors weak.

With constant innovation, the market will favor the one with the most developers contributing.

Please note, the author wasn't dismissing network effects. His point is that the natural desire for profit, will drive interest to invest in the undervalued thing. This will pull Bitcoin down if there aren't more novices coming in that are afraid of the altcoins. I believe there is sufficient supply of newcomers who will buy Bitcoin before any altcoin, thus his scenario isn't entirely valid.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Anonymint, I have read the PM you posted (which is, itself, rude) and I have to say I agree with every word of it.  Your attitude gets in the way of any constructive intentions that you may have; and as has been pointed out many times by many people previously, you don't understand Bitcoin as well as you think that you do.  Alternative, invitation only, technical bitcoin forums have been founded specificly to avoid you.  Which, BTW, is quite an accompishment if your goal was to troll.  Ironicly, I can't believe that you're a talented troll; but instead passionately believe everything that you claim.  Therefore, I must admit that the highest form of trolling that I have ever seen on this forum (or anywhere else) is accidental.

I came to post regarding the copied PM (I agree it is also extremely uncool to quote PMs in the open).

The above post does better than I ever could.

I revealed it because it expressed a veiled threat that I should be incarcerated for expressing my logic.

Also I did not PM him. I asked him in my public post to not do ad hominem, so he sent me a PM. So I had no agreement with him to have a private discussion. In any case, I wouldn't normally reveal a PM (especially if didn't remove the author's identifying information), but when someone equates debate in a forum with jail time, that is a pattern that needs to be exposed as early as possible. I hope he didn't really mean that.

He sent me another PM and I don't need to reveal it as it was more conciliatory, yet still made a demand of me but it wasn't so unreasonable so I complied in the interest of keeping the discussion on the technical issues.



Let's wait to see if gmaxell can refute the technical argument. I am fairly sure he can't. Which would then mean that he is doing the trolling per your definition. If he can't then he fails his own test for banning "level of technical mastery to the nearly flawless state", so therefore he must logically ban himself from his own subforum. Hahaha.  Roll Eyes


You missed his point.  Fail.

The reason he mentioned your lack of "level of technical mastery to the nearly flawless state" was to explain what it would take to justify the arrogant blathering you do on the forums.

Like here where I was correct.  Roll Eyes

Or here where you were being a dick to me, you were logically incorrect and I was correct.  Roll Eyes

He HAS tremendous technical mastery, and isn't a dick.  He is respected for the two reasons you are maligned.  Skill and character.

He is a dick to me (sometimes, not sure yet if it is habitual). Let's see if he can learn to have a rational discussion with me instead of brow-beating me.

And it is not yet clear to me if he or I have won the technical argument. Let's see...I am reviewing his latest reply...
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
It shouldn't have.  I'd wager that if you actually sat down and assessed your real costs, you'll find that your expenses have likely doubled as well, since about 2000.

Well there was that jump when I upgraded to my McMansion in 2006.

Quote
While gas prices have been fairly flat the past couple of years, the price of a gallon of petrol near where I live was right around $2.20 in 2008 and is $3.57 today; and has been as high as $4.09 in between.

So it seems that your memory is suspect afterall. Gas may have been in the low $2s in 2008, but it was above $4 in 2007. Perhaps you should look into the reasons why it was so cheap in 2008? Because it does not make your case at all.

We have been in severe deflation since 2008, which is the main point of my post upthread (which quoted Shadowstats).

For the moment you are not yet seeing the severity of the deflation in your daily lives because most still trust that there are a $quadrillion of fractional reserves. By 2016ish (2018 at latest) all hell will break loose.

Quote
The offical CPI suppresses

There was no statement made about the official CPI, stop red herringing.

My entire point was the official CPI was understated to hide the fact they pumped up the fractional reserves, while they simultaneously hide the fact that actual circulation of currency, i.e. velocity of M0 and MB, have fallen off the cliff (especially since 2008).

And no there isn't any hyperinflation, the Shadowstats figures only show about 8-10% per annum inflation which seems to roughly correlate with the growth in my expenses.

Shadowstats is just as big of a pile of bs; pointing out the flaws of some other flawed metric does not make Shadowstats not flawed. Besides, all it is doing is obviously just adding 5% on to the CPI, there is no actual metric.

Mathematically we can't have an average which applies to everyone. We can look at the geometric weighting of what the majority of the population spend on, and use that metric to compute a CPI which is representative of that group.

And without that hedonics bullshit of the official CPI where if a computer becomes 2X as fast, the official CPI counts that as a halving of the price of a computer! Bullshit.

And I don't have the data points, but if we assume roughly 8% inflation since 2000 according to shadowstats, that means there has been ~150% inflation in 14 years. Someone making $50k today is the same as someone making $20k in 2000.

1.08^13 = 2.71, thus 171% increase or 2.71 times. Thus $50k would be $18k. There is a calculator on their website for computing exactly. You can get the green bar value by comparing its height in pixels (to cheat so you don't have to pay a subscription).

http://www.shadowstats.com/inflation_calculator

It says $50k in 2014 would be $36k by BLS and $14k by SGS.

That BLS figure implies an average of 2.5% per year, which is complete bullshit. The SGS figure may be a bit too high though.

The following roughly agrees with my experience.

http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/70yearsofpricechange.html

So for meat:

1.075^23 = $4.89/$0.89

Thus 7.5% ≈ 8% is not far from the actual truth, at least for meat.

P.S. John Williams (proprietor of ShadowStats.com) thinks we will have hyperinflation. He is entirely mistaken. We will have severe deflation.

hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Bitcoin is not fundamentally designed to behave as a currency...

Agreed I've been making similar points as you did throughout the archive of my posts.

This thread, and every other bitcoin discussion, seems to really be an endless debate about bitcoin's strengths/weaknesses as an investment.

No I am actually trying to fix the currency use too (but pushing for an altcoin because Bitcoin can't be heavily modified), but it is more complex than the logic you expressed. Essentially there must be investment first to drive the currency uses, but the currency uses need to survive the investment phase. Bitcoin can't remain decentralized so if it survives as a currency it will only be with government blessing.

The bigger point is missed.  The fact of the matter is that bitcoin simply cannot function as a currency, and the behavior of users on the network confirms this, more and more so over time.

I haven't missed that point. It is just difficult to read all my posts. There are too many.

Tying into the original post, I suppose, is the fact that Bitcoin's a horrible, HORRIBLE long-term investment.  When AES is rendered obsolete or any of the potential flaws discussed in this thread are exploited, all value in the network will be lost.  Seeing as how at least 8% of all bitcoins in circulation have been stolen at least once, well....

I don't think that necessarily follows.

Part of your point is valid, but some people have gained a lot on this investment.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1004
What does that have to do with whether the technology exists to improve nuclear?

I hope you realize energy is regulated and taxed such that it is controlled by cartels. Getting rid of that doesn't imply a Dark Age, rather it frees us to realize innovations which were suppressed because they are paradigm shifts which compete with the cartels.

You fail to understand anarchy. Anarchy had never ever been something different than self-sufficiency. Whoever is (had been) self-sufficient, doesn't have a desire to trade with aliens and building (maintaining) complex structures. Anarcho capitalism is an oxymoron promoted by pseudo-anarchists. They are collectivists.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
Why not stick to point form facts? Nothing else.

Yeah that is what I was trying to do. Go read the posts from others in that CoinJoin thread in response to my request for technical comments.

Anonymint, I have read the PM you posted (which is, itself, rude) and I have to say I agree with every word of it.  Your attitude gets in the way of any constructive intentions that you may have; and as has been pointed out many times by many people previously, you don't understand Bitcoin as well as you think that you do.  Alternative, invitation only, technical bitcoin forums have been founded specificly to avoid you.  Which, BTW, is quite an accompishment if your goal was to troll.  Ironicly, I can't believe that you're a talented troll; but instead passionately believe everything that you claim.  Therefore, I must admit that the highest form of trolling that I have ever seen on this forum (or anywhere else) is accidental.

Let's wait to see if gmaxell can refute the technical argument. I am fairly sure he can't. Which would then mean that he is doing the trolling per your definition. If he can't then he fails his own test for banning "level of technical mastery to the nearly flawless state", so therefore he must logically ban himself from his own subforum. Hahaha.  Roll Eyes

It is unfortunate that you see spirited discussion as trolling. You've just provided an example of totalitarianism.

(mathematically the end-game of totalitarian regimes is to ban, i.e. destroy, themselves)

The implication that I would be "incarcerated" for expressing (sharing!) a technical opinion is definitely the markers of the psychology of a totalitarian sociopath control freak. That is not the decentralized freedom of the hacker and internet world that I worked hard (back in the 80s and 90s) to hand to kiddie gmaxell.

Operating the NSA requires quite bright people. Don't you think they will be increasingly hard to find when the U.S. descends towards being the Animal Farm?

My thinking goes like this: what people want the most is freedom, and working for a totalitarian state is the antithesis of freedom. Probably some will still choose to do it, but the brightest have the most choice and are the least likely to choose working for the govt.

While I agree that most of the brightest wouldn't work for the government as long as they can find income elsewhere, that's already the case.  Those that are ideologically opposed to government leave those services fairly quickly under any economic conditions.  However, there are always the remainder.  I've read that roughly 3% of the adult population are sociopathic to some degree or another.  Having worked in government 'enforcement' in the past, my own experiences tell me that government is significantly overrepresented by this demographic.  If you have ever really known a true sociopath, they are not motivated by economic gain so much as by personal power gain.  A society in decline would give many of them an increased opprotunity for power gains in the near term.  I just can't picture these people walking away from government 'service', and (unfortunately) almost all of them are quite intelligent.  Do not underestimate your enemy, and trust me when I say that they are, indeed, your enemy.

The problem is that the NSA doesn't need to be that smart because they have the asymmetric power derived from political power.

However indeed we can outsmart them if the outcome purely depends on technology.

Hence one of the reasons I created this thread. And hence the reason AnonyMint won't be announcing any altcoin that implements the ideas in this thread.

The outcome will be a mix of the technological and the political. The NSA+G20 will win the political (i.e. the majority will follow Bitcoin + world government) until everything is burned to the stumps. I am hoping the technologists can win in the sense that we don't get burned to stumps. Then at some point we take over and the majority comes to our side.

Tortilla (that is what MPOE calls you, hehe I don't agree just a joke), perhaps you don't understand that we can't get from here to there without a severe lashing.

[sociopaths] I just can't picture these people walking away from government 'service', and (unfortunately) almost all of them are quite intelligent.  Do not underestimate your enemy, and trust me when I say that they are, indeed, your enemy.

Sad

Perhaps this is why Third Reich was perfectly operational until destroyed militarily. Who is there to destroy this one? Or should we start to accelerate our prayers concerning Jesus' coming?  Huh

That is what my efforts are about surviving my friend. One day you might understand. Am I motivated by fear, greed, or helping? Or a mix? And you?

Be careful with applying the Biblical of the macro on the micro steps along the way. The Bible says God works in mysterious ways.
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
Anonymint, I have read the PM you posted (which is, itself, rude) and I have to say I agree with every word of it.  Your attitude gets in the way of any constructive intentions that you may have; and as has been pointed out many times by many people previously, you don't understand Bitcoin as well as you think that you do.  Alternative, invitation only, technical bitcoin forums have been founded specificly to avoid you.  Which, BTW, is quite an accompishment if your goal was to troll.  Ironicly, I can't believe that you're a talented troll; but instead passionately believe everything that you claim.  Therefore, I must admit that the highest form of trolling that I have ever seen on this forum (or anywhere else) is accidental.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 521
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007

So it seems that your memory is suspect afterall. Gas may have been in the low $2s in 2008, but it was above $4 in 2007. Perhaps you should look into the reasons why it was so cheap in 2008? Because it does not make your case at all.

At my age, my memory should always be suspect.

Quote
There was no statement made about the official CPI, stop red herringing. Shadowstats is just as big of a pile of bs; pointing out the flaws of some other flawed metric does not make Shadowstats not flawed. Besides, all it is doing is obviously just adding 5% on to the CPI, there is no actual metric.

Well, I can accept the argument that Shadowstats can still be flawed.  I'm just of the opinion that their methods are a bit more open, and their biases a bit less suspect.

Quote
And I don't have the data points, but if we assume roughly 8% inflation since 2000 according to shadowstats, that means there has been ~150% inflation in 14 years. Someone making $50k today is the same as someone making $20k in 2000.

You do have a good point there, but also a great many things besides have changed during those same 14 years to mitigate the effects.  (I'm not really talking about price inflation, so much as using that as an example since that is what the CPI measures.)  I'm mostly talking about monetary base inflation, which has been counteracted, to a great extent, by the debt destruction during 2007-2009 (mostly felt in the crash of houseing prices) and other smaller effects, such as the average increase in gas mialage and the decrease in average miles driven per year by Americans.  The rise of ridesharing services like zipcar really are having an outsized impact on the economy, permmitting urban millinials to commute by public transit with a ready access to a personal vehicle whenever neccessry.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
It shouldn't have.  I'd wager that if you actually sat down and assessed your real costs, you'll find that your expenses have likely doubled as well, since about 2000.

Well there was that jump when I upgraded to my McMansion in 2006.

Quote
While gas prices have been fairly flat the past couple of years, the price of a gallon of petrol near where I live was right around $2.20 in 2008 and is $3.57 today; and has been as high as $4.09 in between.

So it seems that your memory is suspect afterall. Gas may have been in the low $2s in 2008, but it was above $4 in 2007. Perhaps you should look into the reasons why it was so cheap in 2008? Because it does not make your case at all.

Quote
The offical CPI suppresses

There was no statement made about the official CPI, stop red herringing. Shadowstats is just as big of a pile of bs; pointing out the flaws of some other flawed metric does not make Shadowstats not flawed. Besides, all it is doing is obviously just adding 5% on to the CPI, there is no actual metric.

And I don't have the data points, but if we assume roughly 8% inflation since 2000 according to shadowstats, that means there has been ~150% inflation in 14 years. Someone making $50k today is the same as someone making $20k in 2000.
legendary
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
Mine have more than doubled.

My mind is blown.

It shouldn't have.  I'd wager that if you actually sat down and assessed your real costs, you'll find that your expenses have likely doubled as well, since about 2000.  While gas prices have been fairly flat the past couple of years, the price of a gallon of petrol near where I live was right around $2.20 in 2008 and is $3.57 today; and has been as high as $4.09 in between.  Likewise, as recently as two years ago, a gallon of propane cost me about $1.60, delivered; today it's $3.40.  Granted, there are a lot of market forces going on there, including the quite un-global-warming-like winter we just had.  Yet, the cost of beef or chicken at the grocery store is much more than it was a decade ago as well.  The offical CPI suppresses the official inflation metric in a number of ways, one of which is to use 'substitution'.  I.E., they assume, as prices rise, someone who could no longer afford beef would buy chicken instead; so they swap the price of beef for the price of chicken in the formula.  There are other examples I can produce.   And the cost of consumer energy needs isn't even included in the modern calculations at all, only the commercial and/or wholesale prices of those energy sources; or more specificly, the effect of the rising energy that commercial businesses pass onto their consumer prices.
Pages:
Jump to: