Bitcoin Forum

Typically, Bitcoin cultists have dismissed the latest which demonstrates that Bitcoin has a fundamental vulnerability. Some salient facts pertinent to this issue largely ignored by this community of rampant speculators.


1. Despite what Bitcoin cultists claim, Bitcoin does have a central authority. Specifically, the group responsible for the most popular Bitcoin client wields as much power over Bitcoin as any central bank does over state fiat.

2. A fork of the most popular client with what we shall call a war miner module (extra credit for spotting the gaming reference) would quickly become popular with all those people who invested in ASIC hardware, but ended up  out of pocket as mining difficulty moved ahead of them.

3. There seems to be a foolish assumption that nobody would bother exploiting this systemic flaw in Bitcoin because to do so would destroy the very thing they would be investing in exploiting. Alas gentlemen, you shall be hoist be your own petard. For all the talk of a brave new world of cryptocurrency, free from the ruinous short-termism of state fiat, what you have is a community whose engagement with Bitcoin is entirely speculative in nature. It's all about riding the bubble and cashing out before it explodes, very few people seem truly committed to Bitcoin as a currency, rather a means to acquire more of the sate fiat they claim to detest. You've collectively recreated the very worst excesses of the Wall St. Mafia, and as a consequence there are plenty in the Bitcoin community who will seek to exploit this core vulnerability for profit.

The greed that created the bubble in Bitcoin will burn it to the ground just as quickly.

People who exploit any vulnerability would become filthy rich before bitcoin crumbles to dust, right?
Else, no point in exploiting.

Then by all means, go ahead and be the first, become rich, and then laugh at us.
Until then, I'll be laughing at you, deal?

I agree it is a sham. Bitcoin is not currency it is a speculative bubble.

I think we're beyond the speculative stage of bitcoin. Investment firms like Accel Partners wouldn't be putting $9m into companies like Circle if they didn't have confidence. Besides, Accel wouldn't give two shits if they lost $9m, but their reputation is also at stake, and by putting faith in bitcoin - I think that says a lot.

Bitcoin has withstood a colossal amount of negative PR, it was victorious when Liberty Reserve was taken down, it stuck two fingers up at the critics that said Silk Road's demise would be the end of Bitcoin.

Bitcoin ATM's, Bitcoin debit cards, eBay alluding to the possibility of accepting it. These aren't small events. Bitcoin arguably, could be improved - but what system in this world couldn't?

I think we've got something that's here to stay.

maybe there are people using it as a sham, but there are also people using it as a currency everyday.

Where have I heard this before....  ::)

tell this to Michael Novogratz.

The established financial order put hundreds of Billions into sub-prime mortgages. You can't on the one hand decry these people and on the other kiss their asses when they throw a few pennies (relative to their usual financial gambling activity) at Bitcoin. Their either degenerate fiscal bandits or they aren't.

This would be they guy from the investment bank that would have gone bankrupt had its counterparties not been bailed out by the state?

Of course, but the activity of non speculators is not sufficient to support current valuation or anything even close to it; even more so now that Silk Road has gone which did give Bitcoin some unique  utility in terms of accessing that market.

thank you for substantiating my point.

the whole reason Bitcoin is taking off is precisely b/c of those bailout policies.  at least give him credit for realizing it for what it is and taking defensive actions.

Or perhaps, like many others - they realise that fiat's days are numbered - whether it's 5 years, or 25 years away - they're shrewd with money, and if they see there is genuine value in bitcoin, they will invest. Oh wait, they already did.

So you think this degenerate financial crook is a reformed character?

have you ever heard of the phrase "listen to the market"?

you can go on all day long with your false assumptions but at the end of this day, yes TODAY, the market is hitting an all time new high.

the message is loud and clear:  you're wrong.

So you think a guy from one of the most crooked banks in the world is coming to Bitcoin with good intentions?

Bitcoin doesn't care who puts money into it.

it's the economic principles behind the open source protocol that resonates with the majority of ppl worldwide.

Does the confidence of rampant speculators in any way ameliorate the fundamental flaw in Bitcoin?

How can it resonate with a wordwide majority when only a tiny fraction of the population have ever heard of it? Have you been smoking Bitcrack again?

fundamental flaw?  according to whom?  you?  stop making me laugh.

the code along with it's socioeconomic design has lasted 5 yrs now and we're at an all time high.  its been vetted upside down and sideways.  you come along and spout off a few "opinions" and expect everyone to listen?

why haven't you already stolen all the money in the top 10 addresses?  oh yeah, you can't.

at least you got one thing right.

we're just getting started.

Where it not for Bitcoin's defacto central bank several billion Bitcoins would still be in circulation.Your hubris is unwarranted.

take some time to study.  you really do sound like an idiot to ppl around here.

the core development team is not a de facto central bank.  not even close.

They can blacklist Bitcoins, reverse transactions and penalise people choosing to use a client other than their own. Sound like a central authority to me.

greed is good, bring the greed. HEY, can we get a little extra greed over here?

title of this thread should be:


revans really is in trouble.

coz the bitcoin boat LEFT him

I was on it, I got off, ill-gotten gains in tow*, and looked at different solutions that are not merely tools for speculators.


* As gains were derived from Bankster style speculators driving up the price the resultant state fiat was disposed of in socially useful ways.

The rather low barrier to a fork is actually one of the things which makes Bitcoin very compelling to me.  This creates a situation where the development team is empowered by retaining the trust and the direction that the majority users find desirable (or at least tolerable.)

A fork would have a significant negative impact on valuations since it would produce a LOT of uncertainty.  Further, a fork would probably actually come in waves of multiple simultaneous forks.

A critical thing to note, however, is that a code fork could not in and of itself remove value from the block chain.  I think it more than likely that the fork which comes out on top will be treating the legacy blockchain as it's source of truth (value.)  Thus, anyone employing Bitcoin should probably anticipate the potential need to defer transactions for extended periods of time.

they can what?!   

start here:

bitcoin.com

Don't feed the troll.

Given that one of those things has already been done, which of the other two is giving you problems?

[edit]troll food deleted[/edit]

Ahh man. This post is for the benefit of revans and everyone else who is thinking the same things. I couldn't resist posting it , sorry .. just in one of those moods. Feel free to skip the follow diatribe.


@revans:

Fyi, your posts here in Bitcoin Discussion, and in the other forums (Technical) are getting a little annoying.

Obviously you are trying to use fear and panic to cause a market drop. Let me save you some time. FYI, this strategy has been used in this community hundreds of times already by similar people to yourself with similar motives.  So, now most people invested in bitcoin from the beginning have become/are becoming accustomed to it. That's probably one of the reasons that your posts have had little - if any - effect on the price today. Perhaps stop wasting more of your (and everyone else's - who has to read your drivel) time with any more? Let's just put it simply like this: If you are so clever that you can predict "we're just getting started" and can bring down bitcoin, well take a short position on Bitfinex and then run your 51% attack and profit. Also (just an aside), maybe before you do it it would be nice to know who you are - so we can share in your glory

I am not trying to condone any speculators, but I can understand where they are coming from. Bitcoin is an investment that offers incredibly high rewards - if it succeeds. So it is only natural that speculators will enter the market. That is the nature of a public market. Speculators are also helping to bring bitcoin out to the media and attention of the public. That in turn attracts more research and "eyes" into bitcoin, which only helps to draw attention to more vulnerabilities.

Ok , Most people here understand that bitcoin is a risky proposition. A 51% attack is just one of the risks that has been present since the start, and this most recent paper or "discovery" is another manifestation of that. The only difference between what was written up in this paper is that a few academics actually formalized the problem, put some statistics to work to calculate a probability (and it seems fleshed out more the technical means of how it could work), and proposed a fix to the protocol.

Anyhow.... I agree with this paper that a selfish node attack could be utilized to make a 51% attack easier. A "selfish miner" attack is not a new proposition and has been known about in the BTC community for a long time.

A selfish miner attack would allow someone to attack the network with a smaller % of share than 51%, however they would still require enough of a share to give them a good probability of consistantly "getting ahead" of the public blockchain. However, the attack would work exactly the same way as a 51% attack, so in this respect this paper is just another manifestation of a 51% attack. A few more things about a 51% attack. (1) It should also be noted that such an attack has only existed in theory and never succeeded against bitcoin - as far as I know, anyway. And I am sure there have been many people who tried. (2) There are features that can be implemented to the protocol to make a selfish miner attack more difficult. It would be in everyone's interest in the BTC community to implement these features asap. That would make such an attack less probable.

Finally ...... One good thing that may come from your posts is that the more you continue to post this stuff, the more likely it becomes that the bitcoin core devs will implement more security measures into the procol.

By the way @nak .... I suggest you delete this from your post:

So, what's your new cult revans? Everyone really wants to know.

Careful, Bankster!

 :D

All those words and you neglected to check if the words you were attributing to me were actually posted by me.

Cults are for the easily led, the woolly minded, and those seeking salvation. I have no time for Messianic crackpots and their acolytes and thus Cultcoin is no longer for me.

I'm actually glad such trolls can freely express themselves here.
Sincerly. :)

so you lost the argument, right?

now you are going to shut up?

Don't worry, I know this this thing is a super try-hard troll-inator. It replied, and had nothing to back up it's claims of "moving on to the real solution", just a bit of blatant sidestepping instead.

There is little merit in debating with someone who seems to lack an understanding of what they are arguing about. Your post is for the most part just anxious dismissal of a reality you fervently hope does not manifest

Oh, I understood you. I was just poking a little fun.  :)

+1
Judging by the trading today, I would say a lot of people around the world are proving they believe in the concept. I don't think bitcoin is in trouble. What was discovered is a legitimate theoretical threat, but not the kind of thing that can be done easily (profitably?). It is also something that can be addressed. At least that's what I think, as I do not understand enough about the protocol to really know. Sybil concerns me like a creative 51% attack does. It could happen, but it is highly unlikely to happen or bring down the network.    

You're a silly little man who intentionally doesn't consider all the facts.
You've cherry picked negative aspects and ignored the rest.
That makes everything you just said pointless.  How people do this will always confound me.
You'd think a person speaking would want their words to hold some water.
Yet they speak while knowingly ignoring facts which disprove their words.  Human beings are sad...
The opportunists who are trying to make money off Bitcoin right now are the very organizations which will thrust Bitcoin into the mainstream.
Greed is necessary to get Bitcoin out of the nerd circles and onto the main stage.
Greed doesn't always mean failure.  This is another reason why your viewpoint on reality is lacking.
Once those seeking to make money off mining hardware, merchant services, ATM's, etc have done their work, it will be at that point which those who will appreciate its positive aspects, can be used by billions of humans on earth.
There are over 6 billion people who don't have bank accounts.  And now they will.  For free.
Anyone who poo poo's this is foolish.

Many of those same people don't have access to

The Internet
Computers
Electricity
Food
Water
Shelter

Not really seeing what advantages accrue to people in those circumstances by using Bitcoin.

Well you may soon be in for a big surprise. Bitcoin will change everything in exactly those markets.

(and if $250+ is "really in trouble" ... bring on more trouble please)

Nonsense.

These people are penniless in their national currencies, and should they ever get access to Bitcoin they will be satoshiless .

Somewhere out there, a garden is missing its troll.

Gnomes, gardens have gnomes.

True, but I was picturing something far less cute, more like "chucky" clutching a dollar bill.

Whatever floats your boat.

is it already going back up?

originality: 2/10
style: 3/10

Hey all,
Just here for the worship service/ goat slaying.

Where do I get my uniform?

And where's the kool-aid???

PS   I <3 this cult!

PPS   Lets nominate Revans to high priestess.    He's obviously the smartest here AND he has a crystal ball!!!!!!!!!!!!!   (extra credit for gaming reference)

Trolololololo

Too late guys, I already sold all my Bitcoins. :D

Glad I got out at the top :) *phew!*

Oh Revans. You may have just outsmarted yourself. Now that you've rid yourself of all bitcoin and have no business here except your own, what is your next chapter in life?

The fundamental flaw with bitcoin is that it is not a UNIT.  Currency is 3 things. 1. a store of value
                                                                                                           2. a medium of exchange
                                                                                                           3. a UNIT of account

Bitcoin is not currency because it is not a UNIT. Units are definable in objective terms and are a constant
Bitcoin is not definable and is not a constant. Bitcoin has the same problem as the dollar since 1971. It cant be defined.

For bitcoin to become currency it has to be defined and the limit has to be removed. The amount of bitcoin would then have to change in relation to demand for it to keep the definition true.   

Yeah.....see, your myopic focus on this unit pedantry doesn't make sense in your other threads either.

What about bitcoin lacks units? Just because the unit is defined at the protocol layer in binary...is that what's annoying you here? The inherent abstractness of digital assets? You're kinda sounding like an old-school gold bug who can't get his head around something non-physically-tangible...


Edit: Ugh...I can't believe I bumped this thread! Says to self: "Don't feed the trolls....don't feed the trolls..."

What is that definition? What is objectively equal too? It is not that it is not tangible. We have units of electricity and they are not tangible. The problem is it is not definable.

Mail is 3 things: 1. a mail box
                        2. an envelope
                        3. a mailman

SMTP is not mail cos you can't put the bits indide an envelope, and there's no mailman... So it doesnt fit the definition of mail despite the fact it has the same functionality.. Theres even people who call it "email"! What a bunch of fools!

Everybody knows that the definition of money is an static and immutable god-given concept. It cant evolve along the years! Whats this kind of sorcery? Let's call the spanish inquisition! I'm sending my carrier piggeon now...

i think btc be price 300$

 ???

you tallk about some small panic
about project bitcoin is die

you need call doctor

all people try/make big money

also a lot people invest a lot money for this procedure


 ::)

This is crackpot gibberish you basically just pulled out of your ass.

Umm, yeah.  Right.  Bitcoin isn't currency because, according to you, it "has the same problem as the dollar," since apparently the dollar isn't currency either according to your utterly idiotic made-up bullshit.

Much bigger trouble on the horizon, affects not just bitcoin:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=325642.0

Your really under the wrong impression on how it all works.

lets say the govt tells the devs to make a client that blacklists coins, they publish it and say "this is the official client you must use it".

1. Nobody is required to use it, and anyone with half a brain wont.
2. Everyone will be yelling about how crazy it is and to not use it.
3. Someone will be forking the official client(probably the devs themselves over TOR) to include the latest updates without that bit of code in it.


That example applies to the other two examples you mention. And let me just cut you off before you try to make your next point. "But the devs DID reverse many transactions!" No they didnt. If memory serves... there was an issue where the blockchain forked from an update, unintentionally.  you either let it run its course and fix itself (screwing people in the process) or ... get the pool operators together to go back to the previous version of the client to fix it faster. The fallout was minimal and it was the right choice to make. The problem that caused it was in the original database the clients used, a bug.

If people wernt in agreement with what was done they would have left the pools rather then migrating to them.

If you want the rest of the details im sure there is a thread about it somewhere, including a chat log.

No, that's flat out wrong. Not only is the group that works on the standard client very large, and very broad, and very active (not to mention under lots of scrutiny) the miners also have a strong say in what bitcoin looks like. Even if the group that makes the popular client were tyrannical in some sense, the miners (the REAL backbone of Bitcoin) can decide themselves if they support new features, new clients, etc... If the miners and developers somehow 'collude' on features, then what you get is a BETTER BITCOIN. Because what your saying is that the people who actively build bitcoin agree with the people who actively run bitcoin, which is exactly what all this is anyway. It's a consensus system. Which means it runs perfectly fine.


Nope. There are tens of thousands, if not now, soon, hundreds of thousands of miners out there. The only thing that coordinates them now is the pools that they mine one. Miners have no interest in a fork, it's bad for bitcoin, bad for business. A Forked bitcoin with the 'loser asic miners' has no value. You might as well jump on my bandwagon to Monetize and Mine Bitcoin Testnet. Because there already IS a 'bitcoin2' and it's right inside the standard bitcoin client. If you're pissed the difficulty has surpassed your device and still want to mine bitcoin, just hop on the test net. Forks run by the already out-hashes ASICS would be instantly orphaned.


It's not a flaw, and it's not currently exploitable. You are probably not watching the development email list, but not only are they talking about ways to get around this, but the issue is academic at best. The mining ecosystem is rather well understood to the miners There aren't a bunch of "dark horses" out there. The same people with the hash power to pull something like this off are also the same people working to find solutions to it. There's no money to be made in destroying your own money.

Bitcoin is a sham. Unlike the dollar.

Quote of the day, awesome

Its funny how such an obvious and easy money-making exploit has been described in detail and broadcast to the world, yet no one has taken advantage of it.

It was only a few days ago. Give it time.

you really think that highly of yourself, eh?

The esteem in which I hold myself is irrelevant. I was merely pointing out that there has not been sufficient time for someone to create and debug an attack based on the selfish mining principle explained in the paper.

This is true.  Under orders from the secret committee that runs the foundation, I added a secret file to the bitcoin source master repository.  Don't bother looking for it on your copy of the source , it is hidden secret file.  This file allows the cabal to push updates to all nodes, changing the block validation rules.  The end result is that the central bank foundation can print unlimited bitcoins.

(Note:  I'm mocking the idiot here.  Not only is this not true, it couldn't possibly become true, no matter how many sock puppet accounts Atlas creates to spread these lies.)

Dick face, Open up your pee brain a little.   

Is currency a system of measurement? .... (yes)

Are all systems of measurement dependent on a unit of measurement? .... (yes)

Is bitcoin a UNIT? No none of the worlds "currencies" are.

The gold that the central banks still hold is a UNIT. 

if internet fractures along national borders how it could influence btc?
 I thought its kind of P2P network which is able to operate independently and if necessary, some easy adjustments can be done to keep p2P net alive...
apologize, I am not developer, I have only common IT skills.

You answer your own question.  Either his wallets were not encrypted, not encrypted well, or he was convinced to cough up the key.

That is incorrect. It may be hard for them to do, but they can be seized if they are involved in a crime. Or a corrupt government somewhere could take them for whatever reason they want.

I don't even know what the OP is saying. He's concerned that the core devs will add in some sort of backdoor into the main Bitcoin client and "make" everybody change their client to this new client? Why would they switch to the new client, exactly?

You're essentially saying that the devs will create a flawed altcoin and all Bitcoiners will randomly decide to switch to the flawed altcoin. Only this has been tried in the past, and has failed, for really obvious reasons: Nobody wants to change their good Bitcoins into crap Bitcoins which is what they're doing by switching their client.

Thank you all for quick deletion of my post which was not rude or offtopic!
this is reallly polite democratic discussion
and also thank you who managed to answer my curious question about bitcoin before someone disliked it and deleted it...

It's called give us the password to your Bitcoins (in this case, ill gotten funds), or face another 20 years in prison.

Probably because you posted the exact same thing in 4+ threads.

There are ways to resist to this.
See https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=323993.0 for a starter, multisigning is probably the best bet until some specific, unreplicable devices become reality.

There is no way to resist this.
Now lets fast forward some years and he has the choice to be a free man as soon as he gives the key or stay buried alive in a concrete room.  How many nights will he go to bed knowing he could enjoy live and not have the door slammed closed behind him?
What good is x amount of coins with no access to it ever.
Also giving up the coins would be considered being part of the "rehabilitation process".
Of course the smart move is to accept the deal offered and get reduced time to start with.

Please get familiar with multi-signature before being so sure. ;)

Kouye, you only need to consider the countless drug dealers the governments have threatened with, "show us where the money is or face X amount of prison time" to know it's false.


Whether they use multi-sig or bury cash in a treasure chest in the middle of the desert, either way government will get it's way.

Trust me, in that sort of predicament, you will be rolling over faster than you can say "multi-sig!" by either giving them the password or revealing who the other people involved are.

As foolish as a Nash equilibrium (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nash_equilibrium). See you at the end of times to debrief about why Bitcoin didn't fail.