Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin => Bitcoin Discussion => Topic started by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 09:12:07 AM



Title: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 09:12:07 AM
In early days of May 2016, when Craig Wright claimed to be Satoshi, by rejecting most of the community members demanding for Satoshi private keys, I argued somehow in favor of him. I don't believe in keys, keys are not our identities, they are certifications to our rights, nothing more. Losing/having access to a couple of keys won't change anything about who Satoshi is or is not. I like Gavin Anderson (personally) and I followed him, it was not a big deal after all, who cares about Satoshi real identity?

Even in the past couple of years, being informed about Wright's suspicious behaviours and moves in the ecosystem, I have not decided about him being a hoax or Satoshi himself. Actually didn't follow the man at all.

Now, I have encountered this article : Drugs, fraud, and murder (https://medium.com/@craig_10243/drugs-fraud-and-murder-ddf12208ae8b) By Craig Wright and I'm now fully convinced about him being a hoax. Thank you Craig, you are absolutely helpful in making an embarrassment exemplary out of your carrier.

In this article, besides repeatedly denouncing bitcoin and advertising for bcash, Craig Wright is crusading against:
Quote
... a group of misguided anarchistic socialists who refuse to work within the bounds of the law wanting to cry at the world and say, we do not want law, we want to say what the world is like. It is unfortunate that many grown men still act this way.

Other than its poor writing, this article shows a radical difference in philosophy and vision between the fake Satoshi and the original one:
>[Lengthy exposition of vulnerability of a systm to use-of-force
>monopolies ellided.]
>
>You will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography.

Yes, but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years.

Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own.

Satoshi

I, personally, wouldn't care about bitcoin if it was not against state control.
Libbitcoin guys have formalized this issue as Axiom of Resistance (https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/Axiom-of-Resistance). The word 'axiom' is used intentionally to prevent any further disputes. They simply ask whether you believe in desirability and feasibility of resisting against state control or not? Yes? You are a bitcoiner. No? You are not! Their words:
One who does not accept the axiom of resistance is contemplating an entirely different system than Bitcoin. If one assumes it is not possible for a system to resist state controls, conclusions do not make sense in the context of Bitcoin; just as conclusions in spherical geometry contradict Euclidean.

I didn't started this to re-new an old hoax story. I'm curious about how other bitcoiners think about this issue.




Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 11:06:28 AM
craig scammed the australian government by making a fake trust containing a file of copy-paste public keys (no private keys)
and is in big trouble for that.
he then double downed by getting private investors funds too.
he spiralled into alot of legal and financial issues and is just on a non stop campaign to hope he can ponzi his way out of trouble by grabbing funds from any source he can.

he is trying to make a name for himself hoping it will give him some legal leniency for when the courts gavel(hammer) finally knocks

the old banker excuse.. 'if i go prison thousands of employees lose their jobs, millions of people lose money'
but in the end.. if he doesnt get sorted out soon more will suffer by his games

as for the ethos of bitcoin.
it has changed from the 2009-2013 vision.. but trying to point at non-coders like craig as the controversy. the fingers should be pointing at those that have coded the changes made to bitcoin that have diverted the path away from the original vision
and sorry to say this.. but that would be the core devs

laws can stop businesses from publicly running smoothly but cannot switch off individualised activity. take the century old alcohol prohibition era. or the so called 'war on drugs'

people still got drunk and high

as for axiom of resistance
bitcoin was not meant to become fiat2.0. it was meant to be a second option away from fiat. to de-monopoly fiat as being the only option.
the anarchist ethos (in prohibition terms) is not to say "everyone needs to be constantly drunk and high or else" as an only option to rage against the state.. its simply allowing choice and Independence to be sober or be drunk.

government laws can be made to scream "the only option is to not get drunk/high" but that didnt stop people.
as long as bitcoin remains as a OPEN OPTION that doesnt want to become the only option. then people get to have a choice.

anyone saying bitcoin needs regulation. needs government to tax it, ar truly missing the point of bitcoin


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 11:20:03 AM
franky,
Honestly, I don't see anything that Core has done to change bitcoin vision generally and axiom of resistance specially.

The only one suspicious behavior of Core was and is the fact that they refused and continue to refuse rethinking/fixing mining pressure flaw as the main centralization threat to bitcoin at the same time that they fight against straightforward performance upgrades (let's not use 'scaling proposals' term) in the name of decentralization! I don't fully support this guys, but I think it is more about them being devs rather than strategists.

Now, please tell me about your opinion about axiom of resistance.  :)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 10, 2018, 11:55:40 AM
when the courts gabble(hammer) finally knocks

GAVEL.  It's called a gavel.  

https://www.smileysapp.com/emojis/facepalm-emoji.png


as for the ethos of bitcoin.
it has changed from the 2009-2013 vision.. but trying to point at non-coders like craig as the controversy. the fingers should be pointing at those that have coded the changes made to bitcoin that have diverted the path away from the original vision
and sorry to say this.. but that would be the core devs

And every other participant in the network who agrees with the present course.  Seems like you always forget about them somehow.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 11:57:18 AM
when the courts gabble(hammer) finally knocks

GAVEL.  It's called a gavel. 

https://www.smileysapp.com/emojis/facepalm-emoji.png


as for the ethos of bitcoin.
it has changed from the 2009-2013 vision.. but trying to point at non-coders like craig as the controversy. the fingers should be pointing at those that have coded the changes made to bitcoin that have diverted the path away from the original vision
and sorry to say this.. but that would be the core devs

And every other participant in the network who agrees with the present course.  Seems like you always forget about them somehow.

YAWN - doomad typical reply to ignore topic and go straight to personal attack
running "compatible" is not agreeing. its being told theres no way to object without being thrown off. seems u forget there was no choice to stop segwit..
P.S your post is proof you did not even talk about the topic of wright and axiom.. like i said YOU meander off topic to then spark personal attack.
again if you dont like my opinion. click the ignore button
http://www.stickpng.com/assets/images/580b57fcd9996e24bc43c44b.png


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 12:14:50 PM
Doomad,
Stop harassing franky for a while, do you believe in Axiom of Resistance?


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 12:56:59 PM
to those confused by the term axiom
think of it like common sense

An axiom is a concept in logic. It is a statement which is accepted without question, and which has no proof.

craig wright thought he could axiom himself as satoshi..
(make a statement and people will just believe it as true and just say "yea it makes common sense that hes satoshi")
but people own axioms seen that wright couldnt even use his axiom correctly
(peoples own common sense seen that wright didnt even sound like the common perception of satoshi's personality)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 02:11:39 PM
to those confused by the term axiom
think of it like common sense
To be more specific, an axiom is what we build a discipline (like cryptocurrency)  around it without any feedback from the discipline to the axiom. Although it is more likely for an axiom to be 'common sense compatible' it is not necessary at all.

Axiom of Resistance is the most beautiful thing about bitcoin, it provides bitcoin with its most crucial resource: hearts of people all around the world. We don't try to prove decentralization as a good thing, we don't try to prove it feasible and practical, we just try to achieve it, why?

It is because of the Axiom of Resistance, we believe in decentralization of money as a good future for human welfare and we believe that there is a way to achieve it, there should be, otherwise how is it possible to resist state control? 

I understand for most of you guys in US and Europe, bitcoin as a decentralized ecosystem is not a big deal, you could simply adopt with revisionism force empowered by whales, pools, ASIC manufacturers, ... as long as you (foolishly) feel safe about your treasures and opportunities but it is not the case for me and people like me who live in less developed regions of the world, here bitcoin, true bitcoin I mean, is our only hope.



Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 10, 2018, 02:15:52 PM
Doomad,
Stop harassing franky for a while, do you believe in Axiom of Resistance?

I've certainly never thought that Bitcoin needed government approval.  It's effectively self-legitimising.  So in that sense, it's resistant to not only state control, but also minority control.  It will always be what the majority of its users want it to be.   I wouldn't be harassing Franky1 if he dropped this ridiculous pretence of "developer control".  Being able to express preference simply through participation is immensely powerful.  That's where Bitcoin's resistance ultimately stems from.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 02:45:19 PM
franky,
Please, no longer 'bite' the bait. It is not about how we tear each other apart the Axiom of resistance against state control is the topic for the christ sake.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 03:01:46 PM
whales, pools, ASIC manufacturers, ..
trying to stay on topic

why do people think social drama, whales, pools and asic manufacturers can change the rules?
the axiom is that bitcoins rules are code. and pools asics and whales dont change code

its like politics
when trump does something bad. seems some people dont say trump needs to change his ways. but instead peoples axioms fail by saying "well its your fault trump signed a sanction/pressed a nuke button"
thus trying to assume trump shouldnt change and people shouldnt resist trump.. but just let trump do what he does my making the axiom into "blame yourself and be a sheep, just follow the law"

the real axiom(logic/common sense) is
people dont get a daily vote to resist state decisions made daily. so how can it be other peoples fault for what trump does..

wright is just drama
the price is just drama
pool hashpower is just drama

non of which can resist changes made to the code


to be able to resist. you first need to know who you should resist.
in politics. its not to resist the voter, or smear campaign the voter. because they have no sanction writing power or nuke button. the power is with the state legislators and trump. so to resist the state, you need to aim efforts at the state. and to offer the voter a option that gives voters a choice so that the state doesnt get automatic 'do as states please' control

bitcoins the same



Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 10, 2018, 07:17:28 PM
whales, pools, ASIC manufacturers, ..
trying to stay on topic

why do people think social drama, whales, pools and asic manufacturers can change the rules?
the axiom is that bitcoins rules are code. and pools asics and whales don't change code
Changing the code in the extents that considerably defeat or improve essential components of bitcoin related to state control resistance, features  like (pseudo) anonymity, censorship resistance, decentralization, ... is a social decision and not a developer's choice, no matter how influential and/or exclusive is the developer. Bitcoin is open-source and once the community is determined about a specific change, it will find its devs.

Your perception about Core devs is just exaggerative, my problem with these guys is not about what they do or have done, it is about what they are championing for: Doing just nothing!.

Bitcoin started as a beta version, a proof of concept for PoW and other brilliant ideas of Satoshi, after ten years so many challenges and threats have showed-up, ASICs and pools put decentralization in danger and centralized exchanges ruined privacy and anonymity of users and now SEC is drawing lines and enforcing its artificial "law"s by expanding its interpretation of securities.

This bitcoin is no longer a promising system for resisting against state control, imo. The power is finding a new way to neutralize or abuse bitcoin on a daily basis and our devs are insisting on keeping everything the same as always while the community is forgetting what bitcoin was essentially meant for: resisting state control.

About Axiom of Resistance itself, Bitcoin haven't reach it yet as :
Axiom of Resistance is about the desirability and feasibility of setting monetary system free from state control as a supposition i.e. a hypothesis which we do accept as an undisputable rule. So, it is not a goal or a feature, it was the main incentive and theoretical basis (both) for Satoshi to start designing bitcoin and it is now the main driving force behind bitcoin adoption by millions of people all around the world.

I'm just asking about how conscious are we about it and how do we define ourselves as a bitcoiner? I think a deep understanding of the axiomatic nature of bitcoin's state resistance is very helpful to bring us more closer to each other by understanding how noble and decent is our agenda.



Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 08:39:04 PM
Changing the code in the extents that considerably defeat or improve essential components of bitcoin related to state control resistance, features  like (pseudo) anonymity, censorship resistance, decentralization, ... is a social decision and not a developer's choice, no matter how influential and/or exclusive is the developer

its not a social decision anymore.
1. multiple choice of differing proposals has been rekt off the network(2013-2016)
2. devs admit to doing inflight upgrades and that the mandatory activation and the people dont vote "due to compatibility"
(august 2017)

yes the devs admit it. which makes me laugh that certain people who want to get people distracted into social drama games of creating memes about people who dont even code... those people are not understanding there is no point in pointing fingers at pools, altcoins or just random scammers that dont code.

3. changes to code, need devs to write it.. if devs chose not to write code things wont change. so devs are at the centre of rule changes. again devs can now add more changes without users needing to upgrade."dont worry sheep its compatible"

..
trump can change laws without national elections.

by assuming its ok let them do it. is not resistance

satoshi(the real one) axiom of resistance was that the network should always use consensus (community majority (u call social decision of node users)) not the inflight mandatory stuff that has been seen to occur last year

bitcoins ethos and axiom of resistance of 2009 to 2013 is not the same as bitcoin now


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 10, 2018, 10:17:24 PM
devs can now add more changes without users needing to upgrade."dont worry sheep its compatible"

Such is the nature of softforks.  It's not some sordid secret devs have "admitted" or a crime they have confessed to.  That's just how softforks work.  Not every feature is practical to implement via backwards-compatible softfork, but for those that can be, there's nothing anyone can do to veto them (unless it's a majority of those securing the network vetoing them in unison).  Anyone is free to code it and anyone is free to run it.

If you can't abide by that:

a) What's your "fix" to prevent it?  
b) Why do you think anyone other than you would even want to prevent it?
c) Are you happy to compromise permissionless freedom to satisfy your desire to veto any ideas you personally disagree with?



my problem with these guys is not about what they do or have done, it is about what they are championing for: Doing just nothing!.

Bitcoin started as a beta version, a proof of concept for PoW and other brilliant ideas of Satoshi, after ten years so many challenges and threats have showed-up, ASICs and pools put decentralization in danger and centralized exchanges ruined privacy and anonymity of users and now SEC is drawing lines and enforcing its artificial "law"s by expanding its interpretation of securities.

This bitcoin is no longer a promising system for resisting against state control, imo. The power is finding a new way to neutralize or abuse bitcoin on a daily basis and our devs are insisting on keeping everything the same as always while the community is forgetting what bitcoin was essentially meant for: resisting state control.

I honestly don't see what developers have to do with what centralised exchanges and the SEC are doing.  The "resistance" property demonstrated by the longevity of the network is primarily the result of the people running the software.  Ordinary people strengthening the network purely by participating.  In a scenario where the state were to mandate that users had to register to a central authority or apply for a licence to be legally entitled to run the software, or even ban the use of the software entirely, how many people would comply with that?  I'd imagine it's about the same number who comply with the state's laws regarding peer-to-peer file sharing and copyright infringement, which is clearly not enough to prevent illegal file sharing from happening.

So with that in mind, if users and developers are hesitant to enact radical, sweeping changes to the protocol, or any changes that make it more costly to run a full node, it's precisely because they don't want to make it harder for people to resist if/when the state does attempt to use force against the network.  A network with fewer nodes will be inherently less resistant.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 10:46:54 PM
more doomad flip flopping
EDIT: (shows how now doomad admits consensus wasnt reached and people didnt agree)
Exactly as before with the BTC/BCH split.  Consensus could not be reached, so we naturally went our separate ways.  Each to their own.
LOL.. gotta laugh at flip floppers

one minute, "its community decision.." next minute "there's nothing anyone can do to veto them" next minute "the community all agreed, apart from one person" next minute "consensus couldnt be reached"

anyway lets move on:
If you can't abide by that:

we should sheepishly abide by cores law?... do you even hear yourself?
come on.. take 2 steps back..
have an outer body experience of not defending a dev for just a couple minutes
just long enough to hear your own words as if through the ears of someone that doesnt want single control from one group

things WERE different in 2009-2013 where the community did have a choice and things did cause issues and we seen orphan mechanism actually sort out issues.. but now. the lack of orphans show everything has turned to sheep

anyway doomad.. random people just running nodes dont CODE. running nodes doesnt change rules
the rules are CODE
rules can change via code changes that dont require a vote as "theres nothing anyone can do to veto them..."

then the issue is with those that code it.
you cant blame the community if the community dont have a choice.
you cant say the community had agreed if the community didnt have a choice

node users dont make rules. they dont make code. they just follow the rules of those that CODED the rules. having only one team CODE the rules is not freedom of choice.

i have told you that like over a dozen times.. your actually admitting what i said by you saying it tooo..but then you weirdly go into some social drama finger point that because i said it.. its wrong..

so
grand doomad. lord of all things. i applaud and honour you as the sole person that is highlighting that core can and do make changes without community consensus. i applaud you as king of knowledge that you admit that devs have and will continue to delay certain features, but then  rush others. all in the pursuit of their desires because you have highlighted that they should not report or have to listen to the community.

now you had your glory. no need for your flip floppy change of mind to defend a dev.
no need to throw insults
no need to meander topics
no need to finger point at non-devs

but still now you had glory. please go learn about the network and CODE. (atleast just to avoid flip flops and to stick to one side)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 10, 2018, 11:05:30 PM
threats have showed-up, ASICs and pools put decentralization in danger

this have to disagree with. as there are over 20 "tagged" pools. but even within those tags. theres actually more stratum servers. and different facilities/users. you would be shocked at how diverse things actually are...

but here is the thing no matter how much hash power a block is created with. if it doesnt fit the rules it gets rejected. yep a block could be created with zetahash(1k exa) and still get rejected.
pools dont code the rules. all a pool can do is include or exclude transactions.. not change rules

also the worry of centralisation... via the propaganda of "china 50%"
china dont have 50% no where near 50%

but playing devils advocate. if china did have 50%... pools dont make the rules

threats have showed-up,
and centralized exchanges ruined privacy and anonymity of users and now SEC is drawing lines and enforcing its artificial "law"s by expanding its interpretation of securities.

ill agree that third party services are controlled by authorities now. but thats because they are tied to fiat. years ago people were thinking bitcoins utility should be aimed at buying products with it. thus not rely on fiat gateways(exchanges).. but the ethos has moved away from medium of exchange and is trying to be pushed to just be a FIAT tied investment of "store of value" for fiat lovers to get rich quick

but for bitcoin to remain safe we as a community should not rely on one team to control the code. and have any other team get rekt. as then the single team controlling the code. become corrupt. (as seen the last couple years)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: kotajikikox on November 10, 2018, 11:13:34 PM
Because craig isn't a real satoshi nakamoto it been a long time discussing how is the real satoshi but nobody can tell on this.

Craig their reputation aren't qualified to bieng real satoshi as creator of bitcoin, craig have an many case involvements like drug related and scam accusations according to the news i heard before.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 10, 2018, 11:38:21 PM
more doomad flip flopping
one minute, "its community decision.." next minute "there's nothing anyone can do to veto them"

It is the community's decision.  They have already decided.  If no one had run the softfork code, nothing would have happened.  No individual person can veto it when the community decide to support the idea.  I'm sorry if you see that as flip flopping because you don't understand how consensus works and somehow think you get to singlehandedly derail everything that other users of this network are supportive of.  Consensus has never meant you get to prevent people from either creating or running code that is implemented via softfork.  If you think that's how it works, show me in the code where it says that.

Earlier today, my friends and I ordered pizzas as part of a deal that was on offer.  Three 12" pizzas for £21.  Those are the "rules" in this particular deal.  So we had one each.  But you can still add stuffed crust and extra toppings if you like.  So even though my two friends had the standard pizzas with no extras, I added some Mexican Chicken and stuffed crust to mine.  It had no impact on their pizzas.  They got exactly what they wanted.  They didn't resent me for adding additional stuff to mine.  We all got what we asked for.  What's the problem there?  I guess you would have thrown a fit over that.  "How dare someone add extra stuff without my prior consent and approval?  My consensus has been bypassed!"   ::)


any doomad.. random people just running nodes dont CODE.
the rules are CODE
if rules can change via code changes that dont require a vote an where theres nothing anyone can do to veto them...

Code means nothing if no one runs it.  Your problem is that people are running it.  You wish they wouldn't, but you can't stop them.  


then the issue is with those that code it.
you cant blame the community if the community dont have a choice.
you cant say the community had agreed if the community didnt have a choice

You have a choice.  You've already made it.  Despite having made your choice, you still feel entitled to bitch about the choice everyone else is making.


i have told you that like over a dozen times.. your actually admitting what i said by you saying it tooo..but then you weirdly go into some social drama finger point that because i said it.. its wrong..

What's wrong is that you can't argue your point, so you avoid the questions and start repeating "social drama" like it's a pull-string on your back.  You're meandering.  Answer the questions:

a) What's your "fix" to prevent softforks?  
b) Why do you think anyone other than you would even want to prevent softforks?
c) Are you happy to compromise permissionless freedom to satisfy your desire to veto any ideas you personally disagree with?


You don't have an answer to any of those questions because the only solution you can come up with is for you to tell the devs they can't do it.  And then you know I'll point out that's something a totalitarian fascist would say.  So by all means keep avoiding the inevitable outcome where you reveal yourself to be an authoritarian who hates freedom.  It's not an insult if it's a clear observation of your natural tendencies.

Every time you say "developers have too much control", I hear "developers have too much freedom" and that you want to take that freedom away.  You can't prevent softforks without taking away freedom.  Cause and effect.  No amount of complaining about what I'm saying or how I'm saying it will change the fact that what you want isn't possible unless you're comfortable with destroying the permissionless aspect of Bitcoin.  



Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 11, 2018, 12:01:11 AM
Code means nothing if no one runs it.  Your problem is that people are running it.  You wish they wouldn't, but you can't stop them.  

(facepalm)
but the community didnt all run it.
segwit activated where by pools did not have to run segwit code
segwit activated where by node did not have to run segwit code

segwit got activated no matter what the community decided.. there was no consensus in august 2017

you and the devs admit to it "compatability" is your buzzword for the consensus bypass
devs admit to it "inflight upgrades" "bilateral split" as their buzzwords

i am laughing that you flip flop so much saying the community agreed. when they didnt
thats stats done lie. segwit only had 35% actual agreement before the bypass tricks

it wasnt just a me vs the world is was 65% vs core. i find it funny that you think its was just me opposing it.
you say it yourself many times the community couldnt veto it.

so end your flip flopping because all your doing is meandering the topic into social drama.

core FAILED the consensus test. november 2016 -summer 2017 (35% not 95%)
but core couldnt take no for an answer. core didnt want to accept consensus so they then bypassed it with the other bip that had a mandatory date where pools and nodes would get banned and blocks rejected.
and where those that didnt vote would be supplied with stripped data, make them second class no longer full nodes.

that was NOT consensus that was tyranny

anyway
a) What's your "fix" to prevent softforks?  
b) Why do you think anyone other than you would even want to prevent softforks?
c) Are you happy to compromise permissionless freedom to satisfy your desire to veto any ideas you personally disagree with?

a) not to use the summer 2017 bypass bip and stick to the original consensus bip used in 2016(and prior)
b) adding things without network consent...... um ever heard of trojans
c) its not my idea.... 65% of the community didnt want segwit
     also to highlight. i am not controlling or causing any tyranny..
     i have not made code for the community to use. my software is for my use
     code i make has no mandatory crap in it. and does not have any consensus bypass crap

     so to ultimately to destroy your meanders.. there is no point you getting upset by me. all i am doing is talking.
     but it is funny that you think i am controlling/ causing tyranny. and all the other empty insults you make.

anyway even now.. with it fully activated and a year later..
do you see 100% desire for segwit... nope. do you see 50% desire.. nope
the UTXO count. the amount of funds on segwit outputs. the fact that lukejr, sipa and btcc are still asking for funds using legacy addresses.. (thats the real funny)

if you dont like what i have to say. hit the ignore button

http://www.stickpng.com/assets/images/580b57fcd9996e24bc43c44b.png


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 11, 2018, 12:37:36 AM
you and the devs admit to it "compatability" is your buzzword for the consensus bypass
devs admit to it "inflight upgrades" "bilateral split" as their buzzwords

With the frequency you use them, they're clearly your buzzwords now.  Maybe one day you'll figure out no one cares.


it wasnt just a me vs the world is was 65% vs core. i find it funny that you think its was just me opposing it.
you say it yourself many times the community couldnt veto it.

No, I said individuals couldn't veto it.  Nothing anyone can do.  The community, if in agreement, can absolutely veto things they don't approve of.  Like how they vetoed 2x nodes staying connected to the network.  An individual couldn't have disconnected them all.  It took lots of people for that to happen.  You can't veto me using SegWit.  And I honestly don't see why you'd think you have the right to.  If the whole community wanted to veto me using SegWit, that would be a different story.  I'd then be the one pissing into the wind.  But no, it's you doing that.  Again.


core FAILED the consensus test. nomember 15 2016 -summer 2017 (35% not 95%)

If we used your perverted definition of consensus, which is "it's only consensus when Franky1 agrees with it", sure.  Back in the real world, though, consensus is not determined by a statistic on a given day of your choosing.  Consensus is constant and unyielding.  It's happening right now and it says SegWit is fine.  You are failing the consensus test every time you say devs are in control.  You are failing the consensus test if you think a past date is more important than the code people are running right now, this very second.  You are failing the consensus test if you think you get to tell users and developers what they can or can't do.


but core couldnt take no for an answer. core didnt want to accept consensus so they then bypassed it with the other bip that had a mandatory date where pools and nodes would get banned and blocks rejected. that was NOT consensus that was tyranny

Okay, cool, whatever.  Enjoy your "tyranny" of total freedom.  I take it you aren't going to answer those questions about how you'd prevent softforks then?  Figured as much.  I'll accept that as your failure to present a valid formative stance, let alone find a practical path to achieve a predetermined goal.  You don't know what you want and you wouldn't know how to get there if you did.   :D


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 11, 2018, 12:42:39 AM


(yawn)(laugh)
all i see is insults
time to ignore him as he is just after some social drama.
moving on. ill just let doomad drive himself in circles
i gave him months to talk to devs.
i gave him months to research actual code
i gave him months to research devs desires(roadmap)

i will give him praise
him saying one team controlling code is good. letting in trojans is good and making the blockchain stagnate while other networks evolve is good. really does show his motivations are not that of a "bitcoiner". hope devs give him the christmas bonus he must be hoping for.





Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 11, 2018, 12:53:15 AM
all i see is insults

Describing the futility of your efforts is not an insult.  You can't think of a viable way to prevent softforks.  How is it an insult to point out the simple fact that what you want isn't practical?  Stop dodging the real issue here.  You hate SegWit and Lightning, but you can't stop them.  So you make up a story and hope people buy it.  But you've now repeated the story so often that you believe it, as though it were actually true.  It isn't.  There was no consensus bypass.  Because there's no such thing.  Individuals can't prevent softforks.  Everyone is free to do what they want, but they can't stop others from doing the same.  If you break consensus, you get forked off. 


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: KonstantinosM on November 11, 2018, 02:40:20 AM
Ignoring all the franky stuff.

I've been in this space since 2012 and this is the first time I hear about the axiom of resistance.

I thought that it was self evident for most of the bitcoin community that we want to build something that is resistant in all sort of ways. One of the big problems with a bank account is that it can be frozen by the government that has jurisdiction over that bank. If bitcoin could not resist government force it would only take us half-way to economic freedom.

The government also stands for the people in a society, if your money can be controlled by other people, in this case the government, then it's not really your money, at least to the extent that it is being controlled, or able to be controlled by other people. And that extent is absolute. The government can freeze your account, potentially even take the money for themselves (civil forfeiture).



Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: drawingthesun on November 11, 2018, 02:47:20 AM

In this article, besides repeatedly denouncing bitcoin and advertising for bcash, Craig Wright is crusading against:
Quote
... a group of misguided anarchistic socialists who refuse to work within the bounds of the law wanting to cry at the world and say, we do not want law, we want to say what the world is like. It is unfortunate that many grown men still act this way.


And yet another thing that pisses me off about Craig Wright, he has this massive hard on for following the law to the letter and if he was really Satoshi, he would have never created Bitcoin.

Back when Bitcoin was created it was debatable if someone could legally issue their own currency, especially one that doesn't have KYC baked in at the protocol level. You can be sure that the Government would have attacked Craig if they knew about him creating Bitcoin in the early days, as they could have easier deemed his 'rules' (bitcoin codebase) as being him issuing a currency (Bitcoin.)

Of course by the time people started to make cryptocurrency with their names attached, (Ethereum for example) the cat was out of the bag and it was too late to do anything about it.

Like the EtherDelta founder being targeted by the SEC, if Satoshi was not anonymous it's likely they would have been taken to court in the US if they were known around 2009-2011.

Thankfully Satoshi's anonymity allowed the pandoras box to remain open long enough that by the time we get to 2013 it's too late and too many people around the world are using it. I also suspect the CIA made use of Bitcoin and thus was a reason not to make it illegal in the first few years.

Anyways, this to me points to Craig not being Satoshi. As far as the law goes he seems to be too law abiding to ever have even considered something like Bitcoin.

There is no way Craig is Satoshi, the two people are almost 100% opposites.

It's sad that some people follow him and believe all this trite.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 11, 2018, 04:56:15 AM
I've been in this space since 2012 and this is the first time I hear about the axiom of resistance.

I thought that it was self evident for most of the bitcoin community that we want to build something that is resistant in all sort of ways. One of the big problems with a bank account is that it can be frozen by the government that has jurisdiction over that bank. If bitcoin could not resist government force it would only take us half-way to economic freedom.

The government also stands for the people in a society, if your money can be controlled by other people, in this case the government, then it's not really your money, at least to the extent that it is being controlled, or able to be controlled by other people. And that extent is absolute. The government can freeze your account, potentially even take the money for themselves (civil forfeiture).
The problem with self evident facts is about them becoming transparent and being overlooked and eventually denied. Using a strong term like this, axiom of resistance is the cure.

And it is the right time to resurrect resistance, the cause, imo.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Zin-Zang on November 11, 2018, 05:28:25 AM
1. Wright never was Satoshi.

Quote
I am sorry to tell you all, Bitcoin is not, was not, and shall never be “permission-less”. In fact, nothing you ever create will be.

Bitcoin itself is not permission-less, Well Damn he had to get one thing right sooner or later.  :D


Axiom of Resistance
Quote
In other words there is an assumption that it is possible for a system to resist state control.
This is not accepted as a fact but deemed to be a reasonable assumption, due to the behavior of similar systems, on which to base the system.

Quote
One who does not accept the axiom of resistance is contemplating an entirely different system than Bitcoin.
If one assumes it is not possible for a system to resist state controls, conclusions do not make sense in the context of Bitcoin; just as conclusions in spherical geometry contradict Euclidean. For example, without the axiom, how can Bitcoin be trustless and a sound money?
Does not sound money in this case require trust that the state will not subvert its foundations?
This leads one to make obvious errors in an attempt to rationalize the conflict.

For a system  to resist the government, it needs the following
1.  The Ability to Hide from Government Military.               Bitcoin lost this due to the excessive energy usage required
2.  The Ability for anyone to make transactions:                 Bitcoin lost this when the Elite's ASIC miners took over.
3.  The Ability to move operations at a moment's notice.     Bitcoin lost this when ASICS required warehouses.

There are a few crypto coins that can still meet these requirements.
One of them will be the resistance to the Global Elite.

But nothing is set in stone and it will be a battle , of which the global elite will hold nothing back.
They will reign pain and misery on anyone that fights them.

Chinese Proverb
It is a Gift and a Curse to be born in interesting times.

Well Boys and Girls those of you wanting true financial freedom, the next few years are going to get interesting.
God Bless & Good Luck , we're going to need it.  :)



Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 11, 2018, 06:19:07 AM
For a system  to resist the government, it needs the following
1.  The Ability to Hide from Government Military.               Bitcoin lost this due to the excessive energy usage required
2.  The Ability for anyone to make transactions:                 Bitcoin lost this when the Elite's ASIC miners took over.
3.  The Ability to move operations at a moment's notice.     Bitcoin lost this when ASICS required warehouses.

There are a few crypto coins that can still meet these requirements.
One of them will be the resistance to the Global Elite.

But nothing is set in stone and it will be a battle , of which the global elite will hold nothing back.
They will reign pain and misery on anyone that fights them.

Chinese Proverb
It is a Gift and a Curse to be born in interesting times.

Well Boys and Girls those of you wanting true financial freedom, the next few years are going to get interesting.
God Bless & Good Luck , we're going to need it.  :)
Bitcoin is the most inspiring and original cryptocurrency, it is not just another coin. PoW is necessary because you can't switch from some elites to others in the name of freedom.
Money needs to be based on actual work and energy, not trust, not reputation, not convention, not debt as the source of value to be legitimate and to be set free.
But this whole PoW/PoS thing is off-topic we are facing more serious problems right now. Check how Trump's SEC cyber chief is warning against the whole crypto community not to escape from their surveillance. (https://bitcoinist.com/decentralized-exchanges-cant-escape-the-sec-warns-its-cyber-chief/)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: AnAiAk on November 11, 2018, 06:22:43 AM
Of course he is not. Gavin said in an interview that Craig was satoshi to hide his true identity. I know that Gavin maintains contact with Satoshi only through messages (outside the forum), but his true identity is not known by anyone (not even by Gavin).


 Att. -----. 19i1p0^


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Wind_FURY on November 11, 2018, 07:44:52 AM
Of course he is not. Gavin said in an interview that Craig was satoshi to hide his true identity. I know that Gavin maintains contact with Satoshi only through messages (outside the forum), but his true identity is not known by anyone (not even by Gavin).

Are you telling us that Gavin Andresen was trying to protect the identity of a person that even he himself does not know the true identity of? That was hard to put into words. Hahahaha.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 11, 2018, 11:07:20 AM
Anyways, this to me points to Craig not being Satoshi. As far as the law goes he seems to be too law abiding to ever have even considered something like Bitcoin.

craig is not law abiding. craig is a scammer

but craig loves public identity and analytics he would happily grab peoples identity and monetise it. he is not into anonymity/pseudonymity. he has been too in peoples face about garnering fame and trying to make a name for himself in anyway he can

he is also not into coding. he gets other people to code

he just wants to make a name for himself and use the fame to get people to hand him money
the reason he pretends to follow the law. is because if he gets arrested. then all his aussie legal issues will latch on and he will be in bigger trouble


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: DooMAD on November 11, 2018, 01:25:01 PM
The problem with self evident facts is about them becoming transparent and being overlooked and eventually denied. Using a strong term like this, axiom of resistance is the cure.

And it is the right time to resurrect resistance, the cause, imo.

Using strong terms arguably doesn't achieve anything.  It's our actions that define how resistant the chain is.  If you weaken the network's resistance by making it more costly to run a full node, or you inadvertently introduce a critical vulnerability while making radical changes, using strong terms won't magically make things better.  Which is why our actions so far have been to avoid making it costly to run a full node and avoid making radical changes to the protocol.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 11, 2018, 02:55:44 PM
The problem with self evident facts is about them becoming transparent and being overlooked and eventually denied. Using a strong term like this, axiom of resistance is the cure.

And it is the right time to resurrect resistance, the cause, imo.

Using strong terms arguably doesn't achieve anything.  It's our actions that define how resistant the chain is.  If you weaken the network's resistance by making it more costly to run a full node, or you inadvertently introduce a critical vulnerability while making radical changes, using strong terms won't magically make things better.  Which is why our actions so far have been to avoid making it costly to run a full node and avoid making radical changes to the protocol.
َAlthough you are right here (what a surprise  :P) but it is just half of the truth about the situation, the other half is about the cause and the non-linearity of socioeconomic phenomenons.

Freezing bitcoin code may be helpful for protecting it from simple threats but won't do anything about unexpected and complex social behaviors. For instance when Slush proposed his pool service, nobody had a clue about how sophisticated the situation is. Satoshi was around yet (he disappeared few weeks later) and made no serious contribution, just a pure technical comment, it took years for pools to be understood as a serious centralization threat.

Bitcoin is not a piece of code, it is not tcp/ip or snmp it is complex socioeconomic protocol based on game theory played by sophisticated actors among them banks, governments, surveillance institutions, scammers,  pool operators, ASIC manufacturers, ambitious developers, academicians, ...

The most stupid idea for bitcoin is ignoring its need for adoption and change to remain focused on its cause. Leaving bitcoin as is, is nothing less than betraying it by putting it in danger of being neutralized and failing its mission: resistance.

I do care about software bugs but do you care about the resistance?


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: vgk88 on November 11, 2018, 09:30:40 PM
I do not think that Craig is Satoshi. Craig is trying to deceive the whole cryptocurrency community. But his conflict with Roger Ver can be useful for Bitcoin. This will show that hard forks are a bad idea.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: franky1 on November 11, 2018, 09:47:38 PM
more costly to run a node??

um.. sorry but you can get a PC with more space and ram for less cost than 2009. (its cheaper to run a node than before)
even something like a 256gb microsd card (the size of a fingernail) proves against the whole myth of "nodes will need servers"

even the fact that 56kbit/s dialup would be 4mbyte/10min..
so with fiber which is 1000x faster then dialup. again proves against the myth of nodes on servers

but the funny part is that resisting developing onchain using the excuse of "cost to run node".. while letting those same decision makers then inflight upgrade new stuff.. where that inflight upgrade mechanism is a backdoor (trojan gateway) is a security risk to the network.

and all we hear is the muttering rants of "trust the devs"

seems some axioms have been lost on some people

as for mining..
block creaters cannot create/alter the rules... they can only collate transactions to crate blocks of data(not new code). it does not matter if its 10exahash or 1zetahash, if they tried to make a block thats not within the rule they would get rejected. there is no threat. bar empty blocks (which devs can create a rule to avoid/reduce risk of)
pools stay within the rules to get paid. if they break the rules they simply dont get paid and the next pools gets the win.

its a simple game of 100m running. if the first cross the line is found to be cheating. the runner up wins. and the runner up is usually able to cross th line milliseconds aftr the first one.

mining is not a 'if the first runner does it in 10 seconds then the second runner must take 20 seconds to run 100m and the 3rd racer must take 30 seconds.. you will finds that the reality is that the runner up is only a short period behind the LUCKY first runner.
(^ pre-empting the block delay myth of rejecting blocks ^)

and as for the centralisation myth of "china 50%". slush is in thailand, f2pool is everywhere. and the stratums tagged as "antpool" are in iceland, georgia, canada, mongolia, china, and other places.

but lets compare. GPU mining "OMG centralisation AMD own mining and have their openCL boost that out competes geforce"
also asics in general whether it be bitfury avalon or bitmain are WAY WAY WAY cheaper and electric efficient than GPU

take the stats.
50exa
that would require 10 trillion PC's or 330 billion GPU or just 3.5million asics.
where an ASIC is just the cost of 2GPU not 10,000

so. when it comes to bitcoin security and resisting protocol control. its the CODE people should be concentrating on. not the social drama that has nothing to do with code


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Wind_FURY on November 12, 2018, 06:08:34 AM

I didn't started this to re-new an old hoax story. I'm curious about how other bitcoiners think about this issue.


What were you expecting to get out if this? That the "assumptions that could lead something to be true" expressed in the "Axiom of Resistance" might be applicable in the "assumptions" of Craig Wright to be truly Satoshi?


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 12, 2018, 06:37:27 AM

I didn't started this to re-new an old hoax story. I'm curious about how other bitcoiners think about this issue.


What were you expecting to get out if this? That the "assumptions that could lead something to be true" expressed in the "Axiom of Resistance" might be applicable in the "assumptions" of Craig Wright to be truly Satoshi?
Actually, I didn't started it to discuss Wright, I used him as an excuse, now I'm realizing that the man is really funny as he is practically engaged in a "taking ownership of bitcoin" program. The man is really stupid by any measure: fake enemy, fake war, fake victory, fake power!  :D

So, let's talk about Craig Wright a bit more  ;)

My argument:
Craig Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto is ultimately false as he does not support axiom of resistance and is not a bitcoiner, no matter he has or has not access to Satoshi's private keys. His probable access to the keys could be used as an evidence for conspiracy accusations against him in courts.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: AGD on November 12, 2018, 07:08:53 AM
Somebody told me, that Gavin confirmed Craig beeing Satoshi only to distract from the fact that he is Satoshi. See the meta game?


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Kakmakr on November 12, 2018, 07:12:08 AM
One reason why I think Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto, is the fact that he is trying too hard to be Satoshi Nakamoto. You must understand that Satoshi never tried to be in the limelight, from the start. He avoided being Dox'ed at all cost, because he wanted to stay anonymous.

Craig Wright is the exact opposite of that and he is trying his utmost best to be in the limelight. You do not need Axiom Resistance to tell you that, it is common sense.  ::)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Wind_FURY on November 13, 2018, 05:54:21 AM

I didn't started this to re-new an old hoax story. I'm curious about how other bitcoiners think about this issue.


What were you expecting to get out if this? That the "assumptions that could lead something to be true" expressed in the "Axiom of Resistance" might be applicable in the "assumptions" of Craig Wright to be truly Satoshi?
Actually, I didn't started it to discuss Wright, I used him as an excuse, now I'm realizing that the man is really funny as he is practically engaged in a "taking ownership of bitcoin" program. The man is really stupid by any measure: fake enemy, fake war, fake victory, fake power!  :D

Ok, I perceived the argument from the other way around. Haha.


Quote
So, let's talk about Craig Wright a bit more  ;)

My argument:
Craig Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto is ultimately false as he does not support axiom of resistance and is not a bitcoiner, no matter he has or has not access to Satoshi's private keys. His probable access to the keys could be used as an evidence for conspiracy accusations against him in courts.

My answer would be, whether Craig Wright supports the axiom or not is irrelevant. If I express my support for the axiom would that make me Satoshi? How can I be if I don't have the keys to prove I am him?


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 13, 2018, 01:10:01 PM
So, let's talk about Craig Wright a bit more  ;)

My argument:
Craig Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto is ultimately false as he does not support axiom of resistance and is not a bitcoiner, no matter he has or has not access to Satoshi's private keys. His probable access to the keys could be used as an evidence for conspiracy accusations against him in courts.

My answer would be, whether Craig Wright supports the axiom or not is irrelevant. If I express my support for the axiom would that make me Satoshi? How can I be if I don't have the keys to prove I am him?

Holding a key just proves one thing: you have rights to spend a balance, not holding it means you can't do it. Your identity has nothing to do with your possession of keys, it is a social issue and should be addressed socially.

It is why I think Wright's social behavior leaves no space for him to steal Satoshi icon, he is not a bitcoiner as I discussed above, being Satoshi himself? Noways!


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Wind_FURY on November 14, 2018, 05:33:12 AM
So, let's talk about Craig Wright a bit more  ;)

My argument:
Craig Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto is ultimately false as he does not support axiom of resistance and is not a bitcoiner, no matter he has or has not access to Satoshi's private keys. His probable access to the keys could be used as an evidence for conspiracy accusations against him in courts.

My answer would be, whether Craig Wright supports the axiom or not is irrelevant. If I express my support for the axiom would that make me Satoshi? How can I be if I don't have the keys to prove I am him?

Holding a key just proves one thing: you have rights to spend a balance, not holding it means you can't do it. Your identity has nothing to do with your possession of keys, it is a social issue and should be addressed socially.

It is why I think Wright's social behavior leaves no space for him to steal Satoshi icon, he is not a bitcoiner as I discussed above, being Satoshi himself? Noways!

But if Craig Wright held the keys, and used it to verify that he is Satoshi, it would not make the community think more him, but it would unquestionably make Satoshi look less.

Bitcoin will not care. 8)


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: aliashraf on November 14, 2018, 01:23:04 PM
So, let's talk about Craig Wright a bit more  ;)

My argument:
Craig Wright's claim to be Satoshi Nakamoto is ultimately false as he does not support axiom of resistance and is not a bitcoiner, no matter he has or has not access to Satoshi's private keys. His probable access to the keys could be used as an evidence for conspiracy accusations against him in courts.

My answer would be, whether Craig Wright supports the axiom or not is irrelevant. If I express my support for the axiom would that make me Satoshi? How can I be if I don't have the keys to prove I am him?

Holding a key just proves one thing: you have rights to spend a balance, not holding it means you can't do it. Your identity has nothing to do with your possession of keys, it is a social issue and should be addressed socially.

It is why I think Wright's social behavior leaves no space for him to steal Satoshi icon, he is not a bitcoiner as I discussed above, being Satoshi himself? Noways!

But if Craig Wright held the keys, and used it to verify that he is Satoshi, it would not make the community think more him, but it would unquestionably make Satoshi look less.

Bitcoin will not care. 8)
Having access to the keys of Satoshi wouldn't make Craig Wright anybody other than Craig Wright. It is impossible for him to be Satoshi because the latter was the one who defined and invented cryptocurrency as an alternative to state controlled money and Craig wright is the one who tries to sell it as a complementary utility to states.


Title: Re: Axiom of Resistance (Why Craig Wright is not Satoshi)
Post by: Wind_FURY on November 15, 2018, 05:30:42 AM
Ah this is a philosophical debate. Then I agree. If the "Satoshi persona" and Craig Wright really lived in a single physical body, then there is an argument that Satoshi still wouldn't be Craig Wright simply because of his rejection of the axiom, which makes Satoshi's support of the axiom more relevant.