It's true LR is turning into WMZ and will be seizing/holding accounts now for verification, already happened to numerous people I know. Costa Rica is not a viable place to run a currency anymore, they should move to the Seychelles or Azerbaijan.
There are blogs out there with piles of people complaining that their Liberty Reserve account was frozen. The outlook isn't good folks. I've noticed that a lot of people are moving their operations to Belize now. HDmoney so far is biz as usual. Mt Gox should switch over to them or the other big exchangers
I'm not too familiar with HD Money. However, I have heard of it. I hope that Jed doesn't end up with a pile of Liberty Reserve that he can't get back out as dollars. (I PM'd him about this thread already.) If a run happens (I suspect one started on the 1st), Liberty Reserve will collapse. It's unaudited and many suspect it is fractional reserve. The running joke is " NO Liberty NO Reserve" (CR's new bank laws / fractional reserve, unaudited). A run will provoke them into freezing accounts faster and faster to try to stay afloat. That will only piss more and more people off. These pissed off people will spout out on blogs and forums. (Already starting to happen.) The panic will spread and accelerate the run. The Liberty Reserve exchangers will start hiking the rates to exchange into fiat, because the risk of default will rise. Some exchangers will just quit immediately because they'll remember the e-gold panic. ... and that's the Madhatter forecast.  This concludes our broadcast day. *click* |
|
|
|
The destruction of the family unit is an epidemic. I admire the Mormons only for their emphasis of the importance of family. (Perhaps I admire their emergency food preparedness too.) I find the music on the radio here to be corrosive to children. The rap/gangster/"booty"-music stations in particular. They are vulgar, disgusting, sing about sexual situations, and sometimes even include background panting. It is unsuitable for children. The Bisphenol-A estrogen mimicker and phyto-estrogens in soy products (every single processed food item has switched to soy oil in the last few years. Hey, it's cheap!) do concern me. They process a lot of soy products with hexane too. Mmmm hexane! The best thing to do, in my opinion, is to just steer clear of processed foods. When I see a label that says "may contain traces of soy/nuts/whatever" it makes me think that they don't clean their machines. In terms of water fluoridation, it bothers me for different reasons. I see it as force. If we live in a free country, I should be able to choose to not have stuff added to my water. If you want fluoride, you should put it into your own water with tablets or whatever. I don't want fluoride in my drinking water. It's my choice. It is far cheaper/efficient to leave the fluoride out and supply those who want it with tablets. It is far more expensive for each household that doesn't want flouride to buy a $1000 reverse osmosis machine to filter it out. Not to mention the costs at the water treatment plant to put that stuff in.  Cheers! The Madhatter |
|
|
|
We could start selling physical notes with scratch-and-reveal Bitcoin keys. Paypal won't mind that.
Great idea. Buying/selling Bitcoins to private individuals in person would be good too. Perhaps people should start using craigslist/kijiji and advertise that they do trades in person for cash. |
|
|
|
Why would there be links? Costa Rica's banking laws are published. Use Google. The advertisement you are referring to is an email signature. Bitcoin is mentioned as an alternative too. Have you logged into your LR account lately? See the beginnings of the AML/KYC stuff yet?  On the bright side: this is good news for Bitcoin. As more and more of these centralized payment processors fail; people will turn to decentralized systems. |
|
|
|
Try a monochrome laser printer with a decent envelope feeder. You can deface stacks of bills rapidly and the ink doesn't smear. ... or so I've heard... |
|
|
|
|
*cough* *cough* The windows client needs UPnP. *cough* *cough*
|
|
|
|
What we're going to do? Call the police?
 You can't be serious... |
|
|
|
|
I found these on IRC:
h4kklwodpcmo6cbq.onion:8333
vv6kcfscuntybrzm.onion:8333
|
|
|
|
Tor is very dangerous for those that do not know how to protect themselves already. Using personally identifiable information over Tor defeats the purpose of using it in the first place. Most things can be MITMed on the Tor exit nodes (even some SSL connections...google Moxie Marlinspike).
You're preaching to the choir. But using Bitcoin on Tor and non-Tor connections to communicate with those you wish to transact with also defeats the purpose of using Tor. The average person that "does not know how to protect themselves already" is not ready for Tor.
Oh sure. Having some protection/obfuscation (to beat DPI stuff) is better than nothing. Wouldn't you agree? There are always other attack vectors that have to be considered. What about physical spying, for example? Right now, a default installation of Bitcoin is so easily detected/blocked from the network layer. Shouldn't we be concerned? I certainly am. I want Bitcoin to be unstoppable. A crazy spray of garbled packets that hide alongside regular HTTPS connections to banks. I want to make it so that blocking Bitcoin also means blocking "their" existing bank infrastructure as well. |
|
|
|
bitcoin can implement SSL obfuscation by adding a start-ssl message immediately after the version message. The version message will tell us whether or not the node supports SSL, making it easy to integrate SSL in a backwards-compatible manner.
That wouldn't work. DPI gear would just pick out the version string and send out some RST packets. The cops would then be dispatched to break some knee caps. :/ |
|
|
|
I agree with your concern about people not knowing how to protect themselves, but then, I think that better than adding unnecessary features to the main software, we should just offer preconfigured bundles, as I said on my last post.
I suppose that could be done. I guess the user would also get other benefits from Tor as well, such as pseudo-anonymous browsing, etc. I wonder if the Tor project could be convinced to just include Bitcoin with their bundle. We might be too far away from that. They don't seem to want to even touch Bitcoin. I was instructed to send my donations to the EFF instead of them.  An "anonymous bitcoin" bundle to be downloaded from the main project page, that would include the bitcoin software + an embedded tor proxy, everything preconfigured... this is better, imho, than adding SSL support to the bitcoin client.
It should automatically setup a Tor hidden service with a port forward back to Bitcoin too then. We can leave it up to the user to publish their .onion address/port number. It should also contain a list of "seed" nodes in the torrc. (Public hidden services to bootstrap from.) Also, Bitcoin should at least let the user select a port other than 8333. It should also have UPnP support. Enabled by default on Windows/Mac, disabled by default on Linux/*NIX. Would that make the *NIX geeks happier about UPnP support? |
|
|
|
So is the bounty for these features to be added to the official client, or would an alternate client that's 100% compatible with the official client while having these additional features count?
Official client. What good would a fork be? So I can run it between me, myself, and I? |
|
|
|
As long as businesses need to run VPNs and SSL websites, I think crypto will remain legal. Mimicking traffic patters in another matter, though.
Exactly. I highly doubt the governments of the world will block banks, for example. |
|
|
|
I know that this thread is not a place for this, but one feature I would love to see is to have an option for bitcoind to work in foreground while printing logs to sdout. I hate to hack this thing up every time to have it running under djb's daemontools.
+1 I'm also an avid user of djb's daemontools. A foreground command line switch would be very nice. |
|
|
|
Fair enough. I haven't heard of fidonet for a long, long time.
I used to run FidoNet BBSes where I live. |
|
|
|
Bear in mind that quite a few oppressive regimes actually own or can probably obtain SSL root certificates. I don't think of SSL as protecting me from governments and I'd suggest nobody else does either.
Yes. I understand what you are saying here. We should be at least obfuscating Bitcoin connections as FF+Apache connections. China, for example, can easily block Bitcoin at the moment - just filter one port: 8333. How sad. China can't block every SSL connection. Commerce relies on SSL connections too heavily. I understand and agree with what you're trying to do here. I also give you massive credit for being willing to put money where your mouth is. But beating an adversary with DPI isn't going to be easy - at the very least, somebody should put together a design doc or paper explaining their threat model and solution before you pay for it.
Check out the newer videos by Roger Dingledine. They explain the lessons they learned about keeping Tor from being blocked in China/Iran. UPnP support on the other hand is a no brainer. I'd also be willing to contribute some coin (dollars/bits) towards implementation of that in the official client. The P2P network needs to be as dense as possible and using UPnP to reconfigure WiFi NATs is the best way to achieve a quick boost.
Totally. I think that UPnP should be on by default. |
|
|
|
We should identify what core functionality bitcoin needs and use existing tools to extend how we use it, the way Unix tools do.
Less than 0.25% of the population uses *NIX. If we want mass adoption we need to focus more on the end user operating systems. |
|
|
|
Agree. However, that random port stuff you are proposing with all the windows specific UPnP BS is probably not such a great idea. I, personally would prefer that client simply takes on command line IP address and port to listen. Simple, easy and portable solution.
It should choose a random port upon install. If you have a port specified in the bitcoin.conf, it will use that explicitly. Us smarter folks would likely specify a port. (I'd use 443). Think about the average Joe. They never toy with the defaults. If we want the network to be resistant to DPI filtering we need this. |
|
|
|
This is a deficiency in the official client, and should be fixed.
+1 I'd like to run bitcoind on port 443. I want it to look like Apache/SSL. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
