Topic: Why hasn't any government stopped Bitcoin? - page 18. (Read 36271 times)

There is another very important factoid that I only recently realized.

The AML regulations which are spreading all over the world due to the terrorism theme the Zionists have foisted on the world (as explained in great detail in the videos I linked for all you to watch and keep plodding y’all to watch), make it illegal for miners to sell virtual currencies except on an AML regulated exchange (which of course the Zionists will control with their control over the regulators). You may not legally sell mined BTC to a private party or P2P. You can spend it on goods & services, but a mining operation can’t survive by spending its BTC, as it needs cash flow to pay electricity and upgrade mining hardware.

Thus you can clearly see that the Zionists are employing the nation-state laws to give themselves an eventual monopoly on who can mine Bitcoin. This is in addition to the ASICBOOST thing which I already explained upthread leverages the patent law of nation-states to give the Zionists a 30% electrical efficiency advantage.

They planned this out exquisitely.

Sheep vs. Wolf


No, no, no, it has stayed on topic. Just because you disagree with my hypothesis, doesn’t mean my posts are off-topic. That is a disingenuous claim. Disagreement is not proof.

Why hasn't any government stopped Bitcoin? Because the Zionists are pulling the strings in government and because Bitcoin was designed to be superior to the jurisdiction of any single nation-state (but the Zionists pulling strings and preventing any potential nation-state cooperation to stop Bitcoin will also be a factor). The Zionists want Bitcoin to succeed because it serves several aims:

• It’s creative destruction of the nation-state central banks with themselves as the central bank in control of Bitcoin at the end game.
• It’s a marvellous globalized tracking device.
• It helps them eliminate cash, which is difficult for them to control. Bitcoin they will control and can turn off anyone’s number precisely as predicted in Revelation.
• Given their control of the only two 14mn ASIC fabs in the world (via proxy as the financiers), they are indirectly gaining the seigniorage of issuing Bitcoin (mining).
• It fools all the “useful idiot” nerds into supporting them.
• It provides a system for them to more efficiently launder their drug and other illicit activities money and funding of their operatives all over the world.
• Provides a way via unregulated speculation and offshoots such as ICOs for them to promote self-incrimination of wide swaths of the very people who might otherwise be able to defeat them.
• Gives them an alternative to the barbaric, non-electronic relic gold, as they crash and reset the global monetary system circa 2020 to 2024.
• It’s a Hegelian dialectic leverage against the nation-states which they want to force into submission to a world government.

Did you not listen in the videos I linked for you of the power the Zionists have even at the local government level in the USA.

I will be editing this post and adding more information to make my case stronger.

Mainly I’m disappointed that you just declared you’re correct without retorting the vast number of details I have linked to both in my past discussions with @dinofelis, my logic about Satoshi’s necessary priorities, and the details in the videos about Mossad implementing the 9/11 slaughter.


Disagree. I already explained that due to the careful analysis he put into hashing and interaction of different hashes in the double-hashing scenarios in Bitcoin, he was quite aware of the weakness of SHA256 in the proof-of-work context. I delved into this in great detail in my discussions with @dinofelis which I provided links to. If you are unwilling to read and comprehend those discussions, then I suggest you’re just an ignorant bystander.

For you to argue otherwise, is (sorry to say so frankly) absolutely asinine. Satoshi would not have released a system where he had not analysed this is great and excruciating detail the hash function for proof-of-work as that is the cornerstone of his invention. The hallmarks of his work and precise speech prove his fanatical attention to detail.

Please do not waste my scarce time with dribble (drool or drivel). I expect a more well researched reply from you. I do not wish to be denigrating or unappreciative, but I have do not have time if you are not even willing to study my hypothesis in great detail.


You’re apparently inept in the math of Probability & Statistics theory, or in correctly applying the initial conditions to the math.

There’s not multiple possible random cases of low-hanging fruit exploit discoveries on proof-of-work. Every sufficiently astute expert who has studied hash functions (including my deep study of them in 2013/4 when I was trying to design an ASIC-resistant PoW algorithm) knows about the sort of weakness that was exploited for ASICBOOST. In fact, I remember noting the structural peculiarity of SHA2 before ASICBOOST was announced as I independently saw there was a weakness that could perhaps be exploited but at the time I did not pursue it because of my health condition and because I had so many different priorities for things to work on and it seemed outside my capitalization to capitalize on any way.

It’s impossible that Satoshi did not study that weakness of that type of hash function construction. Absolutely impossible. Anyone who claims otherwise just really hasn’t studied the issue.

When one studies hash functions they become aware of the construction types such as Merkle–Damgård construction, wide-pipe, MD-compliant padding, etc..

Satoshi knew damn well that he was employing a cryptographic hash function in a paradigm that cryptographic hash functions are not normally designed for, i.e. that the cryptographic properties assured for hash functions would not necessary be sufficient. So of course he would study very carefully looking for weakness thereof. It’s impossible for someone of “his” (team’s collective) intellect to not find the ASICBOOST weakness. I suggest you ask Daniel Bernstein to study this in great detail and then ask for his conclusion. I am confident he will conclude the same as me.

Its re-“discovery” was quite unremarkable, inevitable and predictable.

Remember this. Things that look random to someone with a 140 IQ or non-expert, can be blatantly obvious to a 180 IQ or an expert in that field. Be very careful about your bias to due your mistaking ignorance as randomness. (the linked post is mine where I’m essentially mapping out mathematically what cognitive dissonance is)


It was already too late when it was re-discovered, to change the proof-of-work algorithm. And the other “fixes” proposed (which involved SegWit) destroy Bitcoin’s security (if you analyse it holistically as Craig Wright explained).


I am so disappointed in you. I thought you were a sophisticated and deep thinker.

Bitcoin can (economically) scale just fine. The centralization comes only when the Zionists are ready. They decide when.

Also you did not even pay attention that the centralization is only absolutely necessary (otherwise consensus will no longer converge) when the block reward declines near zero.

Man you did not even read the links I provided for you. Or you did not digest and assimilate them. I do not have time to spoon feed you.


There is no forking away from the economic majority. The economic majority is the Zionists, because the people being flocks of sheep instead of pack wolves hand that power vacuum to them. If 9/11 does not convince you of Satan’s power here on earth, there will be more amazing feats coming. Again until you watch the 9/11 videos I provided which make an extremely compelling case that what Mossad represents (not limited to just Mossad) is in control over every key aspect of the civilizations, then we really have nothing to discuss with each other. I can not debate a willingly ignorant person. Sorry. If you’ve studied everything and then can make specific refutations of detailed facts, then we can have a useful discussion.


If you believe Satoshi was a single person, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.


Please quote for me Satoshi’s writing about what you claim. I do not remember reading that.


Lol. It’s true that someone may invent an improvement (in fact I have and will release it soon), but that is not Bitcoin. We were talking about Bitcoin, not altcoins. Bitcoin can not copy my design.

But another factor that perhaps the Zionists win any way (because the people like yourself are sheep and thus empowered Satan), so even my better decentralized ledger may not help us avoid the end game of Revelation.

You’re a sheep because you refuse to review the evidence that Mossad did 9/11. You selfishly follow the other sheep who refuse to learn.

I’m a wolf, a pack animal, not a flock animal.


Willfully refusing to learn is not an admirable trait.

Assigning derogatory labels (e.g. “conspiracies or scapegoating”) to something you have not studied is the epitome of a fool.

It’s only by studying it and then refuting it that you can claim the high ground.


My understanding is the Great Harlot are the “banksters” who end up with all the wealth on top the mountain in Israel. Afaik, the Zionists are not the citizens of Israel, but rather corrupters of the Israelites.


An unsubstantiated accusation is not proof.

---

Based on refutation of which facts in my highly detailed thesis?

You and he both offered no factual argument. Just assertions. Whereas, I presented numerous facts and evidence.

What is the point of having a discussion with someone who ignores all the evidence?

I think firstly there isn't much negative stuff associated with bitcoin that it needs to be clamped down on. Secondly, it is not easy to completely outlaw it and may be more productive to regulate it. Thirdly, by outlawing it, it could lead to emergence of an underground black market which could make it worse.

I think that governments have some fear about bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, that is why most banks are creating some FUD about all that concerns about cryptocurrencies. But there is an altcoin that i have never understood, you all know that Ripple is one of the most succesfull altcoins, and it is on the top 10, but i dont know how did it get there, or from where does its volume come from.. It is a very weird altcoin, and i think that it has been created by banks.

The thread has gone off topic. Nevertheless:

Satoshi did not choose to "enable" ASICBoost, that is corruption and conspiracy.

You have taken a natural exploit, which is inevitable of all human systems, and
have construed it into such a way as to portray it as a desired choice. There are
many exploits that are possible and are only discovered by the desire and
determination of an exploiter in most cases. In this case, it was discovered by
someone who patented it for their financial benefit to be licensed to miners.
That is acceptable and his discovery gave public notice to the community that
such an exploit was possible.

Personally, I would have preferred that he disclosed it in secret to the developers
so that it could be patched prior to its wide spread use, but he chose to monetize
it for himself, which is also acceptable because it follows the human game theory
aspect within Bitcoin. Sometimes, even non-direct participants of the Bitcoin
system are bound by its designed theoretical constraints, and thus inadvertently
make the full system stronger over time.

Satoshi did not intentionally desire centralization of the network, since if he did
so, the experiment would have never reached a stage in which it would prove
your overall argument. Your argument is incorrect because its basic premise will
not bring about your future conclusion. In fact, it will do the opposite and allow a
fully centralized world system to dominate over all flesh unabated and uncontested.

This is not acceptable and the actions today will circumvent the world government
and its single world currency of tomorrow. By the nature of the Bitcoin system and
it forking ability alone, it is contradictory to centralization and control, and thus
like the phoenix can not die and will continually be reborn after each attack.

Satoshi may not have been all knowing, but he was not a malicious instrument.
All proxies are only given the information they directly need to perform their tasks
at that time. Additional data for beyond the lifespan of the proxy is unnecessary
and discouraged.




Irrelevant, and does not refute.

I made no statements that it solved the problem of mining centralization and only
provided the answer of "1MB limit + Time = stabilization till natural balancing".
Mining centralization is a normal development of human interaction in the Bitcoin
mining system, and thus can not be solved with programmed restraints since the
devices exist in the physical world. Satoshi himself acknowledge that more efficient
specialized devices would come about due to humanities' current interaction in the
system. But as time progresses, any centralization reduces due to technological
advances and knowledge. Thus, the longer Bitcoin survives, the more balanced
it will become.




I have no interest in conspiracies or scapegoating.

The Bitcoin system was designed as a beacon of light in the darkness that exists
now and is to come. It will shine in the face of oppression and remind the human
citizens in the world that there is still hope and resistance when all other avenues
have been shut down to them.

The world will never love Bitcoin because it directly rejects the things in their world.
Bitcoin can never become the world's tool, because it contradicts their fundamental
systems and thus proves that they are forming invalid blocks, and that their nodes
have become fully dishonest and malicious. Corrections from within the system is
no longer possible at this point in time, so Satoshi was coded and performed.

Your belief that Zionists have anything to do with Bitcoin, means you do not
know what happens to Zion during the time of the oppression that is to come.
The people of Zion and the world who are forced into the wilderness and into
the mountains will then understand Bitcoin's true purpose and that Satoshi was
indeed a proven proxy. Though he was not perfect, and no proxies are, because
of his success in his given task, many will endure and be found in the book of life.




As for this above paragraph you have cited:
You have your theory backwards and your theological understanding is limited.

For some reason I need to re-explain that double-hashing can mean employing two different hash functions as Satoshi did for example for public addresses. I had already explained this to @dinofelis in the context of an in depth analysis of Satoshi’s design of Bitcoin and also a blog about the future global reserve currency.

AsicBoost is an exploit on the internal stages of the SHA-256 hash function. Some of the computational work does not need to be repeated for successive hashing. Employing two different hash function algorithms chained, would eliminate AsicBoost. Satoshi knew this obviously (because his attention to detail in every other area about critical importance of hashing exemplifies that he would) and he chose to enable AsicBoost which enables centralization of Bitcoin mining.

(Note I will be editing this post to add rebuttals to your other comments. Obviously you’re regurgitating Trilema’s incomplete understanding or those who incorrectly idolize John Nash’s theory of Ideal Money)


The 1MB cap does nothing to solve the centralization problem. Here is a portion of the blog post I am in the process of writing which refutes you. <<--- IMPORTANT


Afaics, you’ve been hoodwinked by the Zionists. If you really want to understand, then you must go watch the videos.


Edit: the Steemit link with the videos appears to be currently offline. Here is an alternative link to the videos.

---

Irrelevant. Satoshi was not limiting himself to the reliance on the standard cryptographic requirements for a cryptographic hash function. He was clearly analysing the complex ways that hash functions could fail in different scenarios.


Irrelevant.

The centralization is due to the fact that not everyone can use it at the same cost due to patents. It is quite clear that TPTB could use it without paying patent royalties. The stealth quality interacts with the patent aspect in that there's no way to know who is using it now or has been using it in the past. Thus those who have access at the highest levels can get it patent-free, but everyone else can’t. Analogous to we pay taxes, but the elite don‘t.

There are only two 14nm ASIC fabs in the world. You can safely assume TPTB and banksters control them (via proxy).


In most industries there is not a surreptitious way that avoiding a patent can benefit an elite power in such a way that it provides the sufficient advantage to winner-take-all the spoils.

Your points do not refute my logic. Satoshi was very much thinking in exquisite detail about the way the internal stages of hash functions interact as evident by the combination of RIPE and SHA. If you had followed the links to all the past discussion with @dinofelis, that more detailed analysis is there.


That is not what I pointed out in my rebuttal. Please read again.


For the powerful who have access to the best of everything, it is then a matter of few percent who amongst them winner-take-alls because of recycling the disproportionate profits into more fixed capital investment. We’re analysing a power-struggle at the highest echelons such as a nation-state versus Zionists.

Yes, Bitcoin was created "for a specific purpose by a specific
entity", but we disagree as to who that entity is. The entity is not
a human Intelligence Service or World governmental body, and
has no interest in large scale territorial, political, or military warfare
or acquisition. The entity is beyond such and has laid foundations
for systems that are yet to come. Bitcoin is not important in this
time, but it was important to establish around 2008 AD for plausible
continuity of historical occurrence.

As for whether Bitcoin must become 51% centralized in order to
maintain future converging consensus, we disagree. The system
was emulated and found that at a certain point in the future, new
consensus rules or decisions are no longer possible or necessary,
since the main system is complete. The system was not intended
to have additions and/or subtractions throughout its lifespan
"voted" on through "centralized miner consensus". That is modern
day corruption. Nakamoto Consensus Theory failed in 2010.

(If changes to the system are needed today, before the total full
freeze takes effect, it will need to be done so through a new
"Community Consensus" mechanism. This mechanism is an all
or nothing approach, and not a majority rule or democracy. The
purpose of this mechanism is to rectify problems with efficiency
and attempt to maintain the single chain. It is not about making
changes or "upgrades", but about our singularity.)

Satoshi placed the 1MB cap to prevent the full centralization and
the ultimate collapse of the system, and this contradicts that his
original intention was centralization. When he set the limit, he
acknowledged that his original design could not properly function
because technology that exploits will always outpace technology
that advances. So, the system was placed into a cooldown state
until it could be naturally rectified by time. Valuation of the token
or proving human economic theories are irreverent to the future
goals. The goal was to provide choice, representative, or escape
from the coming system that will be their abomination. Bitcoin
is not of this world, so it shall stand and rebuke in the face
of the abominations that arise from the earth and the sea.




I do not think double Sha-256 would stop ASICBoost from
manifesting. ASICBoost is an exploit on the PoW inputs directly,
not the hashing algo.




Everything was planned out, and though there have been some
hiccups along the way, it will ultimately help bring about Nash's
Ideal Money as a side effect of its existence and success, but
miner centralization and modern day Israel has no direct
importance/significance with the actual goal.

Excellent post! Indeed.

However, please note Bitcoin was created for a specific purpose by a specific entity[1], and some additional evidence of that is that recent research has shown that Bitcoin must become 51% centralized (in terms of control) because as transaction fees become greater than protocol block reward, the incentive to converge on a consensus is lost.

And no, the Byzcoin research doesn’t ameliorate (solve) this problem.

Also Satoshi put double-hashing every where except on the PoW, thus enabling AsicBoost intentionally.

Everything was exquisitely premeditated and planned out for the move towards Nash’s Ideal Money but with a twist where that currency becomes entirely centralized on a hill in Israel (per biblical Revelation).

Enjoy.



[1] to bring about the world government by destroying the exclusive jurisdiction of the nation-states over money per John Nash’s Ideal Money concept but with a twist where they designed it purposely to become entirely centralized in their control

No government has so far been able to prohibit the circulation of bitcoins and other crypto currency in their country, apparently because there is no real mechanism to control such a ban. Citizens will vseravno use the Internet and deal with crypto currency. Most likely this is what stops governments from making decisions about the ban. Now we will see how this matter is finally solved in China and then the situation will clear up.

all countries  can’t move as union so you find any countries have special rules so that they can’t stopped bitcoin only can effect on price or stop legal exchange

Bitcoin isn't controlled by government. It works independent

There is only one flaw in your arguments. This is something that we cannot buy goods with bitcoin. Each of us is forced periodically to exchange bitcoins for Fiat. The government has no problems to strengthen the control over the movement of Fiat and bitcoin will lose its relevance.

1.Bitcoin has no centre to attack. There is no single organisation or person that controls Bitcoin and transactions don't go through a central clearing house there is really no way a regulator can stop people from downloading Bitcoin wallets and sending each other bitcoins. If there we to block all the websites that people can download Bitcoin wallets from, new ones will come up and some people will compile their own wallets from source code - Bitcoin is like Bittorrent is that respect. If they shut down theses internet, people will send each other Bitcoin via SMS and if they shut down the electricity supply, people will use solar and battery-powered solutions
2.secondly,if government try to ban , it will make it more popularize among those ones too who are not known of it,making individuals to explore it and finding new ways to grab something out of it

Bankers will never be able to be a part of bitcoin. All the ways in which banks earn money may not be applicable with bitcoin. Why would I keep money in the Bank if bitcoin brings in more money? On the other hand if the banks will give loans in bitcoin then no they will not take.

I have heard about that. Bill gates comment about bitcoin is not shocking at all but still it’s amazing to hear it straight from his mouth. Bill is a techy guy who have changed the world with computers and it is so co related with bitcoin because it is partly what we used here. I mean bitcoin at this range may contribute also to bill gates profit even without investing to it. But I’m sure his into this kind of investment after all its profitable in nature.

The fact of the matter is, it is not the government itself who is threatened by the existence of bitcoin. It is the financial institution like banks, remittances centers and even more. It is the mandate of the government the stability of that institution that’s why they’re also affected by it. Think of it as it is. If all bank holders will withdraw all they’re saving for bitcoin, what will happen to that bank itself and to one countries economy. I don’t say it will happen but bankers are giving those signs right now. But Sooner or later, they can’t do about it but to eventually be part of it.

A hundred percent agree to that.. It is not that the government has no law or whatever,, it is logically because they can’t stop it literally.. Only if the only option they can is stop internet.. So is it possible absolutely,, No.. It is suicifal to do because the people using it will not be silence and might to a much dangerous situation like war..

The governments of some states have repeatedly expressed their intention to prohibit the circulation of crypto currency in their country. The last time it tried to make China inoculate. However, as far as I know, no state has yet introduced a complete ban on the circulation of the crypto currency. It seems that the state is unable to do this, because if such a decision is adopted, the state bodies will not be able to control it. Citizens of this country will be able to circumvent such a ban and its effectiveness will be low. Maybe that's why no state has ever been able to ban crypto currency.

Government not being able stop bitcoin at this time is really not their wish and its because they must have tried several means necessary with all the facilities and technology available to them especially the world powers that they now have no other option to accept their fate which is resorting to regulation. Until the future when they can now develop a computer that can break the code of the blockchain, I guess we still have tonlive with the regulation.

I'm sure the governments of these countries have done a good amount of research into bitcoin. Thing is, it is hard to outlaw and maybe counter-productive doing so?