Economically Unspendable Outputs: A Problem On The Radar

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

If you are enemy of Libertarianism, the you are an enemy of Bitcoin as well.
Because Bitcoin is all about libertarianism and crypto-anarchy ?

No, Bitcoin is just a currency immune to inflation, and easy to use online.
While most developers would probably prefer libertarianism, I don't think you will find any who support ignoring taxes/laws/regulations.

I don't get it. How come you are even a Bitcoin developer with such views/outlooks ?

Bitcoin is a perfect fit to enable a tonal currency in lieu of government adoption.
I dislike inflation as much as the next person, of course.

OK. I saved this whole discussion on my hard drive so that I can show people what kind of person you are when other discussions arise. I hope you don't have a problem with that.

If you are enemy of Libertarianism, the you are an enemy of Bitcoin as well.
Because Bitcoin is all about libertarianism and crypto-anarchy ?

[image]

Bitcoin is a technology and a protocol. If you think it's political, well then, look at the gif again.

Oh isn't it ? You are clearly lost and you don't know what you are talking about.

Even Satoshi himself has expressed his political views in the Bitcoin protocol - check it out:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Genesis_block

----
What kind of delusion are you having guys ?
95% of people (including me) wouldn't even be here if not for Bitcoin special properties making it immune to governments.

If a day comes that social rules can pressure Bitcoin, then I am out the next day (or I will switch to a fork). Why would i let ANYBODY mess with my money ?

[Luke-Jr]

Even Satoshi himself has expressed his political views in the Bitcoin protocol

The only implied view expressed there is opposition to inflation and/or fractional reserve banking.
Most likely Satoshi held libertarian views, but that's still just his opinions - not Bitcoin itself.

95% of people (including me) wouldn't even be here of not for Bitcoin special properties making it immune to governments.

What a coincidence that 95% of people here are trolls!
Bitcoin can never achieve critical mass of adoption if non-libertarians are barred.

[Uglux]

If a day comes that social rules can pressure Bitcoin, then I am out the next day (or I will switch to a fork). Why would i let ANYBODY mess with my money ?

Well I think that day was after the creation of the genesis block. Isn't it true, that if the majority of miners decide to accept any kind of rule, they have the power to enforce it?

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Even Satoshi himself has expressed his political views in the Bitcoin protocol

The only implied view expressed there is opposition to inflation and/or fractional reserve banking.
Most likely Satoshi held libertarian views, but that's still just his opinions - not Bitcoin itself.

Let me be clear:

After this discussion I don't trust you. I do not like where you would take this currency if you had the chance. I think you are an enemy.
If some day, by some "unfortunate accident" you become main developer, i will vote for creating a fork without you.

95% of people (including me) wouldn't even be here of not for Bitcoin special properties making it immune to governments.

What a coincidence that 95% of people here are trolls!
Bitcoin can never achieve critical mass of adoption if non-libertarians are barred.

Nobody is forcing non-libertarians to use Bitcoin. If they don't want it, it means its not for them.
Bitcoin is winning exactly because it is lbertarian. Exactly because its free of governments rules & social rules. Without it, it would be nothing.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

If a day comes that social rules can pressure Bitcoin, then I am out the next day (or I will switch to a fork). Why would i let ANYBODY mess with my money ?

Well I think that day was after the creation of the genesis block. Isn't it true, that if the majority of miners decide to accept any kind of rule, they have the power to enforce it?

Anybody can be a miner, anybody can buy ASIC and vote with his own wallet. This is also a part of the free market which is the foundation of Bitcoin.

[Luke-Jr]

After this discussion I don't trust you. I do not like where you would take this currency if you had the chance. I think you are an enemy.
If some day, by some "unfortunate accident" you become main developer, i will vote for creating a fork without you.

Good for you.
Centralization on development is the biggest centralized aspect of Bitcoin right now. The more forks the better.

Bitcoin is winning exactly because it is lbertarian. Exactly because its free of governments rules & social rules. Without it, it would be nothing.

Bitcoin isn't winning yet. I'm not aware of any study, but I suspect most merchants who do adopt it, are doing so because of lower fees.
SatoshiDice threatens the viability of those lower fees, thus threatens Bitcoin's chances of winning.

[Killdozer]

Nobody is forcing non-libertarians to use Bitcoin. If they don't want it, it means its not for them.

Nobody is forcing Bitcoin users (or even developers) to be libertarians. It's just you and that bubble you live in.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Bitcoin is winning exactly because it is lbertarian. Exactly because its free of governments rules & social rules. Without it, it would be nothing.

Bitcoin isn't winning yet. I'm not aware of any study, but I suspect most merchants who do adopt it, are doing so because of lower fees.
SatoshiDice threatens the viability of those lower fees, thus threatens Bitcoin's chances of winning.

...and by proposing to socially pressure SatoshiDICE to stop their practices you are threatening the very Bitcoin existence by trying to make it weaker.

[ab8989]

SatoshiDICE is completely nothing compared to an evil, powerful & determined attacker having hundereds millions of dollars avaiable.

On the contrary, that is exactly what SatoshiDice is.

Not at all. SD has an incentive to keep bitcoin network operational. SD is not really even stress-testing the network as some people want to say. It is just loading it with stupidly repeating the same one test over and over. If you would really want to test the network you would have first sunday of every month declared as testday and then on that day send 10 times more TXs than what SD does and see how the network copes with that. If it seems that 10 times more is not enough to bring network to its knees then on next month you send more. There would be other kind of nastiness also that should be tested against.

If some truly evil entity like an international banking conglomerate or some botnet hijacking them wants to convert all the millions of computers on its offices worldwide to run some specifically crafted SW that for examples uses all saturdays and sundays to break havoc on bitcoin network then what you might have some load on the network and the bank would not even break a sweat while doing that.

Discussing ways to cope with that could lead to interesting and very useful improvements to bitcoin and I see this discussion of possible ways of improving the network performance and security but we should get over looking at SD specifically and look at the big picture instead. This discussion about SD has served as a useful tool to get people motivated on doing this. They should not be turned down. "Don't rock the boat" is the attitude that see some people having but it only might serve somebody short-term but not anybody on a long term.

From pure technical standpoint I see ShadowOfHarbringer on the right track and I see his political views in this case support the right direction of technical development although the political turn on this discussion was very unfortunate.

On the other hand the technical solutions do not live in a vacuum. If bitcoin is purely a technology and a protocol, then bitcoin is dead. Nobody needs it for anything. Technology and a protocol only come alive when somebody uses them and the need to use them might also be rooted in political opinions. Whatever the need is that should be used as a guide for technical solutions.

Social rules are totally unworkable solution to this technical problem. Go try to enforce your social rules to the international banking conglomerate to stop spamming bitcoin network that they do on specific purpose to destroy bitcoin.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Nobody is forcing non-libertarians to use Bitcoin. If they don't want it, it means its not for them.

Nobody is forcing Bitcoin users (or even developers) to be libertarians. It's just you and that bubble you live in.

This statement is irrelevant.
Bitcoin is, by definition, a anarchist/crypto-anarchist currency for the simple reason it cannot be controlled by any central authority.

If you want to use Bitcoin, you have to live with it.

[Killdozer]

Bitcoin is, by definition, a anarchist/crypto-anarchist currency for the simple reason it cannot be controlled by any central authority.

If you want to use Bitcoin, you have to live with it.

So if I use bitcoin I MUST somehow defy all government, never pay taxes (even on my income from bitcoin), don't use any of the governments services and go live in a jungle? (Because for example the roads are also built by the governments usually.) That's just silly.
A lot of people who are using and investing in bitcoin, do it for other purposes than just the hate for the government (like for example for profit). Deal with it.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Bitcoin is, by definition, a anarchist/crypto-anarchist currency for the simple reason it cannot be controlled by any central authority.

If you want to use Bitcoin, you have to live with it.

So if I use bitcoin I MUST somehow defy all government, never pay taxes (even on my income from bitcoin), don't use any of the governments services and go live in a jungle? (Because for example the roads are also built by the governments usually.) That's just silly.

No, you misunderstood me.

By using Bitcoin you MUST accept that other bitcoiners do that (never pay taxes, defy government) or at least live with that.

[Killdozer]

By using Bitcoin you MUST accept that other bitcoiners do that (never pay taxes, defy government) or at least live with that.

Well yes, I definitely accept that. This is exactly my point. Bitcoin is a technology. What political views it's users might have is completely up to them.
Just for the records, I am with you on the fixing the bitcoin instead of banning SatoshiDice, just against this being a political issue somehow.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

By using Bitcoin you MUST accept that other bitcoiners do that (never pay taxes, defy government) or at least live with that.

Well yes, I definitely accept that. This is exactly my point. Bitcoin is a technology. What political views it's users might have is completely up to them.
Just for the records, I am with on the fixing the bitcoin instead of banning SatoshiDice, just against this being a political issue somehow.

Yeah, the turn of this discussion into politics was unfortunate, I did not intend it.

[Anon136]

The form of government that seems to work out best in practice is a monarchy.

as a libertarian i 100% agree with this statement. The form of government that works best does seem to be monarchy. Of course this statement is in no way a defense of monarchy but rather a condemnation of government in general.

[Uglux]

Nobody is forcing non-libertarians to use Bitcoin. If they don't want it, it means its not for them.

Nobody is forcing Bitcoin users (or even developers) to be libertarians. It's just you and that bubble you live in.

This statement is irrelevant.
Bitcoin is, by definition, a anarchist/crypto-anarchist currency for the simple reason it cannot be controlled by any central authority.

If you want to use Bitcoin, you have to live with it.

You still think of Bitcoin as an "accomplished" system. But what you say about a central authority is still by far not true at the current state of the network. The hole drama was because of asking sd not to fuck a system in development too hard. Just a (maybe naive) try to ask people, who claim to "love" Bitcoin, but blame at it at the same time, that something like they do is possible to do. "Nothing wrong with me, as long as I am not affected".
It was you fear of "regulation" that led to this political rage... Bitcoin is still an experiment, like human society.

If a day comes that social rules can pressure Bitcoin, then I am out the next day (or I will switch to a fork). Why would i let ANYBODY mess with my money ?

Well I think that day was after the creation of the genesis block. Isn't it true, that if the majority of miners decide to accept any kind of rule, they have the power to enforce it?

Anybody can be a miner, anybody can buy ASIC and vote with his own wallet. This is also a part of the free market which is the foundation of Bitcoin.

Not Anybody. Only those who have the equipment can be miner and not everyone can buy that equipment (at this moment?). The foundation of Bitcoin is the internet, since only there, they can be spent and verified.
I think the MPEx guy said it: Bitcoin is a republic, not a democracy.

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

Nobody is forcing non-libertarians to use Bitcoin. If they don't want it, it means its not for them.

Nobody is forcing Bitcoin users (or even developers) to be libertarians. It's just you and that bubble you live in.

This statement is irrelevant.
Bitcoin is, by definition, a anarchist/crypto-anarchist currency for the simple reason it cannot be controlled by any central authority.

If you want to use Bitcoin, you have to live with it.

You still think of Bitcoin as an "accomplished" system. But what you say about a central authority is still by far not true at the current state of the network. The hole drama was because of asking sd not to fuck a system in development too hard. Just a (maybe naive) try to ask people, who claim to "love" Bitcoin, but blame at it at the same time, that something like they do is possible to do. "Nothing wrong with me, as long as I am not affected".
It was you fear of "regulation" that led to this political rage... Bitcoin is still an experiment, like human society.

Then I say, let's strive for no less than perfection and make it orders of magnitude better than society. Let's make it as hard as diamond and as flexible as chewing gum.

But Luke-Jr says, "hey let's make stupid laws instead which force you into not attacking Bitcoin". And I say this is incredibly foolish.

If a day comes that social rules can pressure Bitcoin, then I am out the next day (or I will switch to a fork). Why would i let ANYBODY mess with my money ?

Well I think that day was after the creation of the genesis block. Isn't it true, that if the majority of miners decide to accept any kind of rule, they have the power to enforce it?

Anybody can be a miner, anybody can buy ASIC and vote with his own wallet. This is also a part of the free market which is the foundation of Bitcoin.

Not Anybody. Only those who have the equipment can be miner and not everyone can buy that equipment (at this moment?). The foundation of Bitcoin is the internet, since only there, they can be spent and verified.
I think the MPEx guy said it: Bitcoin is a republic, not a democracy.

We can work on that and make it a perfect democracy. Actually, a lot of people is working on it if you haven't noticed.

[justusranvier]

After this discussion I don't trust you. I do not like where you would take this currency if you had the chance. I think you are an enemy.
If some day, by some "unfortunate accident" you become main developer, i will vote for creating a fork without you.

You could probably save yourself some stress by just clicking "Ignore".

[ShadowOfHarbringer]

After this discussion I don't trust you. I do not like where you would take this currency if you had the chance. I think you are an enemy.
If some day, by some "unfortunate accident" you become main developer, i will vote for creating a fork without you.

You could probably save yourself some stress by just clicking "Ignore".

Then i wouldn't be able to straighten out his foolishness.

[anarchy]

Luke-jr: Would you ever change any of the core principles of bitcoin:

1) The limited supply
2) The decentralised nature

A yes or no will do, there are no inbetweens to take on that.