Topic: I questioned the "Bitcoin dev team" (Andresen & Co.) on complying with AML laws. - page 2. (Read 6796 times)

Then Bitcoin is just shit and there is nothing you can do, oh well.

Yeah, but people will have decided so, not some obscure politician at the far east-wing of Romney.

Of course power always slips away but people can break things. People can break Bitcoin regardless of power.

Well, if that's your goal, good luck. You really think the USA control the majority of the world? You really think US government is big enough to try and control the majority of Bitcoin users? I knew americans were full of themselves, but not that much.

Breaking news, 90% of the world doesn't really give a crap what US government think and want to do. And that 90% will use Bitcoin anyway.

Who says you have to control everybody? All you need is a good enough majority under control and the face of the currency is yours.

Well, like mobodick said.

How can you make laws on calculations? Bitcoin is just a big formula where people make inputs to create outputs. Yeah, you can try to control all the inputs(people and hardware), but you cannot control the formula.

And right now, it's pretty impossible to control the software, since the software is open-source. Any form of control is detected automatically. You can try to control the people inputting in the software, but again, with a decentralized system, it's like a game of cat and mouse where there's 1 cat for every billion mouses.

Maths laws are above human laws, plain and simple.

We are trying to tell you that it doesn't matter if they lie or not, if they are perfect or not.  The system was set up in a way that it doesn't matter, no one has to trust anyone.

To do what you are thinking would require a magic wand, not a government.  And even if one day all of the devs and pool operators woke up as their own evil twins, someone else would just fork the project and the chain at some point prior to the switch, and your life would go on as before.

Okay, I submit. I trust everyone. The devs will never lie. The devs will be perfect. (!)

Man, are you thick.
 

Sure, but they don't run on pure math.
You've just got it the wrong way up.
You can use math to describe physics, but that doesn't make math into physics or chemistry.

+1

Ok, now I get it...  

My former statement was sarcasm. People are fallible. People can be bought.

?

The good thing with git is that you don't have to read the complete code. You can just look at the changes in the code.

Try this (linux):
- open the terminal
- copy this lines:

git clone https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin.git

cd bitcoin

gitk &

(If this does not work maybe you need to install "git" and "gitk" first)

Andresen will always use Github. The releases on sourceforge will always reflect the code.

Guns and bullets run on basic chemistry and physics.

Do you suppose that a legislature might make laws (which might be commonly, if imperfectly) enforced regarding the possession and use of guns and bullets?

Do you suppose that a person who manufactured and sold guns or ammunition might at some point find it helpful to be aware of those laws?

Note to the feebleminded: I have a lot of guns and bullets. Molon labe. I believe the Second Amendment protects an individual RKBA. I am not arguing that guns should be more regulated. This post is not about gun control.

This post is pointing out that governments attempt to, and with varying degrees of success, regulate items and processes which operate on basic physical or mathematical laws or processes which are themselves beyond the legislature's reach.

If that observation is insufficient, you might consider whether or not governments have attempted to regulate the growing and processing of certain plants, or of relatively simple chemical reactions/transformations that can be applied to ordinary chemical compounds. Those attempts have obviously been less than wholly successful; but they have certainly had a significant impact on people interested in those plants and those chemicals, to the extent that many people who would like to use those things do not, and others incur significant costs adapting their operations to the the risk of (imperfect) intervention.

If only there was some tool that would highlight changes and provide annotation and discussion...

Very few people can read code completely after release.

+1


-1

For the former, there are sneakier ways of manipulation.

As for the latter, it can be done through apathy in most of the mining community along with the dev team assuring any skeptics that it's all "conspiracy theories".