Except a fork in this case creates an entirely different currency. I don't want to reduce the value of the Bitcoins I have now or see them reduced.
Not really. As long as it implements the same underlying protocol, it is still bitcoins. No, no it is not. I will not get $12 and upwards for an alternate Bitcoin not supported by most of the community. But my understanding is that you're not so much complaining about the internals of bitcoin itself as with the software around it. Or maybe not. I'll have to go back and reread what you wrote. Definitely some of your issues could be fixed with a fork that would not change that it's bitcoins. Edit: Yes, your post #1 linked to a complaint about disk IO and time to verify the block chain. Both of these could be resolved without giving up on bitcoins. Though that may not be too helpful as the mainstream client is what people will be exposed to in general. Like you say, there are already lightweight wallets out there.
|
|
|
The reason that analogs of traditional financial institutions are being created is that they work and often were in place long before banking became the province of centralized government.
The test is if, in a free market, without government interference, those institutions which fail to provide value should quickly fail.
|
|
|
Except a fork in this case creates an entirely different currency. I don't want to reduce the value of the Bitcoins I have now or see them reduced.
Not really. As long as it implements the same underlying protocol, it is still bitcoins.
|
|
|
Let's make another example. It's anti-IPR world again, and Mr. X is a bitcoin user. He doesn't risk leaving bitcoins on his computer so he takes a printout of his BPKs and stores it in his wallet (the banknote kind). Mr Y finds the wallet and, being a good citizen, returns the wallet to its owner complete with all the contents. However, before doing so he makes a copy of the BPKs and later that day extracts the associated bitcoins. The printout is clearly Mr X's property, but what about the number written on it?
No moreso than the numbers on your credit cards. IP tends to protect creative works and does not apply to numbers (that creative works can be represented at numbers is sometimes brought out but that's another discussion).
|
|
|
I likely won't even be considering biometrics. It's extremely tricky to revoke an eyeball or fingerprint. My understanding is that the card cannot be dumped (or at least it's an optional setting). If it's possible to dump the card at all (barring scanning electron microscopes), it's not going to work as it will always be possible to find a way but I'm confident that won't be an issue.
Hm - seems like you'd need to setup some second factor auth otherwise you run the risk of having the card stolen and being unable to prevent anyone from using it. I have been thinking about that. It would likely be a passcode or pin but optional in case you are likely to be using the card on an untrusted system (though even with a keylogger or hacks, you'd still need the wallet physically attached so that may not be a big deal to have mandatory). Also up for consideration are wallet backups and/or importing external wallets. Likely I would require a passphrase on first use. But in theory, it should be possible to set up a fresh wallet on a compromised system with no security risk.
|
|
|
I think I can see my house from here.
|
|
|
Well let us know how that goes.
I still like the idea of a encrypting the private key and storing it on the card - then the reader can do the biometric scan, pass that the jvm on the card - along with the amount and desitination address, and the card can pass back a signed transaction - after decrypting the private key.
I guess the important question would be - could the reader be made to snag the entire contents of the card - if so then this wouldn't be secure either. In that case, we need a dongle that the user owns, to make sure that the POS machine can't read out the card - and once we're getting into designing hardware, might as well go fully custom and just use flash.
I likely won't even be considering biometrics. It's extremely tricky to revoke an eyeball or fingerprint. My understanding is that the card cannot be dumped (or at least it's an optional setting). If it's possible to dump the card at all (barring scanning electron microscopes), it's not going to work as it will always be possible to find a way but I'm confident that won't be an issue.
|
|
|
Im patiently waiting for someone to release something that users of those dirt cheap nokia phones can use.
You mean something like Coinapult? http://coinapult.com/sms-walletI think he means Brew?
|
|
|
Hey, I want my name on it ![Tongue](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/tongue.gif) I'm thinking it could have a QR code. Or maybe be totally custom. Of course, QR code would imply preloaded with a key.
|
|
|
What if there's 3 presidents all sharing power
Ssshh. That's NBC's new sitcom. haha, if thats true, they'll show how it wouldn't work then people wouldn't ever go for the idea Wait, what? Who but you said anything about sharing power?
|
|
|
Ah, I thought you were talking about those lifeforms called women. I can sometimes see them from my basement window.
Just start hanging out at steampunk conventions ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fpull.imgfave.netdna-cdn.com%2Fimage_cache%2F1286555008331864.jpeg&t=663&c=nddUMyRmDN4jYQ)
|
|
|
Gambling is entertainment,
I never saw the entertainment side of things. Maybe with poker. But every time I played that, there were always people so much better that I just couldn't be bothered after a while.
|
|
|
I do use Windows, but I don't trust Windows to store my bitcoins!
![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bradbranson.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2011%2F01%2Fmost_interesting_man.jpg&t=663&c=OB9F_b7mr6OaTA)
|
|
|
Messias complexes usually end in the mental hospital.
Unfortunately, as the ones wearing badges which say "Doctor"
|
|
|
Smartcards are an interesting idea. Is there any way to prevent someone from being able to extract the private key once it's loaded on the card?
The concern being someone steals a card, drops it into a reader and has full access to whatever's stored on it, including the private key.
Maybe the POS device uses some sort of biometric reading to feed another private key to the card to dectypt the one stored on the card?
That way, the card card could still sign in - but wouldn't have only an encrypted copy of the private key on it...
so without the POS machine, the smart card and the owner's proof of life - nobody would be able to do anything with it.
I just ordered several cards and a reader so I'm about to find out ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) Though I do have a little experience as I ordered the java ibutton kit when it first came out. The card actually runs a Java machine with protected memory etc. It's basically a fairly retarded computer. You can talk to it and it talks back. The cards also have some built-in crypto that may or may not be useful. The one thing you possibly can't trust is the reader device. It can lie to the card and to the user. Though maybe the reader and the card could be considered as a unit and you would own the reader. It could have the buttons and display but be fairly dumb and the smarts are in the java card. Then you can have multiple cheap wallets you can swap into a relatively more expensive reader. You might trust your friend's reader but then again, maybe only as much as a low-value hot wallet.
|
|
|
I am becoming more and more convinced that hardware wallets will be the way to go. I think I'll spend the weekend studying the rockbox project and seeing if it could be leveraged. I'm also wondering about smartcard options ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsp1.aspweb.com.tw%2F%2Fpictureexplorer%2FWebsite%2F1085%2FPictureFiles%2F2_25.JPG&t=663&c=bHYW6eIa6g_pKw) $4, runs Java. There are security issues with these that I don't think would be surmountable but they may be "good enough" for many purposes.
|
|
|
There's always the good old "Theft of power" and "Theft of services" Private keys are clearly not "intellectual property" of any kind though.
Is this a genuine anti-IPR position, or is it something that just occurred to you now? Is there such a thing as "theft of power"? Wouldn't that be just revolution? I don't understand your reference to "theft of service". What does that mean? Is it possible to steal a service? Wouldn't that just mean enslaving the service provider and so have no relevance to bitcoin private keys? Aren't there any anti-IPR pro-bitcoin libertarians here willing to tackle this issue? Seems thorny enough to me. Power of the I*V=W kind. Hackers have been charged with this since by hacking into systems, they are using power on that systems that they haven't paid for or been authorized to use. Theft of services is more usually used for cable (the TV kind, not the spools) but I think may have been applied in similar cases.
|
|
|
What is your benchmark? You are talking about $1. That is not a lot of money anywhere and is not crippling anyone - a device capable of running Bitcoin is still in the order of $50.
Right. So only well-to-do merchants can afford such a device, and folk limited to brainwallets and earning 0.0457 BTC a day might well find a cheaper blockchain based currency, with its presumably lower fees, more suitable than bitcoin for their needs. -MarkM- ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fsp1.aspweb.com.tw%2F%2Fpictureexplorer%2FWebsite%2F1085%2FPictureFiles%2F2_25.JPG&t=663&c=bHYW6eIa6g_pKw) $4, runs java. You'd maybe need a public/shared terminal and there may be security implications but there are options out there.
|
|
|
Well, if it was the knowledge of the possession that was the currency then that makes the currency super portable and thus practical. So that would be exactly what he ment by portability. Stones would be impractical to use as a currency and would prevent it from being used widely in everyday life.
Yes. It was my understanding that the posting of the picture of the stone coins was made as a counter to the portability requirement. The stones themselves were red-herrings (which actually would possibly be portable enough to be used as currency but would probably violate the previously undisclosed "must not smell of fish" requirement).
|
|
|
Now could it be this is because people actually demand a government? Could it have to do something with this topic? Could it be that they do see the need for more balance and social equity?
Nope, there is a benefit to the individual if they can exercise power over others. Hence some individuals seek to climb the ladder of authority (and will create the ladder if it doesn't already exist). Unfortunately, there are plenty who are content to accede to such control and thus lend their power to those who seek to control.
|
|
|
|