No change to the official bitcoin client is required, because most mining is done by mining pools which can make the change to their own modified clients.
You need to change every full-client implementation, not only miners. |
|
|
|
|
The question to ask is what happened to gold prices in periods/places where its possession was forbidden.
For ex., I know that in the 30s in the US, the government forbid the possession of gold. But I've never seen an analysis of whatever happened to its price.
|
|
|
|
A valid contract should feature non-repudiation, for example you keep the other paper copy, or a witness/arbiter exists. Can you prove I have clicked the dialog and not skipped over it using a debugger ? You can't, as such I've never entered a contract with you.
That's a good point. But then, can you prove the hand-signature on a paper was really done by me? Even something signed with a cryptographic private key is not 100% sure, as the key could have leaked. Theoretically speaking, if you accept the eula, you're accepting its terms. Proving you accepted it is another story. That's why trials should be done by courts whose decision both parties in a dispute directly or indirectly agreed to respect. |
|
|
|
You and your wife have shot a private porn movie (for your own eyes only). I take a copy of it, but you don't lose the original. Would you not have felt you lost something ? (like your exclusive right to view it)
If you didn't get the owners authorization to make that copy, the act of copying is a violation of their property rights. But then, if you pass the video to somebody else, the couple cannot make the same accusation against this third party. You are mixing up trespass (getting the original copy of the video), and copyright (the controlling of copies of your 'work' outside your property). No, not really... I was exactly trying to say that making an unauthorized copy is a form of trespassing. Even if you were given the right to enter the couple's house. Actually, even if they authorize you to watch the video, but said: "Don't copy". If you copy, you'd be doing an unauthorized use of their property. |
|
|
|
If the program spawns a dialog blackmailing me to click or else, it's not a valid contract. I'm using my private property in every way I see fit, including clicking on any dialogs I might desire. The mere act of generating a sequence of bits does not give the author partial ownership of my physical property, nor does it transforms my computer into his agent in my house. It's my choice to let my property operate on said sequence or not, or to modify, extend and publish that sequence, because information is not property.
I have to disagree there. It doesn't matter the format of a contract, as long as it is voluntary and explicit. The same thing you said about a sequence of bytes could be said about a sequence of words printed on a piece of paper. Both are valid forms of contract. People are free to enter into mutual, limited agreements regarding sharing of information. They can impose on each other financial penalties if the information leaks to the outside, and so create a limited private form of intellectual property, if they feel this beneficial for them.
Well, that's what eulas are for... A porn movie with your wife is a contractual agreement between you two. The one who betrayed the contract wilfully or due to negligence should pay. I have no obligation to help you meet your contractual obligations, or to help you succeed in business or love.
But you have no right to use their properties without their consent, and that includes making a copy. |
|
|
|
You and your wife have shot a private porn movie (for your own eyes only). I take a copy of it, but you don't lose the original. Would you not have felt you lost something ? (like your exclusive right to view it)
If you didn't get the owners authorization to make that copy, the act of copying is a violation of their property rights. But then, if you pass the video to somebody else, the couple cannot make the same accusation against this third party. |
|
|
|
Inaccurate, the GFW block searchs for Tor and the Tor website itself. But they can not block Tor traffic, it's impossible, unless they maintain a whitelist and block all other traffic coming in and out of China (which isn't unimaginable for Chinese government)
No, the GFW blocks Tor itself. It doesn't need a whitelist. It just need to - Blacklist all public tor relays
- Pay some low-wage Chinese to go on creating Google accounts and tracking each tor bridge as soon as it's up, to block them as well.
They are already doing this. Unless there has been some new progress on tor capability of hiding from the GFW that I'm not aware of. |
|
|
|
|
Eulas do qualify. To those who sign them, obviously. If you get a copy of a program for free with no eula, nobody has any recourse against you.
That's the main problem with IP. You may try to simulate them with contracts. But contracts can not be extended to someone who has never signed it. It's like a marriage contract which predicts punishment to the lover of the unfaithful spouse!
|
|
|
|
|
The permission has to be explicit.
|
|
|
|
So, technically speaking, none of us are compelled to do what our respective Govts do anyway, our only obligation is to common law which can be summed up as saying you can do anything you like ( including trade in virtual currrency, they may make it illegal but it will never be unlawful )
And how do you make them understand this when they come to bust you? |
|
|
|
|
It would be nice if someone distributed Bitcoin+Tor bundles (or bitcoin+I2P bundles) previously configured. It would be even nicer if the bitcoin protocol could send URLs when broadcasting peers addresses (can it be done right now?). This way, .onion and .i2p URLs could be sent instead of IP addresses.
I think the most authoritarian governments might start trying to block bitcoin by blocking its bootstrap methods...
|
|
|
|
Provas logicamente coesas de que a iniciação de coerção só piora a vida em sociedade já existem aos montes. Estude economia austríaca. Leia artigos de Hans-Hermann Hoppe sobre a ética da propriedade privada. O melhor site em português para encontrar tais textos: http://www.mises.org.br |
|
|
|
|
Not to mention that if you accessed the computer of someone without this person's authorization, it's a violation of his property rights.
In other words, if I don't authorize you to copy my wallet, there's no legitimate way you can do it.
|
|
|
|
|
I think exchanges of the type of bitmarket.eu and OTC have more chances of succeeding in the long run, and can be more numerous. That's because the exchange owner doesn't need to keep any link to the standard banking system. It's more "decentralized" if you will. In many countries, that's mandatory for the exchange survival.
So, if I were you, I'd go for this type of exchange, with the flexibility to use any currency and multiple payment methods, as well as escrow.
|
|
|
|
Posting their source code on the internet in an encrypted file would be a good idea.
Then, if anything ever happens to them, they can post the password, so a bunch more exchanges can start up using their software.
I was thinking on suggesting the same thing.  Exchange owners, please, do this Wikileaks-like insurance! |
|
|
|
Since witnessing their abandonment of Bitcoin donations and practically stating that using 'legal tender' is the best way to defend online liberty
Seriously? I was not aware of this. Have they at least tried explaining this contradictory positon of theirs? It's quite weird. They were among the first to accept bitcoin donations, back when bitcoins weren't worth that much, and now that it has proven its value, they don't want anymore? |
|
|
|
|
Have you tried contacting them before coming here to rant?
This forum is about bitcoin. You're on the Bitcoin Discussion board. This is not MtGox support forum.
Of course that if you're actually scammed by a bitcoin merchant, letting the entire community know about it is a nice thing to do. But at least try to solve the problem directly with the merchant and only come here after it's clear you've been scammed. I'm pretty sure that's not your case.
|
|
|
|
|
Que diferença faz o local do pool?
Traduções talvez, mas bom, em geral quem é nerd o suficiente para minerar, entende inglês.
|
|
|
|
Can someone explain for me how easy/difficult it will be for the great firewall of China to be able to stop the spread of bitcoins?
They can make it painful. For ex., they could block all bootstrap methods (IRC and known nodes). They could filter packets, screwing those who do not encrypt their connections. Tor is already blocked, so it wouldn't help much either. Is it possible that a non technical person inside of China will have trouble sending and receiving bitcoins with someone outside of China?
I guess it would be as much as hard as it is for these non technical people to access forbidden web content... they would have to find a proxy which hasn't yet been taken down. |
|
|
|
TTo circumvent it is very easy. All you need to do is
1. Download Tor browser bundle
2. Download Bitcoin
3. Start Tor and in Bitcoin client Settings->Options check "Connect through socks4 proxy"
Use IP 127.0.0.1 Port 9050 which are default
The great firewall of China blocks Tor. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
