I agree with this theory, that Nick Szabo is Satoshi.
To me, the biggest piece of evidence that very few people discuss, is the fact that Nick Szabo attempted to post-date his "bit gold" post from 2005 to 2009, after the release of Bitcoin.
There is another possibility: he is not Satoshi, but he knows who Satoshi is. |
|
|
|
Yeah but the interesting thing is it's probably individual officials buying mostly, rather than having some kind of government treasury hold wallet data for the government as a whole or any department. Bitcoin is so good at what it does that it could rip these bureaucracies apart, since for the first time each individual's wealth isn't contingent on the web of trust in the political world. It's a way for even government officials to opt out. And of course not just in China.
I agree with what you said here, but I would also not rule out the possibility of purchases by the government itself, it can even be done with private hands. And let us not forget the individual bankers themselves. Who seriously thinks they'll let themselves get behind the wave? That was my interpretation of PBOC's statement, they are trying to ban something they know banks are trying to get involved, otherwise they need not be so explicit. |
|
|
|
Yeah but the interesting thing is it's probably individual officials buying mostly, rather than having some kind of government treasury hold wallet data for the government as a whole or any department. Bitcoin is so good at what it does that it could rip these bureaucracies apart, since for the first time each individual's wealth isn't contingent on the web of trust in the political world. It's a way for even government officials to opt out. And of course not just in China.
I agree with what you said here, but I would also not rule out the possibility of purchases by the government itself, it can even be done with private hands. |
|
|
|
Holy shit that's the missing puzzle piece (in the conspiracy theory)!
It's well known that China has been encouraging its citizens to stockpile gold, probably so they could confiscate it if needed and as a way of making their citizens richer (a sort of leveraged play on gold).
I was thinking they might be doing the same thing with Bitcoin now. But the problem with the theory was always that they can't really confiscate bitcoins. However, they can sort of do it by manipulating the market and media, laws, etc. It's exactly what you'd expect a powerful and strategically cunning government to do.
It's actually a pretty great strategy. Get your citizens to buy, and if the price goes down it's the same as if they gambled it away in Macau. The government loses nothing much. If the price goes up you get more tax money and economic growth, and then with your strong control of media and everything you can "shake the tree" and still be able to buy in yourself at decent prices once Bitcoin is more solidly a thing.
Lower risk and higher reward than just buying in with your own money right away.
If this is true it would confirm what I have been saying for a while: hoarding bitcoins is good, it's an essential safeguard for our liberty lest all coins go into the hands of governments. |
|
|
|
Perhaps China is protecting Bitcoin from an overrun and/or keeping the price low so that gov people can buy in.
When we finally break gold parity it will be all the more shocking because right now the gold believers can entrench their views by saying, "See? It can never beat gold. Everyone knows that. Bitcoin was slayed by the golden dragon. Hahahahaaa."
Oh, you just inspire me of a new conspiracy theory: perhaps China(or some other mighty organizations) is busy liquidating gold and accumulating bitcoins, so they are putting a temporary check on the price parity. This actually makes sense if you analyze the sequence of events during these two months: bitcoins used to be available in large quantities only on foreign exchanges, thus CCP can't get hold of them without moving large amount of fiats into foreign exchanges, which will likely attract attentions. So they may decide to first prop up the bitcoin price in China, gradually siphoning bitcoins into Chinese exchanges, then issue the PBOC statement to creak a market panic, frighten the Chinese speculators to undersell the bitcoins they just bought, and thereby accumulating many bitcoins using yuans being moved entirely within Chinese financial system, which they can freely manipulate to hide their true identities. |
|
|
|
|
The blog that this post first made appearance have no history of posting and most likely was newly created, I suspect the author maybe trying to lead people astray in their searches of Satoshi.
|
|
|
|
|
We need to read between the lines.
Why do the PBOC made it explicit that all banks and payment processors can't offer Bitcoin services, and go as far as making a ban list? Are not China's banks just PBOC's bitches, and making too much money to care about Bitcoin at all? Also in this nation we don't really care much about the accuracy of wording anyway, we are not a nation of lawyers.
Chances are, that the financial institutions actually had secretly planned to get in Bitcoin, that they have been quenching their thirst for bitcoins for a long time, and it's high time the big daddy should grab their ears and give them a warning.
Also, one would be naive to think that PBOC really cares about common folks' risks. The banks have been pimping gold to their customers since day one of the gold drop, PBOC didn't give a damn.
|
|
|
|
To say the least, everyone talks about the tulip mania, what happened after the mania? Didn't Netherland become a kingdom of tulips, until this day? Everyone talks about the dotcom bubble, what happened after the bubble? Didn't the IT technology transform nearly every aspect of our life? Following the same pattern, Bitcoin would have seen worldwide adoption after the bubble, not bad at all! What's all this doom and gloom about?
I like your comments; I'll certainly use this. I guess to bake a cake you gotta break some eggs. However, I'm guessing the thing that people are worried about is who gets in last may never recover. I'll agree that it is the people's fault who get in near the end and risk too much. And everyone wants to time the market, which is why people think they've missed the opportunity. This is why I try not to talk to people about speculation, but help them find a use for bitcoin, and then buy some to take advantage of that use. Then if they believe the technology is useful and will keep being adopted (increasing it's valuation) then I'd say they are ready to "invest" some more. Most people don't have patience for this; they are just looking for the quick buck which is likely why the media feeds off it...for their bottom line. All makes sense from different perspectives. I agree with you there, and I always urge people to check their own financial situation whenever they want to invest and reflect if they can afford to lose it all, they need to prove to me they can use a client proficiently, which they will need for storing coins anyway, I think that makes sense. The case with Bitcoin is especially unique given the fact that it's trying to liberate us from the powers that control our money, who will very often get in last and hold the bag just like any common sucker yet without risking any bit of their own money. The two most infamous cases are Gordon Brown's liquidation of UK gold reserve right at the gold price bottom and Bernanke's purchase of gold right off the peak, both costed taxpayers billions yet hardly affect those in charge personally, at least when investing in Bitcoin you are responsible for what you have done. |
|
|
|
Please read my example model, you cannot undo what someone has already done, in this case the receiver would have already sent the BTC off.
He still has to wait for confirmations to verify that I haven't sent the coins off to another address I control before he sent them off to an address he controls. Just because I send him a wallet doesn't mean I don't still have a copy to do with whatever I please. Sorry... you've changed nothing yet added extra steps to a transfer. No because receiver can verify if anyone has sent before. Yes, and until he gets confirmations that the coins are at an address that he alone controls, he is still vulnerable. So... he still needs to transfer the coins and wait for confirmation! You aren't saving any time here, only adding an extra pointless step. Why does he need to wait for a confirmation? Sender is still tied to real life. The receiver needs to wait for a confirmation because if the receiver doesn't then the sender can take his copy of the wallet and send those coins to an address that only he controls. In which case the receiver will be holding an empty wallet. I'm not sure what you are talking about when you say, "tied to real life". If say, the merchant has the private key, then he can basically replicate anything the original sender does. |
|
|
|
|
I heard a claim that OpenCXP actually tries to do that, you pay the merchant and give him your private key, the merchant sends the change back to another address of you, have yet to see an implementation yet.
|
|
|
|
|
To say the least, everyone talks about the tulip mania, what happened after the mania? Didn't Netherland become a kingdom of tulips, until this day? Everyone talks about the dotcom bubble, what happened after the bubble? Didn't the IT technology transform nearly every aspect of our life? Following the same pattern, Bitcoin would have seen worldwide adoption after the bubble, not bad at all! What's all this doom and gloom about?
|
|
|
|
What do I get out of a bitcoin if the value goes to zero???
What do I get out of a Dollar if the value goes to zero??? Toilet paper Exactly! Try wiping your ass with a bitcoin! Try wiping your ass with a dollar bill and tell me the next day how you feel..... |
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, do they [China] block Cloudflare port 80, too, or only Cloudflare port 443?
Both http and https not working. Most Chinese Armory users would be skillful enough to use proxies or VPN, but that open them up to the danger of MITM attack. |
|
|
|
|
No one will choose it as their Ph.D project, the project is so massive in scale that it will take 10 years for a relatively talented postgraduate to lay down all the foundations. The field should definitely be cryptography, that's where all the works before his(b-money, bit gold, etc) were done.
|
|
|
|
And how do you move the Armory installation itself to the offline machine? Burn it to a CD. There's probably a lower chance of malicious data on a burned CD having the ability to execute a hardware-level compromise. Probably. I am thinking of not putting a filesystem at all on the medium and moving everything with dd, raw blocks in, raw blocks out, then piping all data to sha256sum check first on the online machine(yes there will probably be buffer overflows), for transaction data, I will be even more careful by read and check 64 -128 bytes a time to prevent buffer overflows. |
|
|
|
|
And how do you move the Armory installation itself to the offline machine? You can do all kinds of hash/signature check offline for sure, but when it's there for you to check the virus should already have settled down.
|
|
|
|
Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.
More like gold down. Btc waaay down. But btc should be back by the end of the week. Silver however, will it hold 18? Hmmmmm.... In terms of market resilience BTC is up by a notch, I am surprised that there is so much money in this market. More than 300K BTCs dropped at this price and it can't be sustained below 1000, if we include other obscure Chinese exchanges there will be probably 500K or even more. |
|
|
|
|
I ain't even an Android user and I have read several reviews about it, and they got a Wikipedia page, check it out.
|
|
|
|
Okay foreigners please wait as long as you wish, I am gonna do as what one of my compatriots said in this thread-全仓抄底.  |
|
|
|
Think about it, what will you use as carriers of information in your future processors? The bandwidth has to match up to the processing capability of processors(reason why will measure it in terms of Hertz, a unit for frequency) in the end you will use photons, nothing but photons. As your bandwidth increases, you need to use higher and higher frequency laser-beams, which translates to higher and higher energy photons, when your photon energy reaches the level of electron rest energy, electron-pairs start to be created out of Dirac sea. Were you dropped on your head as a child? I can understand that you just know too little about physics after all, none of what I said violates any fundamental law of physics, in fact the humanly possible laser power is not too far away from the level required to create electron pairs. I'm a semiconductor process engineer. That doesn't say anything about your knowledge of optical information processing, or lasers over all, or even fundamental physics. I'm probably getting trolled. In a natural and free ecosystem waste =food, the waste heat in mining will be put to good use soon.
In the future when humans can make routine interstellar trips and everything is powered by natural or man-made nuclear fusion reactors, we could well be creating matters directly out of the waste energy of mining farms, which itself is used to record blockchain information at a sub-nuclear level, the ultimate amalgam of Bitcoin and Gold. 1) Waste energy and ultra-high frequency coherent light used by some hypothetical optical processor are very different things. One is waste and cannot do useful work, and the other is useful energy that can do work. 2) As I pointed out, virtual particles are not matter and cannot be usefully used for the storage of information, since they do not obey the mass-shell relation. 3) "the ultimate amalgam of Bitcoin and Gold" wat. Surely you don't imply your superlaser-powered photonic processors would be creating gold particles? Because that'd belie a rather poor grasp of the physics you've accused me of not understanding. By the way, laser light at a frequency high enough to produce virtual particles would absolutely wreck whatever kind of photonic metamaterial is responsible for the information processing. This is cypherdoc's thread and I have long been used to rant whatever I have in mind here, with only vague connection to what's being discussed, sorry if it brings confusion. Yes per the definition of waste energy to think they can be used to create matters is ridiculous, what I meant is more along the line of "still highly energetic photons after being used for calculation", and information recording would certainly not happen at pair production time, it has to be afterwards, and we haven't even started with the creation of protons and neutrons, which is completely another matter, in fact it would be silly if you choose to create subatomic particles yourself rather than using the protons that is already abundant in the Universe, the whole rant is actually a response to goldbug's claim that Bitcoin is not physical and thus have no real value, so the gold thing is completely metaphoric. Solid metamaterials will be wrecked, but plasmas can support light-bending up to the desired energy level very well, and by the way, after the electron-pairs are created they are as real as the electrons in your bread and not virtual anymore. And stimulated emission would work just fine, you can use highly accelerated free electrons to produce coherent radiations, not just orbit electrons. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
