Pages:
Author

Topic: [LEAKED] Private Bitcoin Foundation Discussions On Blacklisting, more (ZIP dump) - page 3. (Read 61198 times)

member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
Some form of regulation and control is coming, like it or not.
~BCX~

Regulation by whom? bitcoin can move wherever it wants. this only makes sense if you're completely US centric and blind to the impact cryptocurrencies can have on the world.

I've read through the posts at TBF, and what people say there is completely opposed to bitcoin the ideal. we need more developers/enthusiasts outside of the US.
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
What is the Bitcoin foundation?

The more I read about the entities that are getting involved with Bitcoin the muddier my picture of Bitcoin gets.

You say Bitcoin is decentralized? It is not and will never be as long as there's someone pulling the strings behind the scenes.
Whether it's an entity within the network (a large pool), a shady wall-street investor or the big brother foundation...

Where is the long term plan posted? Where is the list of planned features? Where do I send my feature suggestions? Where is the open discussion?
Where are the miners in all of this? Are we just dumb, cheap labor?

So long as the strings are held by enough people, that is decentralization.  Where they get tied into ropes are the problems.  If you have a private key and a mining rig, you have an untangled string.

Most your questions have been adequately and repeatedly answered.  If you can read code, even better than google, hop on github.  Feature suggestion - pull request.  Most people aren't in the group that can be useful there.  Consequently the "Very Open Discussion".... most of which is more open than is useful, as incredible amounts of time are used by people-that-know-stuff explaining to people-that-don't-know-how-to-find-answers. 

There is some utility to this VOD process at this stage of the project (which is still beta) because the "issue identifiers" (complainers) are still giving enough useful input to the "issue resolvers" (people that make things) to be of some valuable guidance.
And there are plenty of us around the edges that can talk to both.  When you are at the point of identifying a novel issue that hasn't been addressed, you get tremendous acclaim and hatred.

The automatic and persistent KYC proposals are in that category.  There is a problem, some solutions to that problem may make it worse, and so it will be hotly debated.
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Came here to see honest enlightening arguments...

Leaving disappointed.
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
Gents, I really don't have time for this bullshit.
If you have any question to me, try to express it in a way that I would understand.
Otherwise just give me a break, because I am not here to prove anything to you.
I said what I had to say and that's it - you don't like it, not my problem.
legendary
Activity: 4760
Merit: 1283
Right - I don't address you points. that's probably true.
But how do you expect people to address bullshit like "bitcoin is not p2p" or "you cannot create value by computing hashes"?

Your points are in some abstract fantasy land, where my imagination cannot even reach them.
I'm just a human being - unable to address things that I cannot perceive.

Seems to me that:

 - Bitcoin is less and less 'p2p', and is threatening to become vastly less so in the future.

 - 'Computing hashes' is just a means of accomplishing proof-of-work and facilitating the necessary book-keeping work in the system.  It is no more special than that and is distinctly NOT what creates value in the Bitcoin system.  Nor is it the only way to achieve the goals in a general sense.

I don't consider either of these two of they guy's points to be 'bullshit'.  Try again.

newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
Right - I don't address you points. that's probably true.
But how do you expect people to address bullshit like "bitcoin is not p2p" or "you cannot create value by computing hashes"?

Your points are in some abstract fantasy land, where my imagination cannot even reach them.
I'm just a human being - unable to address things that I cannot perceive.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 257
bluemeanie
Sorry mam, but the more I read you, the clearer it is to me that you are talking only bullshit.

In fact, I do support all kind of blacklists.
One example would be a list containing all the people who I do not take seriously.
And you've just got subscribed to this one. Smiley


seems you NEVER address my points.
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
Sorry mam, but the more I read you, the clearer it is to me that you are talking only bullshit.

In fact, I do support all kind of blacklists.
One example would be a list containing all the people who I do not take seriously.
And you've just got subscribed to this one. Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 257
bluemeanie
didn't we already establish that Bitcoin is not p2p?

OK - I get you: Bitcoin is not P2P and its value does not come from hashing, but rather from fooling people..

Any other original thoughts you have to share?

not really sure what's happened since yesterday, but suddenly seems you're in favor of blacklists?

did you get a PM invite to become a second-tier Bitcoin superfriend?  Suddenly Blacklists are 'for our own protection'? 

the technology could go one of two ways:

1) they manage to introduce sufficient controls, then they keep the price afloat, people continue to use thinking it's 'cool' or whatever meanwhile they actually have less privacy than Dwolla, but believe otherwise.

2) they dont put in the controls due to community resistance, and subsequently the price of Bitcoin plummets and all the 'experts' on here pretend that they predicted this all along.
full member
Activity: 129
Merit: 100
The bottom line is,

if any one of you think that any system that is value in BILLIONS of USD is ever going to remain "uncontrolled" you are seriously delusional.

Bitcoin = Money

Money = Power

If not the Bitcoin Foundation, then another.

There will always be a desire and battle to control it.


~BCX~

This is true.

That said, decentralizing development by moving it away from centralized developers to make it objectively community-driven could be a step in the right direction.
https://cryptocointalk.com/topic/3449-decentralizing-development-through-vanity-voting/
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
didn't we already establish that Bitcoin is not p2p?

OK - I get you: Bitcoin is not P2P and its value does not come from hashing, but rather from fooling people..

Any other original thoughts you have to share?
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 257
bluemeanie
Now you sound like my TV Smiley

If you think that the value of bitcoin comes from fooling people and not from hashing, then... well, what can I say; everyone has a right to be wrong Smiley
But for all I know bitcoins value does come from hashing, because nobody would have trusted a p2p currency that is not properly protected, and only the hashing protects this system, nothing else.


didn't we already establish that Bitcoin is not p2p?
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
Now you sound like my TV Smiley

If you think that the value of bitcoin comes from fooling people and not from hashing, then... well, what can I say; everyone has a right to be wrong Smiley
But for all I know bitcoins value does come from hashing, because nobody would have trusted a p2p currency that is not properly protected, and the only thing that protects this system is the hashing.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 257
bluemeanie
you can't just create value from nothing by computing some hashes.  
well, the very existence of bitcoin has proven your statement to be totally faulty.
apparently you can create value by computing some hashes. Smiley

but it isn't "from nothing" - it is from computing hashes.



Quote
You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.

-Abraham Lincoln


legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
you can't just create value from nothing by computing some hashes. 
well, the very existence of bitcoin has proven your statement to be totally faulty.
apparently you can create value by computing some hashes, but it isn't "from nothing" - it is actually from computing these hashes... Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 257
bluemeanie
You are overestimating capabilities of the devs or any other kind of "elected" entities.
They cannot touch the protocol without getting their changes accepted by the miners - at least by 51% of them.
And the miners will do everything they can to protect their interests, which is essentially the value of a single bitcoin.

this only works for so long as BTC is appreciating.
Why? Please explain me why it would not work if BTC wasn't appreciating.

It does not matter whether the BTC price goes up or down.
In any case the miners will do anything to protect it, because they profit in bitcoins.
Bitcoin was actually designed with this exact intent and the design is flawless. Well, at least I don't see how it can fail.

you can't just create value from nothing by computing some hashes.  Typically, when you bring this up, people contend that Bitcoin is 'peer to peer' but we've established that this isn't true.  Bitcoin really delivers precisely NOTHING, but there are so many people invested in it, they keep the appearance of use and value intact.

Earlier someone responded to my post that 'paypal is valuable', and he's right paypal is valuable, but a paypal that requires massive processor banks isn't valuable at all.

This is not really the place where you're going to get a a reasoned argument so it's really not worth putting to much effort into it.  There are loads of publications out there that explain why many of the ideas about Bitcoin simply aren't true.  Most people here are just trying to get Venture Capital money or make a quick buck somehow.  Practically no one uses Bitcoin for real commerce.
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
You are overestimating capabilities of the devs or any other kind of "elected" entities.
They cannot touch the protocol without getting their changes accepted by the miners - at least by 51% of them.
And the miners will do everything they can to protect their interests, which is essentially the value of a single bitcoin.

this only works for so long as BTC is appreciating.
Why? Please explain me why it would not work if BTC wasn't appreciating.

It does not matter whether the BTC price goes up or down.
In any case the miners will do anything to protect it, because they profit in bitcoins.
Bitcoin was actually designed with this exact intent and the design is flawless. Well, at least I don't see how it can fail.
sr. member
Activity: 280
Merit: 257
bluemeanie
Fair enough, but let's not over-extrapolate. There is significant strength in the network being disparate and decentralised but as we've seen from the topic of this thread, power tends to corrupt and those that are supposedly on the Foundation to advance Bitcoin are, according to the vast majority of commentators on this thread, doing quite the opposite.

If those who are elected by a narrow minority cannot reflect the concerns of the broader majority, perhaps it's time to consider the dissolution of the Bitcoin Foundation or the establishment of another more responsive body that pursues a more egalitarian decentralised agenda. I'm probably not the only independent miner who might vote for that, indeed, it's probably the extension of the 'hard fork' thinking - a voice counter to those courting entrenched financial orthodoxy.

You are overestimating capabilities of the devs or any other kind of "elected" entities.
They cannot touch the protocol without getting their changes accepted by the miners - at least by 51% of them.
And the miners will do everything they can to protect their interests, which is essentially the value of a single bitcoin.

this only works for so long as BTC is appreciating.
legendary
Activity: 2053
Merit: 1356
aka tonikt
And the miners will do everything they can to protect their interests, which is essentially the value of a single bitcoin.

I would love to see this in practice. Maybe it's about time something happened to test this theory.

I'm afraid you won't see it soon.
I am not aware of any incoming blockchain protocol changes, and even if they would, last time it took like a year to upgrade the network to blocks version 2.
But that was back in the times when the network hashing power was like million times lower and the miners had much more trust in the dev team. The situation today is totally different and no sane respected person is going to put his reputation on forcing a protocol change that has even a tiny chance to not be accepted by the miners. Just look what happened to our poor Mike - and he didn't even start to write any code yet for his red and black lists that were supposed to deliver some justice into bitcoins.. Apparently all the bitcoins sheep that Mike was just trying to protect don't give a shit about his justice, so he didn't even get his brilliant ideas to a pre-voting Smiley


My money is you wouldn't like the results.  Wink

No worries - almost all my money is already in that bet Wink
Pages:
Jump to: