I request we continue to delete our upthread posts on each reply as I have done, at least for as long as this sub-thread is of reasonable length. Hopefully we can reach agreement now.


I've done extensive thinking about the breakage of the encryption and that is why I favor Lamport signatures, Mceliece public key cryptography, and not using public key (i.e. using symmetric cryptography) as much as possible.

There is no reasonable quantum computing resistant Diffie-Hellman key exchange, so I am thinking we can eliminate it from an improved Tor by sending a Nonce to the prospective relay encrypted with its public key, then the encrypted (in our public key) reply must include the Nonce. The entire reason Diffie-Helman is needed in Tor is because the prior relay hop could inject its only symmetric key instead.

All encryption will eventually be broken and I made this point in a long discussion on this forum with smooth about how all anonymity can eventually be broken ex post facto. But as I stated in my first reply to you, this requires the adversary save all the data. For example, a global national security PRISM adversary can’t save the data mixes we do offline.

This is why I am arguing to use only quantum resistant encryption for anonymity aspects and to use much larger key lengths than we think are necessary.

Note I will be cross-posting our excellent discussion to that thread I linked in my first reply to you.

Being able to read the brain’s thoughts could indeed make anonymity much more challenging, but we are at least a decade from that being something the authorities can realistically deploy and even then it will probably require they get proximity to your brain. Our physical bodies are going to become a burden. Hopefully by that time we can upload our brain to a computer, put our body into zombie state, continue thinking there on the computer, then download it back to biological brain copy later. In that way, we could side-step the authorities anew. You see technology is not asymmetric in support of socialism. We just have to be willing to find the solutions for liberty.

I hope I have inspired some libertarian readers!

Almost all of the scientific evidence that has been interpreted to point at evolution, can also point at climate and environmental adaptation.

The Youtube video "Molecular Machinery of Life" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ4N0iSeR8U - is one of many, many videos showing the operations in the cells. The kinds of operations shown are extremely complex. We don't see anything that is bringing this kind of "machinery" into existence. We have no evidence of the machinery being created from scratch. It is so complex that it would have taken the full 13 to 14 billion years that science wants to attribute to the age of the universe for it to come about by accident. And maybe that wouldn't have been long enough.

We as people and scientists are learning. We are adapting things of nature to work for us in many ways. Yet the complicated operations of a single living cell are way more complex that anything we can come close to inventing or making at this stage of the game.

The point is, we are so ignorant, that even if nature DID make life like it is, then nature itself would be God. What I mean is, the complexity of nature is here. It is so advanced beyond us, that whatever method it came into existence by, that method is God. And not only God, but GREAT GOD ALMIGHTY.

So, get it out of your head that there isn't any God. Rather, be logical and see that nature itself shows you that there has to be a God, even if it is only nature itself. And start looking for that God. If nature around us is what He can make, think of the great and wonderful things He will do for you when you acknowledge Him.

Denying God is like denying the facts of nature that science has discovered all around us.

Not the same god. The people might have a common ancestor. But the god is different.

Islam is from Muhammad from around 600 AD. Even though he is considered to be the last of the prophets, the first of the writings were revealed by him around that time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam

Moses wrote from around 1500 BC. Some Bible scholars think that the first 2 books of the Bible were written by Adam or Abraham, centuries before Moses, and simply transcribed by Moses.

The whole idea of the Bible is salvation through the gift of God, that is, through Jesus.

The Islamic Qur'an suggests if not downright says that salvation is based on how good/bad you were in this life.

Christianity came into being starting with Jesus, the Christ, even though it was not called by that name initially, in a year 0-4 AD. Calendars have changed, and we really don't know exactly the year that Jesus was born in.

Catholicism as a term came for Christianity about near the beginning of the second hundred years AD. Probably the solidification for the church which would become the modern Catholic Church happened in the Council of Nicea in 325 AD.

The point is, just because people came from the same ancestor, doesn't mean that they have the same religion, or that their religions are all the same.

Consider all the "fathers" of the modern science religion. Modern science is such a mishmash of beliefs that it's approximately the worst religion around today.

The fact that the science religion has so many believers - and strong believers, at that - shows you exactly how easy it is to talk people into a religion that hey want to hear, whether or not it makes any sense at all.

There wasn't any "Muslim, Islamic, Catholic" at the time the O.T. was written

Ancient Israel government and Hebrew religion were based on the Law of Moses. Whenever anyone from a different nation became a Hebrew, he/she would be required to obey the Law of Moses. If it was a male, he would have to be circumcised in addition, according to the command that God gave Abraham.

Just as every nation in the world accepts new citizens from other nations at times, the Hebrew nation did as well. The above was the method for the ancient Hebrews. And it probably still follows in the laws of Israel today.

It is difficult to determine which is the right religion. The examples that the Bible gives show that the Hebrew people didn't always keep their religion pure. Yet, the Bible remained pure.

Hey BADecker, you want to set the truth free, right?
Post all of the scientific reasons and evidence that demonstrate that this is the case.
Then let people make their own conclusions once they have evaluated the evidence for your claim.
Is that fair?

Your description fits the religion of science better than Bible religion.  

What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam

 Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.

In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.

The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html

I doubt they care about some thread on Bitcointalk.


Any time frame? Includes the weekend?

Well not everything is perfect but they probably won't do that. They are the only one dealing with banks. Coinbase is working with banks. But RippleLabs is INTEGRATING banks this is far more ambitious.

The day we'll see the result of the banks they signed then it'll be too late to invest. But yes this is risky.

I would just declare them since in 9 out of 10 cases it's pretty easy for them to find out anyway.

Sometimes you'll find as well that the people they're copying from are stuck in the past and refuse to adapt or create something new and that happens a LOT these days and the newer bunch just come along and changes everything because they acknowledge what the problem is, that's how civilisation progresses, obviously there will be fakes out there but when someone is a genuine expert they've usually earned it.

Because it takes time and a lot of work to become an expert...

tooo many people go around these days screaming about their love of bitcoin. and then when people ask about it the standard phrases pop out"

"its a decentralized, sha256 cryptographically secured public ledger".....

then they talk about mining...
you will send average joe to sleep talking about the technical crap before they even see or know what its use/purpose is..
if i asked you what is a bank note. you will just say "here is a dollar, now go to  shop and buy me some gum" you wont talk about the ISO type of the ink/cotton paper. or the location of the federal mint.

so simply ask your friend to download the blockchain.info phone app (or other easy use apps). ask them to display their payment address on their phone screen. and then send them 0.003 ($1)
then say no government can take that off them, no bank can freeze that account, no country/state boarder patrol can stop or seize it, no third party will charge you 2%-8%, no need for plastic credit cards or pin numbers or identity theft. and the funds are in your hand, not in some clearing house waiting 3-5 days..

then talk about the rarity and deflationary nature as oppose to FIAT. and how its more secure than a bank, than paypal, than apple pay

and thats the end of the conversation.

There are certainly a lot of chatter among the global market leaders about the current situation of Bitcoin price. Some are saying that it will die soon. Some are saying it will rise up like before. Well some of the billionaires betting big on Bitcoin and the blockchain technology.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/blockstream-billionaire-entrepreneurs-betting-big-bitcoin/

According to Pennsylvania's Department of Banking and Securities, anyhow. They kinda state the obvious by saying that investing in cryptocurrencies is risky. http://cointelegraph.com/news/112938/pennsylvanias-department-of-banking-and-securities-identifies-digital-currencies-as-top-emerging-threat-to-investors

Anyway, let me know what you think on these two points: what "Bitcoin failed" means for you and why if that technically happens would it be fatal for other cryptos if indeed you think it would be fatal for other cryptos?

Please refrain from pumping your favorite altcoin in this thread. Thank you.