It's disappointing to read that Dillon and others were thinking about actually doing a real DoS attack on the Bitcoin network, rather than write code to improve bitcoind's resource scheduling and DoS handling. That's fantastically irresponsible, but also entirely unsurprising given his track record.
He's track record is right there isn't it? I got the impression he got hes ideals intact |
|
|
|
There is some utility is having a paid core dev team who can respond quickly to issues and develop the code, for example payment protocol.
The core dev team doesn't need to sit under the same umbrella as the, more controversial, US lobbying foundation.
Also the foundation still use language that implied US is THE foundation and others are their Hell's angels bitches 'chapters'. ETP talks about it this way and it is very annoying.
yes. the non-national bf should deal with technical aspects exclusively (remember the quick reaction on the block chain fork in march 2013 - this is a good example, or changing to more efficient database formats...), not with legal issues. e.g. changing the bitcoin protocol due to pressure from nation states should be taboo. national legal issues are best dealt with by local chapters (whether or not members of the intl. bf). Hence: intl. bf yes, but on a ground with least interference to be expected from that govm't. Hence: I vote "yes". Which country: certainly Switzerland is better than US, even though it is *the* banking nation... Other alternatives that spring to my mind that might provide a very friendly environment (alphabetical order): - costa rica (liberal country w/o even an army afaik, seems to be very compatible with btc's ideas) - finland (great btc adoption per capita) - island (proved independence from world banking cartel during financial crisis to avoid financial slavery) - south africa (mentioned earlier in this thread, no personal opinion myself) I wouldn't trust Russia/Putin. Just because they give asylum to snowden and RT.com has some nice broadcasts, their system's fundamental mindset is not "friendly". they just make use of temporary circumstances as it suits them best politically. tomorrow they may point their "weapons" against "you"... or to put it in simple words: your "enemy's enemy" is not automatically your friend, this shows so often in history. The world is multi-polar, not bi-polar... bitcoin should not be involved in anything with the word "legal" in it. Anything like that would ruin it. Also, Europe has this huge suffocating Stockholm syndrome towards the US. No country in Europe must be given such a task. And that definitely includes Switzerland |
|
|
|
|
Just do it. And keep it coming.
|
|
|
|
... We assume the lack of centralized services wherever possible...
What ideas or thoughts do you all have?
Can you, or anyone really, see a situation where this is not possible? |
|
|
|
Oops! Communism failed. "Berlin Wall" mean anything to anyone? My $.02.  It didn't fail, it became mainstream. If greed is the motivation, who doesn't want what communism has to offer  |
|
|
|
Do you know why bitcoin is decentralized?
Just to make it clear, I'm not criticizing the developers. I'm criticizing those who are thinking about ruining what the developers has spent 5+ years to get right.
The next phase in the movement will be the mainstream emergence of the altcoins that stay true to Satoshi's ideal. This could easily happen. You can pick any networked computer game from the 90's and it has all the functionality you need to do online transactions. Bitcoin is a lot more than that, and it keeps amazing me how certain foundation members keeps missing the point. Greed can easily become bitcoins downfall |
|
|
|
The point is this: to enforce socialism you need to have men with guns willing to use them. This is NOT freedom.
Even a child knows violence and threat of violence is wrong.
Yet many adults think it is OK to FORCE me participate in socialist ideals. It is not and never will be.
Socialism sucks. It is evil and against all principles of a free society. You do not threaten violence EVER. The non-aggression principle trumps your ideas of equality every time.
For many people immersed in public education and, dare I say, propaganda, this is new information. It can be difficult to digest. But once you "get it" you "get it". Then you understand and you can never go back to thinking your old and incorrect thoughts.
Capitalism = Freedom
Socialism always always always leads to tyranny.
Thak you for your kind and insigtful post with which I agree 100%! My $.02. You guys are from the US right? There is a certain breed in the US that seems to be completely blind, and yet proud and outspoken about it. You can replace socialism with our new and more modern definition of capitalism in that post above and its still 100% correct. |
|
|
|
|
I'm not replying to those who obviously got my point. I am reading however.
I think the whole prospect should be quite scary, especially to those who have a considerable amount of btc.
|
|
|
|
No one else seems to be complaining about how it is now.
Ahh, brains incoming... Agree, lets keep it that way then |
|
|
|
You guys really are nuts aren't you?
We already have something that works much better, assuming privacy is not a concern
Also it seems that you are focusing on anonymity and ignoring the decentralization factor in bitcoin. Do you know why bitcoin is decentralized? Just to make it clear, I'm not criticizing the developers. I'm criticizing those who are thinking about ruining what the developers has spent 5+ years to get right. |
|
|
|
What some people don't seems to understand, and Mike Hearn in particular, is that both the bitcoin protocol, and the bitcoin clients, is technically a huge piece of crap.
People are using it because it works. You guys really are nuts aren't you? We already have something that works much better, assuming privacy is not a concern |
|
|
|
What some people don't seems to understand, and Mike Hearn in particular, is that both the bitcoin protocol, and the bitcoin clients, is technically a huge piece of crap.
Who want's to send a magnitude more data than necessary back and forth over the wire?
Who want's to spend huge amounts of time and energy processing the wrong answer to an algorithm over and over?
Who want's to run a offline PC just to keep their wallet safe?
Who want's to encrypt and decrypt every little bit at every level?
Bitcoin is _all_ about privacy and anonymity!
That is the whole mf point, idiots!
Only a nutjob would use this software if that is messed up.
It would seem, a lot if us do want to use bitcoin then judging by the numbers, however to really go mainstream some of these issues will have to be addressed. I'm not sure what you mean here but the hilarious thing is that we need all this crap in order to sustain privacy, and a few other things of course. If we are to sanitize bitcoin, as some seems to want, the best way to do that would be to throw the whole thing in the basket. The old cobol code we are using when we visit the ATM down the corner is all we need. Its fast, reliant and easily available. |
|
|
|
|
What some people don't seems to understand, and Mike Hearn in particular, is that both the bitcoin protocol, and the bitcoin clients, is technically a huge piece of crap.
Who want's to send a magnitude more data than necessary back and forth over the wire?
Who want's to spend huge amounts of time and energy processing the wrong answer to an algorithm over and over?
Who want's to run a offline PC just to keep their wallet safe?
Who want's to encrypt and decrypt every little bit at every level?
Bitcoin is all about privacy and anonymity!
Only a nutjob would use this software if that is messed up.
|
|
|
|
Yea I saw the interview and I don't buy the glitter, I want hard facts when it comes to these things  |
|
|
|
|
And the thread is already swarming with idiots that has no idea what they are talking about, and therfore has no idea that they left the topic long ago.
-
The foundation is best ignored.
Maybe you are better off talking to the developers at github. What they do, or don't do, probably matters.
|
|
|
|
I don't think that page answers those specific questions. If the answer to any of them is no, this project should be considered a serious threat |
|
|
|
|
Let those who wants to make it another fiat currency fork it. The rest of us should just stick to clients using the original protocol, and possibly implement better anonymity.
|
|
|
|
|
Does anyone have any insight into this project called dark wallet?
Is it completely open source?
Are the server designed to be a participating node in a flat, decentralized network, so that anyone can run one?
|
|
|
|
I believe he does have a point about corporations.
The IT giants, among others, have paid a pretty penny to get their own clown elected for presidency
The IT giants? Nah, just say all large multinational corporations. I think it's hard to say 'clown' for presidency too because the whole system seems kinda rigged in the US. Whoever is president will get called a clown if you put it like that. Besides, you can't twist the fact that corporations have lobbyists and they can do bad things into the absolute conspiracy diatribe he was spouting. Now you are being picky. |
|
|
|
i smell cold war thinkin
Then you probably don't know history, sir. Cold war wasn't an actual war - it was only a propaganda served by the governments at both the sides of the Berlin wall, just to keep people scared thus more subjective. Whilst the Bitcoin blowup is an actual war, where the people are fighting corporations, that have been enslaving us for the last century using a weapon of a monopoly of the money creation. Today we have our weapon and we are not giving it up. What a lot of nonsense. The Cold War was indeed a war, on many levels, and was fought by proxy all over the globe. The involvement of the USSR and the USA in Afghanistan is a case in point. So was the metaphorical throwing of movies, hamburgers and Coke over the Wall. Don't try to spin your petty Marxist drivel that you've been enslaved by corporations, that is a sheer fabrication. Next you'll be telling us that you are the 'vanguard of the people'. Gimme a break... sheesh.  I believe he does have a point about corporations. The IT giants, among others, have paid a pretty penny to get their own clown elected for president |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
