Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 483. (Read 2032286 times)
Rothschild-led banking has never financed war and terror...
The net tightens: Derogative article on hawala
http://www.newsweek.com/underground-european-hawala-network-financing-middle-eastern-terror-groups-307984
"Hawala: The Ancient Banking Practice Used to Finance Terror Groups"
"An ancient and sophisticated anonymous banking practice is facilitating the payment of jihadists’ salaries in Iraq and Syria via a European network to avoid detection by authorities, according to Spanish intelligence officials.
Known as hawala, the system is being used as a conduit for the financing of fighters aligned to terror groups such as ISIS and the al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front through a network of 250 to 300 shops - such as butchers, supermarkets and phone call centres - run by mostly Pakistani brokers across Spain."
The bitcoin relevance:
"The practice, which has been referred to as the ‘working man’s Bitcoin’ and the ‘terrorist’s ATM’, has survived the emergence of online banking, with $400bn (£258.9bn) exchanging hands every year, Dr Roger Ballard, hawala expert and director of the University of Manchester’s Centre for Applied South Asian Studies (CASAS), estimates."
http://www.newsweek.com/underground-european-hawala-network-financing-middle-eastern-terror-groups-307984
"Hawala: The Ancient Banking Practice Used to Finance Terror Groups"
"An ancient and sophisticated anonymous banking practice is facilitating the payment of jihadists’ salaries in Iraq and Syria via a European network to avoid detection by authorities, according to Spanish intelligence officials.
Known as hawala, the system is being used as a conduit for the financing of fighters aligned to terror groups such as ISIS and the al-Qaeda-affiliated Nusra Front through a network of 250 to 300 shops - such as butchers, supermarkets and phone call centres - run by mostly Pakistani brokers across Spain."
The bitcoin relevance:
"The practice, which has been referred to as the ‘working man’s Bitcoin’ and the ‘terrorist’s ATM’, has survived the emergence of online banking, with $400bn (£258.9bn) exchanging hands every year, Dr Roger Ballard, hawala expert and director of the University of Manchester’s Centre for Applied South Asian Studies (CASAS), estimates."
here also very good read, the blog of the current Greek finance minister and his view on Bitcoin:
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2013/04/22/bitcoin-and-the-dangerous-fantasy-of-apolitical-money/
Very interesting, especially in terms of the discussion we had here about the new supply of gold coming from asteroids, is Section 2 on Bitcoin as an emulation of a precious metal (gold).
Just a food for thought: similarly to being able to mine the gold from the asteroids, what if, one day the limitation of 21 million total supply of Bitcoin is lifted up to some bigger number in a hard fork?
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2013/04/22/bitcoin-and-the-dangerous-fantasy-of-apolitical-money/
Very interesting, especially in terms of the discussion we had here about the new supply of gold coming from asteroids, is Section 2 on Bitcoin as an emulation of a precious metal (gold).
Just a food for thought: similarly to being able to mine the gold from the asteroids, what if, one day the limitation of 21 million total supply of Bitcoin is lifted up to some bigger number in a hard fork?
How many people with Bitcoin holdings are going to say, "Hey, they just hard forked. The new implementation just devalued all our bitcoins by adding 21 Million more Bitcoins to the supply, let's go over to that implementation... instead of this one where our Bitcoins are worth more."
Said nobody ever.
In reality, there's no need ever to add more Bitcoins. It would make far more sense to add more decimal places to better facilitate micro payments as more and more economic energy piles into Bitcoin
After 1000s of Years Enjoying Gold Standard now Welcome to the Bitcoin Standard
http://blog.btcxindia.com/after-1000s-of-years-enjoying-gold-standard-now-welcome-to-the-bitcoin-standard/
http://blog.btcxindia.com/after-1000s-of-years-enjoying-gold-standard-now-welcome-to-the-bitcoin-standard/
Great chat going on reddit about btcxindia blog... check out http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2wvjs6/after_1000s_of_years_enjoying_gold_standard_now/
here also very good read, the blog of the current Greek finance minister and his view on Bitcoin:
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2013/04/22/bitcoin-and-the-dangerous-fantasy-of-apolitical-money/
Very interesting, especially in terms of the discussion we had here about the new supply of gold coming from asteroids, is Section 2 on Bitcoin as an emulation of a precious metal (gold).
Just a food for thought: similarly to being able to mine the gold from the asteroids, what if, one day the limitation of 21 million total supply of Bitcoin is lifted up to some bigger number in a hard fork?
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2013/04/22/bitcoin-and-the-dangerous-fantasy-of-apolitical-money/
Very interesting, especially in terms of the discussion we had here about the new supply of gold coming from asteroids, is Section 2 on Bitcoin as an emulation of a precious metal (gold).
Just a food for thought: similarly to being able to mine the gold from the asteroids, what if, one day the limitation of 21 million total supply of Bitcoin is lifted up to some bigger number in a hard fork?
Gold threatening to fall below 1200 again; and quite possibly, for good.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-23/ex-plunge-protection-team-whistleblower-governments-control-markets-there-no-price-d
Bitcoin discussed as modern version of desire to escape fiat currencies (21min in)
Bitcoin discussed as modern version of desire to escape fiat currencies (21min in)
pretty interesting few minutes with Schall probing about golds role in a new international currency system and malmgren basically saying that bitcoin is now pushing to be the 'outside of fiat / outside of government store of value' that gold once was.
"the public is leaning towards bitcoin as a modern version of holding old fashioned gold"
The lack of understanding continues right up to the eve of Ethereum's planned release. No comprehension of the ledger, still thinking in terms of "tokens" and "blockchain tech is the important thing, not the money."
well he has to sell his own 'tokens'.. not that +20 millions $ has 'funded' his ethereum ting.. XD
The lack of understanding continues right up to the eve of Ethereum's planned release. No comprehension of the ledger, still thinking in terms of "tokens" and "blockchain tech is the important thing, not the money."
"It's the Blockchain, not Bitcoin that's the real killer app." Debunked
http://www.joecoin.com/2015/02/crypto-20-and-other-misconceptions.html
http://www.joecoin.com/2015/02/crypto-20-and-other-misconceptions.html
The piece contains a pretty cool description of Bitcoin:
Quote
Private keys that represent some sort of token are an obvious solution, and when we combine them with two cups of economic scarcity, a Merkle tree root, a spoonful of clever bootstrapping, and a dash of HashCash, we end up with, you guessed it, Bitcoin!
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-23/ex-plunge-protection-team-whistleblower-governments-control-markets-there-no-price-d
Bitcoin discussed as modern version of desire to escape fiat currencies (21min in)
Bitcoin discussed as modern version of desire to escape fiat currencies (21min in)
i foresee the Trezor replacing the offline wallet and its pc and being more secure since the offline wallets can be susceptible to a USB malware attack. as far as i know, there is no way to get privkeys off a Trezor so in that sense it is safer
I think this is a dangerous assumption to make.Trezor has a larger attack surface than an offline laptop, since you have to plug it in directly to a potential hostile machine every time you use it.
You can reduce your attack surface with an offline laptop by using CD-R media instead of USB drives, or maybe by using the audio cable transfer method.
Trezor & Offline Armory multisig FTW
yeah, this would be.
"It's the Blockchain, not Bitcoin that's the real killer app." Debunked
http://www.joecoin.com/2015/02/crypto-20-and-other-misconceptions.html
http://www.joecoin.com/2015/02/crypto-20-and-other-misconceptions.html
nice find:
"As established above, any so-called feature that allows Bitcoin to play nice with competing tokens only serves to make it more vulnerable to being usurped.
The argument that Sidechains will promote a vibrant innovative cryptocurrency ecosystem is misguided at best and disingenuous at worst. Thus far, I've yet to see any charges of treason being discussed by Bitcoin's collective mind of core developers and mining pool decision makers. We'll see if it becomes wise before it's too late."
what am i? chopped liver?
How about any derived private key, which is not the root key? How serious a leak would that make? Does it compromise all the other private keys as well, if the attacker knows the chain code? (which I assumed is the same for both, private and public chains).
You should always assume that revealing a private key from a deterministic wallet will reveal all siblings. In Armory wallets, if private key x is revealed with the chaincode, all private keys >= X+1 are revealed.
But I don't spend much time worrying about this. We do not support or claim to support any use cases where private keys are intentionally revealed. And if your wallet is unintentionally compromised, they will all be revealed anyway.
Thanks for that just to clear up my understanding it is bad practice to distribute private keys from a deterministic wallet.
However is it still true one would need the chaincode and a private key from that chaincode to reveal the resulting private keys of the children keys?
"It's the Blockchain, not Bitcoin that's the real killer app." Debunked
http://www.joecoin.com/2015/02/crypto-20-and-other-misconceptions.html
http://www.joecoin.com/2015/02/crypto-20-and-other-misconceptions.html
How about any derived private key, which is not the root key? How serious a leak would that make? Does it compromise all the other private keys as well, if the attacker knows the chain code? (which I assumed is the same for both, private and public chains).
You should always assume that revealing a private key from a deterministic wallet will reveal all siblings. In Armory wallets, if private key x is revealed with the chaincode, all private keys >= X+1 are revealed.
But I don't spend much time worrying about this. We do not support or claim to support any use cases where private keys are intentionally revealed. And if your wallet is unintentionally compromised, they will all be revealed anyway.
Thanks for that just to clear up my understanding it is bad practice to distribute private keys from a deterministic wallet.
However is it still true one would need the chaincode and a private key from that chaincode to reveal the resulting private keys of the children keys?
i foresee the Trezor replacing the offline wallet and its pc and being more secure since the offline wallets can be susceptible to a USB malware attack. as far as i know, there is no way to get privkeys off a Trezor so in that sense it is safer
I think this is a dangerous assumption to make.Trezor has a larger attack surface than an offline laptop, since you have to plug it in directly to a potential hostile machine every time you use it.
You can reduce your attack surface with an offline laptop by using CD-R media instead of USB drives, or maybe by using the audio cable transfer method.
Trezor & Offline Armory multisig FTW
The main question is if you have just the private key for one or more addresses in a deterministic wallet, are the other addresses at risk or are they secure.
A full Armory wallet is just
1x Root Private Key
1x Root Public Key
1x Chaincode
A watching-only Armory wallet is just
1x Root Public Key
1x Chaincode
So basically watching-only wallets don't have any private key data at all, and the chain code is just a constant that is carried through all the calculations. With the priv key + chaincode, you can compute all private keys. With public key + chain, you can compute all public keys that match the private keys produced on the full/offline wallet.
The chaincode and public key are not security-sensitive. Someone getting them is a breach of privacy, not security. All internet security is based on the fact that the public key is widely distributed (i.e. "public") and that the scheme maintains full security as long as no one else has the private key.
1x Root Private Key
1x Root Public Key
1x Chaincode
A watching-only Armory wallet is just
1x Root Public Key
1x Chaincode
So basically watching-only wallets don't have any private key data at all, and the chain code is just a constant that is carried through all the calculations. With the priv key + chaincode, you can compute all private keys. With public key + chain, you can compute all public keys that match the private keys produced on the full/offline wallet.
The chaincode and public key are not security-sensitive. Someone getting them is a breach of privacy, not security. All internet security is based on the fact that the public key is widely distributed (i.e. "public") and that the scheme maintains full security as long as no one else has the private key.
How about any derived private key, which is not the root key? How serious a leak would that make? Does it compromise all the other private keys as well, if the attacker knows the chain code? (which I assumed is the same for both, private and public chains).
You should always assume that revealing a private key from a deterministic wallet will reveal all siblings. In Armory wallets, if private key x is revealed with the chaincode, all private keys >= X+1 are revealed.
But I don't spend much time worrying about this. We do not support or claim to support any use cases where private keys are intentionally revealed. And if your wallet is unintentionally compromised, they will all be revealed anyway.
i foresee the Trezor replacing the offline wallet and its pc and being more secure since the offline wallets can be susceptible to a USB malware attack. as far as i know, there is no way to get privkeys off a Trezor so in that sense it is safer
I think this is a dangerous assumption to make.Trezor has a larger attack surface than an offline laptop, since you have to plug it in directly to a potential hostile machine every time you use it.
You can reduce your attack surface with an offline laptop by using CD-R media instead of USB drives, or maybe by using the audio cable transfer method.
Jump to: