Bitcoin: The Digital Kill Switch

[AnonyMint]

Simpleton masses? Who are you, Dr. Evil?

The cartel decides to blacklist Wal-Mart because they won't play ball. John Q. Simpleton goes to walmart.com to buy a new NASCAR shirt and some Slim Jims. Wal-Mart generates a never-before-used public address for John to send in his payment. How is the cartel going to identify it as a Wal-Mart address?

Obviously you fail to understand the technical problem. The cartel will control all the processing. John won't be able to get his transaction to go through.

This is a lack of technical understanding on your part as to how the Bitcoin algorithm works.

Once the cartel has all the mining, then John can't route his transaction to his own miner (or any good miner), because the miner who wins the next block must have processing power that is in scale with the total. But if the cartel has made it uneconomic to mine, then these miners with sufficiently high processing power, will no longer exist, because they long since went bankrupt. For example, say the cartel has 10 quadrillion terahashes by 2030, and so to have a 1% chance of getting your transaction through on each block try, you need 100 terahashes of computing power in your good miner. Who is going to keep 100 terahashes of computing power laying around unused because it has been rendered uneconomic by the free processing being given away by the cartel?

Just for those few dissidants that are affected?

Economics doesn't work that way. Go think this out more deeply.

[chmod755]

@chmod755: AFAICS apparently you entirely missed the point of the OP as to the technical threat. Please try re-reading it.

Why did you even mention other things if you didn't want to hear comments about them? Of course the risk of a 51% attack exists and building it up slowly is possible. I'd advise every miner who paid off the rig and is making some BTC now to invest them in something like photovoltaics (or anything else that produces electricity) to keep the risk of "going bankrupt" in mining at almost 0%.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Having numerous competing P2P currencies does not escape from this diabolical threat, if all of them have the same diabolical design. A non-diabolical design would either have debasement that never ends and/or a minimum transaction fee.

Is it a diabolical design or not - http://qubic.boards.net/index.cgi?board=theconcept&action=display&thread=1 ?

Is your argument that there is no first mover advantage, thus a competing P2P currency can be created at any time to fix any design flaw that handed control to corporate monopoly?

As I explained in my prior post, I would not agree. You would have to address my prior post and show me why I am wrong about the first mover advantage.

I don't say you are wrong about the first mover advantage. In my concept there are no fees, no way to identify approved/non-approved users, 51% attack becomes 99.999% attack for paranoic users, transactions are handled outside the system, scalability is not an issue... Just interesting if my concept looks non-diabolical from your point of view.

[AnonyMint]

@chmod755: AFAICS apparently you entirely missed the point of the OP as to the technical threat. Please try re-reading it.

Why did you even mention other things if you didn't want to hear comments about them? Of course the risk of a 51% attack exists and building it up slowly is possible. I'd advise every miner who paid off the rig and is making some BTC now to invest them in something like photovoltaics (or anything else that produces electricity) to keep the risk of "going bankrupt" in mining at almost 0%.

No malice intended, but you don't realize that investing in PV is economically worse than renting electricity from the utility. You will go bankrupt faster.

[chmod755]

You don't realize that investing in PV is economically worse than renting electricity from the utility.

You don't realize that nobody can manipulate electricity prices if you produce it and in the long term it's cheaper in some parts of the world.

[wormbog]

Simpleton masses? Who are you, Dr. Evil?

The cartel decides to blacklist Wal-Mart because they won't play ball. John Q. Simpleton goes to walmart.com to buy a new NASCAR shirt and some Slim Jims. Wal-Mart generates a never-before-used public address for John to send in his payment. How is the cartel going to identify it as a Wal-Mart address?

Obviously you fail to understand the technical problem. The cartel will control all the processing. John won't be able to get his transaction to go through.

This is a lack of technical understanding on your part as to how the Bitcoin algorithm works.

Once the cartel has all the mining, then John can't route his transaction to his own miner (or any good miner), because the miner who wins the next block must have processing power that is in scale with the total. But if the cartel has made it uneconomic to mine, then these miners with sufficiently high processing power, will no longer exist, because they long since went bankrupt. For example, say the cartel has 10 quadrillion terahashes by 2030, and so to have a 1% chance of getting your transaction through on each block try, you need 100 terahashes of computing power in your good miner. Who is going to keep 100 terahashes of computing power laying around unused because it has been rendered uneconomic by the free processing being given away by the cartel?

Just for those few dissidants that are affected?

Economics doesn't work that way. Go think this out more deeply.

Let's say you're correct that the cartel effectively controls all mining power. In order for them to use it effectively they must be able to distinguish between their friends and their enemies. But there's no way to do that.

If they choose to assume anyone they haven't identified is an enemy, the public will quickly abandon the whole system, causing the exchange value to plummet. That's bad economics.

Bitcoin is just the first head of a Hydra. If it gets compromised over overtaken it can be abandoned and replaced with incredible speed. The cartels get left holding all the worthless currency and useless mining hardware.

[AnonyMint]

You don't realize that investing in PV is economically worse than renting electricity from the utility.

You don't realize that nobody can manipulate electricity prices if you produce it and in the long term it's cheaper in some parts of the world.

Even if that were true that it is cheaper in some parts of world, it doesn't make it free, which is what you will need to compete with a cartel giving away mining for free. You will earn 0 from mining. Plus you have your hardware costs (PV and ASICs) to amortize.

[joris]

You fail to understand the technical problem in the OP. Merged mining does not fix the threat. The threat is the corporations can make it uneconomic to mine because they can offer it for free and the other miners will get paid nothing for mining, thus they control all of the mining (merged or otherwise). Before you attack that, go re-read the OP more carefully.

Technically it may be a logical outcome, but how will the alpha-males work harmoniously together to form and continue this cartel?

On world-scale there exists no such 51%-entity, AFAIK. Human nature breaks organisations down internally long before world domination and after a break they will compete which each other, since they both think they are on the right track.

The largest companies and countries are small at the global scale, only one's exposure to one of them can be particularly large. So Bitcoin can be sufficiently protected by size and dispersity.

[AnonyMint]

Having numerous competing P2P currencies does not escape from this diabolical threat, if all of them have the same diabolical design. A non-diabolical design would either have debasement that never ends and/or a minimum transaction fee.

Is it a diabolical design or not - http://qubic.boards.net/index.cgi?board=theconcept&action=display&thread=1 ?

Is your argument that there is no first mover advantage, thus a competing P2P currency can be created at any time to fix any design flaw that handed control to corporate monopoly?

As I explained in my prior post, I would not agree. You would have to address my prior post and show me why I am wrong about the first mover advantage.

I don't say you are wrong about the first mover advantage. In my concept there are no fees, no way to identify approved/non-approved users, 51% attack becomes 99.999% attack for paranoic users, transactions are handled outside the system, scalability is not an issue... Just interesting if my concept looks non-diabolical from your point of view.

Where is the technical description of your algorithm?

Readers please note he is not disagreeing with me whether Bitcoin has the problem I allege.

[chmod755]

Even if that were true that it is cheaper in some parts of world, it doesn't make it free, which is what you will need to compete with a cartel giving away mining for free. You will earn 0 from mining. Plus you have your hardware costs.

It doesn't make it completely free, but much cheaper and most importantly independent from price changes on electricity. Where's your cartel that is "giving away mining for free"? It doesn't exist. There's not a single bank that doesn't charge any fees. Make your cartel and see how "profitable" it is  

[AnonyMint]

Even if that were true that it is cheaper in some parts of world, it doesn't make it free, which is what you will need to compete with a cartel giving away mining for free. You will earn 0 from mining. Plus you have your hardware costs.

It doesn't make it completely free, but much cheaper and independent. Where's your cartel that is "giving away mining for free"? It doesn't exist. There's not a single bank that doesn't charge any fees. Make your cartel and see how "profitable" it is  

I am alleging the cartel will come, because monopolies make profits by extracting rents, e.g. they can increase the prices of products the customers are buying everywhere, just like how credit card fees are opaquely passed on to the customer and the customer does not care (because they don't know and they get to buy their junk).

Even if you argue the monopoly won't come (which I strongly doubt, since they always do), it is better to make a P2P currency that does not have this design flaw that exists in Bitcoin, so then we can be SURE it won't come.

In my design for a P2P currency, you will forever make money on mining. In my design, it would be impossible for the cartel to make mining free.

[AnonyMint]

If Bitcoin is taken over by a cartel we will all just move on to the next thing (maybe even your idea!).  On our way out the door we will make it as expensive as possilbe for the cartel to take over Bitcoin.

I see nothing new in your OP.

It will be too late. Please read my prior reply to joris.

And why not make it cartel-proof now? Why risk it?

There is something unique in my OP. What I am saying is not a 51% attack that does malicious actions. I am saying a 30 then 40 then 50 then 60 then 70 then 80 then 90 then 99 then 99.9999% friendly takeover of mining by corporations that make mining free and never do malicious acts.

No one will have a reason to switch.

Then they can turn off your access, because you wrote something that threatens the power elite. No one will care that you die. You are just one lone "terrorist". The rest of us are enjoying our junk and "free" transaction processing (because we can't see the opaque cost that has been added to everything in the market).

You see the problem, so you blog about it. Next day, your digital tax id is turned off. You die. No one cares. We won't even know it. You won't be able to even upload your blog, because by that time you have to make a micropayment to the hosting.

I have studied the power elite. I know how they operate. They do things insidiously so the masses don't know they've been enslaved.

[Come-from-Beyond]

Where is the technical description of your algorithm?

It's written in Java code. I'll publish it when complete the development of the prototype.

[AnonyMint]

Where is the technical description of your algorithm?

It's written in Java code. I'll publish it when complete the development of the prototype.

Do you own the domain name? quibic.org?

[Come-from-Beyond]

Where is the technical description of your algorithm?

It's written in Java code. I'll publish it when complete the development of the prototype.

Do you own the domain name? quibic.org?

qubic.info

PS: Let's move back to the topic. 

[AnonyMint]

Simpleton masses? Who are you, Dr. Evil?

The cartel decides to blacklist Wal-Mart because they won't play ball. John Q. Simpleton goes to walmart.com to buy a new NASCAR shirt and some Slim Jims. Wal-Mart generates a never-before-used public address for John to send in his payment. How is the cartel going to identify it as a Wal-Mart address?

Obviously you fail to understand the technical problem. The cartel will control all the processing. John won't be able to get his transaction to go through.

This is a lack of technical understanding on your part as to how the Bitcoin algorithm works.

Once the cartel has all the mining, then John can't route his transaction to his own miner (or any good miner), because the miner who wins the next block must have processing power that is in scale with the total. But if the cartel has made it uneconomic to mine, then these miners with sufficiently high processing power, will no longer exist, because they long since went bankrupt. For example, say the cartel has 10 quadrillion terahashes by 2030, and so to have a 1% chance of getting your transaction through on each block try, you need 100 terahashes of computing power in your good miner. Who is going to keep 100 terahashes of computing power laying around unused because it has been rendered uneconomic by the free processing being given away by the cartel?

Just for those few dissidants that are affected?

Economics doesn't work that way. Go think this out more deeply.

Let's say you're correct that the cartel effectively controls all mining power. In order for them to use it effectively they must be able to distinguish between their friends and their enemies. But there's no way to do that.

If they choose to assume anyone they haven't identified is an enemy, the public will quickly abandon the whole system, causing the exchange value to plummet. That's bad economics.

Bitcoin is just the first head of a Hydra. If it gets compromised over overtaken it can be abandoned and replaced with incredible speed. The cartels get left holding all the worthless currency and useless mining hardware.

Their friends are those who report taxes. Those who don't are enemies. Very easy to identify. Once they have the "friendly" takeover of mining, they can slowly morph the system to what they want with tax id attached to every transaction (either explicitly in the database or implicitly in the AML controls and other ways they can know exactly what every transaction is).

The public won't abandon it, because the public won't even perceive they've been harmed. They will happily buy their junk and be unaffected. Only the dissidants will be purged (the ones who think too much).

This will be a slow process, most will say I was crazy, because they won't perceive it is happening over decades. Slowly the dissidants will be picked off, a few at a time. We lose our freedom, bit-by-bit, not all at once. The power elite are not stupid enough to risk it all at once.

[Fiyasko]

There is a VERY obvious reason as to why bitcoin is DECENTRALISED.
TO STOP GOVERNMENT CONTROL
To create a centralized "cartel" would be Shunned by the entire bitcoin community, Because you would be Creating a 51% attack.
Gosh this is stupid, This "killswitch" that your talking about is nothing more than the 51% attack threat that we ALL know about

[AnonyMint]

You fail to understand the technical problem in the OP. Merged mining does not fix the threat. The threat is the corporations can make it uneconomic to mine because they can offer it for free and the other miners will get paid nothing for mining, thus they control all of the mining (merged or otherwise). Before you attack that, go re-read the OP more carefully.

Technically it may be a logical outcome, but how will the alpha-males work harmoniously together to form and continue this cartel?

On world-scale there exists no such 51%-entity, AFAIK. Human nature breaks organisations down internally long before world domination and after a break they will compete which each other, since they both think they are on the right track.

The largest companies and countries are small at the global scale, only one's exposure to one of them can be particularly large. So Bitcoin can be sufficiently protected by size and dispersity.

Cartels work together because they can earn more rents together than separate. They eliminate competition which drives their rents up (competition drives rents down). So the strongest get together.

Over time, the cartels consolidate more, eliminating the weakest within them. They end up as a single controller, which of course is failure, because no single person can run a free market.

Thus they are ultimately == death (for everyone). If it goes that far. Usually before that, mankind will cut off their heads (e.g. in France), but the problem this time is they are far away. Everything is digital. We can't even find them.

This horrifies me.

I think you should go study how Rockefeller monopolized all oil and railroads in USA, if you believe cartels don't form naturally when the economics allow it.

I am proposing to change the design so that the economics will no longer allow it. Bitcoin allows it. My design does not.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I guess OP hasn't heard about merged-mining?

If a superior form of crypto-currency blockchain comes along, it can co-opt the bitcoin mining power and take-over ... it is a level playing field for any good ideas to compete upon.

Wait, don't tell me, that is diabolical?

You fail to understand the technical problem in the OP. Merged mining does not fix the threat. The threat is the corporations can make it uneconomic to mine because they can offer it for free and the other miners will get paid nothing for mining, thus they control all of the mining (merged or otherwise). Before you attack that, go re-read the OP more carefully.

I won't be re-reading any drivel from an amateur loud-mouth like you ... anyway i thought i was on ignore? I wasted enough time already on the first skim through.

It is easy enough to blow hard and loud on forums, go and produce the code. A fully anonymous, merged-mine coin (anonymcoin) will out compete bitcoin, we 'just' need someone to build it, not talk about it.

As I said I'll be watching to see how much code you produce ... not just talk about it.

[AnonyMint]

There is a VERY obvious reason as to why bitcoin is DECENTRALISED.
TO STOP GOVERNMENT CONTROL
To create a centralized "cartel" would be Shunned by the entire bitcoin community, Because you would be Creating a 51% attack.
Gosh this is stupid, This "killswitch" that your talking about is nothing more than the 51% attack threat that we ALL know about

Sir in all due respect, you fail to understand the threat I am explaining.

The mining won't be decentralized anymore, because the cartels will give it away for free.