I remember I had sent the script to someone in a PM back at the day, but don't have it now, could someone post it?

I do not really see why the public portrays hackers as intriguing individuals, when hacking is about as tasteless as vandalism, anyone can setup an anonymous server with a domain asking for credit card numbers in exchange for Emma Watsons nudes if you have 100k targeted views there will be at least 20% credit cards submitted, average of 1k per credit card is 20k if you sell them on the deepweb for 5% then you've got 5k which barely makes a normal salary.

The problem is if you're that good why not work for a european firm and make 10k per month doing some bullshit security job plus have all the perks and avoid the risk of getting locked up, only makes sense for individuals with a low financial intelligence. The average human is so dumb he would trade his credit card info for a chocolate bar, playing our monkey brains large scale is about as impressive as stealing candy from a kid, imagine if you get locked up for 5 years after 5 years of work your monthly salary gets inflated to 2.5 versus the 10 that you could have been making.

This is why Bitcoin works as a monetary system so well, it pays significantly more to work for the system than against it. The avatar was set back in 2011 when they still allowed avatars, no ill intent in mind. I still like to keep it because it reminds me of how infinitely not noob I am vs most of the forum.

No such thing as a white hat hacker either, if your system is secure there is no need to order some schmuck to try to bruteforce the password or type in zeros and ones against a green screen to attempt and gain access.

you call yourself a "hacker" yet this obviously will not work in real life
sit down and think about why

I am not flaming anyone, sure I am young and passionate about my work and like to call idiots by their rightful name, idiots.

Throwing blank statements just appeals to the ignorant public, provide an argument I will provide a counter argument.

$40 an hour on a full time job could indeed be relatively high, on a part time job I have seen offers worse than mine run up to 120 euro per hour.

Business 101 is people who matter don't care and people who care don't matter, don't know how much business experience you have but I assure you nobody cares who and what I called someone in the free market. Those who care don't have the money to employ me for 15 minutes anyway.

This is ridiculous and what a way to kill the price and use other than using it as a tool of theft. Hey everybody lets use Bitcoin to steal government funds so we can get Bitcoin looked down upon by everyone and have tons of regulations and bans on it! This will be great and there will be no way to exchange it for local currency except in person which would be super sketch!

How about we keep Bitcoin the way it is and you get over your crazy idea to kill Bitcoin.

Most of the bullshit foundation are controlled, controlled not as in every person is worth 1 and they control the most, controlled as in Gavin is worth 35, someone else is worth 0.1 perhaps and so on.

Most of the nodes are influenced however, controlled would imply under direct control as-in SSH and registered with the chief executive of the CIAs Paypal. Defeat is inevitable for the sheep, us wolves will get richer no matter what, it's the stupid masses getting swindled of what isn't their to begin with.

Most are influenced by the USG, only a small portion are capable of formulating and truly understanding ideas by analysing them carefully I have no doubt at the back of my mind that we will end up overpowered.

All developers don't need to be controlled, just Gavin, the rest who cannot formulate their own opinion will follow like a flock of sheep.

Not if all parties in set debates are controlled by the USG.

Sybil attacks applied to debates.

It is rather naive to think so, the same kind of nativity is applied to politics where people actually believe that democracy is "fair" because every person has a choice. Gavin could replace the bitcoin-qt client at bitcoin.org overnight and let the stupid masses that don't know squat empower his flawed decision.

I believe I have found the source of the problem.

The proof of work function needs special properties.  So far, the only class of functions that have the properties we need are cryptographic hashes.  Among the few cryptographic hashes available and trusted at the time of release, SHA2-256 provides the best tradeoff between dynamic range and length of output.  Others could have been chosen, and can be chosen in the future, if some pressing need arises.  But don't fool yourself into thinking that there is some function out there that does useful work at the same time.  That would be the holy grail of proof-of-work systems, and lots of people are looking without results.

Then, there are fundamental constants.  These were arbitrary (within a broad range) at the time the system was started.  Why is 600 seconds the goal for the average block time instead of 500 or 700?  Why was the initial subsidy 50 BTC rather than 10 or 100?  No particular reason.  But, once we started using bitcoin, these arbitrary constants stopped being arbitrary.  Now we maintain them because we all agreed to them, and no one has the power to force a change.

And last, there are implementation values.  These are the ones that are, in your words, "being modified by the select few that own the bitcoin.org domain".*  Things like the fee for relay values, etc.  These influence how nodes interact with each other, but don't change the fundamental rules of the system.

Also, there is a fourth class, protocol constants.  These are really a subset of the implementation values, which is why I don't mind putting them after the "last" thing.  These are things that would require wide adoption to work, but don't really change the rules of the game.  For example, If we ever find that 8 places of precision aren't enough, we can make a new transaction version with a wider field and/or a different scaling factor.  This would hard fork old versions off, but wouldn't change the rules of the system.

*  Just for the record, that totally isn't how it works.  The developers can make changes to the software, but they can't make anyone actually use it, so their power to change these values is limited by the public's willingness to accept their changes.  And the software is totally open and free, so any person or group that doesn't like something can fork their own version.