2013-06-30 BITCOIN KILL SWITCH

[BCB]

"of the approximately 9 million bitcoins which currently exist, less than 2 million actually circulate"

http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/how-the-bitcoin-1-manipulate-the-currency-deceive-its-user-community-and-make-its-future-uncertain/2013/06/30

[franky1]

i better throw 7 million coins between wallets more often then

(joke)

[Birdy]

Edit: It's an digged up old piece from 2012
http://newswax.com/2012/10/bitcoin-has-a-kill-switch-and-how-to-disconnect-it/?wpmp_tp=2

[Itcher]

Yea, the kill-switch would become a life-switch ... they throw the millions away, price decreases and everyone can buy btc ... this would become a starting point

[biggie]

If that is true then we as the community should implement the solution described here to get rid of those specific kill-switch-hoarders:

"
So, what, if anything, could be done about it? Unfortunately, the one solution which I can think of (other than the idiotic head-in-the-sand solution of not giving a damn, which the Bitcoin user community seems to favour) is a rather unlikely one, and would be quite distasteful – on a gut level – to most users. I am speaking, of course, of proscription. If the Bitcoin community – or a reasonable subset thereof – agreed that the kill switch ought to be neutralized by any means possible, it would be a fairly straightforward matter to declare the hoarders persona non grata and collectively agree to use modified Bitcoin clients (let’s call them Bitcoin-P) which act as if the particular coins currently held by A, C-F, H-K, and M-S were not bitcoins at all. And that such pseudo-coins will never be accepted as genuine in trade for any good or service. In effect, they would be retroactively shitcoined for all time.

This act would not require cooperation from every single Bitcoin user, or the imposition of any kind of governing authority. If even a minority of users were to move to Bitcoin-P, operating separate exchanges and the like, said users would be forever immune to the effects of a future market glut resulting from hoarders cashing out. Users of conventional Bitcoin would feel the effects in full, suffering the loss of most if not all of their purchasing power.

But I am under no illusions that Bitcoin-P will ever happen, given the libertarian bent of most Bitcoin users. They will mutter of dekulakization and the like. Fine, lose your hard-earned wealth to a pyramid scheme operator at some unspecified future date. But if you like the idea of decentralized cryptocurrencies without built-in kill switches, think hard about Bitcoin-P. Anyone who wants to can start using Bitcoin-P right now, without having to wait for others to be convinced of its merits. Just compile a list of the Satoshi gang’s bitcoins, and start pretending that they aren’t coins at all. It really is that simple.”
"

[Trongersoll]

DOOOOOOMMMMM! Stupid article.

[PerfectAgent]

If that is true then we as the community should implement the solution described here to get rid of those specific kill-switch-hoarders:

"
So, what, if anything, could be done about it? Unfortunately, the one solution which I can think of (other than the idiotic head-in-the-sand solution of not giving a damn, which the Bitcoin user community seems to favour) is a rather unlikely one, and would be quite distasteful – on a gut level – to most users. I am speaking, of course, of proscription. If the Bitcoin community – or a reasonable subset thereof – agreed that the kill switch ought to be neutralized by any means possible, it would be a fairly straightforward matter to declare the hoarders persona non grata and collectively agree to use modified Bitcoin clients (let’s call them Bitcoin-P) which act as if the particular coins currently held by A, C-F, H-K, and M-S were not bitcoins at all. And that such pseudo-coins will never be accepted as genuine in trade for any good or service. In effect, they would be retroactively shitcoined for all time.

This act would not require cooperation from every single Bitcoin user, or the imposition of any kind of governing authority. If even a minority of users were to move to Bitcoin-P, operating separate exchanges and the like, said users would be forever immune to the effects of a future market glut resulting from hoarders cashing out. Users of conventional Bitcoin would feel the effects in full, suffering the loss of most if not all of their purchasing power.

But I am under no illusions that Bitcoin-P will ever happen, given the libertarian bent of most Bitcoin users. They will mutter of dekulakization and the like. Fine, lose your hard-earned wealth to a pyramid scheme operator at some unspecified future date. But if you like the idea of decentralized cryptocurrencies without built-in kill switches, think hard about Bitcoin-P. Anyone who wants to can start using Bitcoin-P right now, without having to wait for others to be convinced of its merits. Just compile a list of the Satoshi gang’s bitcoins, and start pretending that they aren’t coins at all. It really is that simple.”
"

So basically steal the money of people who don't want to use it your way? Wouldn't that in itself be a killswitch, in addition to how unethical it is just to steal because they don't do things your way?

[biggie]

If that is true then we as the community should implement the solution described here to get rid of those specific kill-switch-hoarders:

"
So, what, if anything, could be done about it? Unfortunately, the one solution which I can think of (other than the idiotic head-in-the-sand solution of not giving a damn, which the Bitcoin user community seems to favour) is a rather unlikely one, and would be quite distasteful – on a gut level – to most users. I am speaking, of course, of proscription. If the Bitcoin community – or a reasonable subset thereof – agreed that the kill switch ought to be neutralized by any means possible, it would be a fairly straightforward matter to declare the hoarders persona non grata and collectively agree to use modified Bitcoin clients (let’s call them Bitcoin-P) which act as if the particular coins currently held by A, C-F, H-K, and M-S were not bitcoins at all. And that such pseudo-coins will never be accepted as genuine in trade for any good or service. In effect, they would be retroactively shitcoined for all time.

This act would not require cooperation from every single Bitcoin user, or the imposition of any kind of governing authority. If even a minority of users were to move to Bitcoin-P, operating separate exchanges and the like, said users would be forever immune to the effects of a future market glut resulting from hoarders cashing out. Users of conventional Bitcoin would feel the effects in full, suffering the loss of most if not all of their purchasing power.

But I am under no illusions that Bitcoin-P will ever happen, given the libertarian bent of most Bitcoin users. They will mutter of dekulakization and the like. Fine, lose your hard-earned wealth to a pyramid scheme operator at some unspecified future date. But if you like the idea of decentralized cryptocurrencies without built-in kill switches, think hard about Bitcoin-P. Anyone who wants to can start using Bitcoin-P right now, without having to wait for others to be convinced of its merits. Just compile a list of the Satoshi gang’s bitcoins, and start pretending that they aren’t coins at all. It really is that simple.”
"

So basically steal the money of people who don't want to use it your way? Wouldn't that in itself be a killswitch, in addition to how unethical it is just to steal because they don't do things your way?

Not really, to make sure bitcoin survives as it was intended (!) and its destiny not in the hands of a few people who set this all up from the beginning. Cause if that analysis is true then it's either make a few filthy rich and crash OR make sure there is no "killswitch".

Maybe those people who planned bitcoin and have 7000000 bitcoins as a small group could show their intentions and use those coins to spread bitcoin further by all means. Not saying all coins, but large enough so it's not a killswitch anymore AND at the same time do good with it.

[not.you]

How many of those non-circulating coins are like these?

http://blockchain.info/fb/1nxg

Probably mined on a whim out of curiosity and forgotten.

[DeathAndTaxes]

So basically steal the money of people who don't want to use it your way? Wouldn't that in itself be a killswitch, in addition to how unethical it is just to steal because they don't do things your way?

Not really, to make sure bitcoin survives as it was intended (!) and its destiny not in the hands of a few people who set this all up from the beginning. Cause if that analysis is true then it's either make a few filthy rich and crash OR make sure there is no "killswitch".

Maybe those people who planned bitcoin and have 7000000 bitcoins as a small group could show their intentions and use those coins to spread bitcoin further by all means. Not saying all coins, but large enough so it's not a killswitch anymore AND at the same time do good with it.

Or not.  When the protocol supports confiscation of private property by fiat (meaning "by decree") it simply loses all legitimacy. Bitcoin would be adopting the worst aspects of state control with none of the benefits.  I for one will be selling my coins at market and looking towards a better protocol.  Nobody would trust a currency where some group can decide in the future to retroactively erase your ownership.  Nobody would it is idiotic.

The only "kill switch" is the one you foolishly are reaching for, and of course that was the intent of the FUD.  You are just falling for it like a pawn.  The good news is that it simply is impossible to achieve so there is harm the uneducated can do.

[PerfectAgent]

If that is true then we as the community should implement the solution described here to get rid of those specific kill-switch-hoarders:

"
So, what, if anything, could be done about it? Unfortunately, the one solution which I can think of (other than the idiotic head-in-the-sand solution of not giving a damn, which the Bitcoin user community seems to favour) is a rather unlikely one, and would be quite distasteful – on a gut level – to most users. I am speaking, of course, of proscription. If the Bitcoin community – or a reasonable subset thereof – agreed that the kill switch ought to be neutralized by any means possible, it would be a fairly straightforward matter to declare the hoarders persona non grata and collectively agree to use modified Bitcoin clients (let’s call them Bitcoin-P) which act as if the particular coins currently held by A, C-F, H-K, and M-S were not bitcoins at all. And that such pseudo-coins will never be accepted as genuine in trade for any good or service. In effect, they would be retroactively shitcoined for all time.

This act would not require cooperation from every single Bitcoin user, or the imposition of any kind of governing authority. If even a minority of users were to move to Bitcoin-P, operating separate exchanges and the like, said users would be forever immune to the effects of a future market glut resulting from hoarders cashing out. Users of conventional Bitcoin would feel the effects in full, suffering the loss of most if not all of their purchasing power.

But I am under no illusions that Bitcoin-P will ever happen, given the libertarian bent of most Bitcoin users. They will mutter of dekulakization and the like. Fine, lose your hard-earned wealth to a pyramid scheme operator at some unspecified future date. But if you like the idea of decentralized cryptocurrencies without built-in kill switches, think hard about Bitcoin-P. Anyone who wants to can start using Bitcoin-P right now, without having to wait for others to be convinced of its merits. Just compile a list of the Satoshi gang’s bitcoins, and start pretending that they aren’t coins at all. It really is that simple.”
"

So basically steal the money of people who don't want to use it your way? Wouldn't that in itself be a killswitch, in addition to how unethical it is just to steal because they don't do things your way?

Not really, to make sure bitcoin survives as it was intended (!) and its destiny not in the hands of a few people who set this all up from the beginning. Cause if that analysis is true then it's either make a few filthy rich and crash OR make sure there is no "killswitch".

Maybe those people who planned bitcoin and have 7000000 bitcoins as a small group could show their intentions and use those coins to spread bitcoin further by all means. Not saying all coins, but large enough so it's not a killswitch anymore AND at the same time do good with it.

Or not.  The minute the protocol supports confiscation of private property well it loses all legitimacy. It puts Bitcoin in a category worse that monpolistic state fiat currencies (and that is saying a lot). I for one will be selling my coins at market and looking towards a better protocol.

The only "kill switch" is the one you foolishly are reaching for.  Of course that was the intent of the FUD and you are just falling for it like a pawn.

Oh yeah, if this were possible, I'd nope the hell out of Bitcoin, and fast.

[biggie]

Well, it looks like fear is speaking instead of thinking. What those few people (less then 10 ?) controlling 7,000.000 coins want with hoarding that amount ? If their intentions were good they would be spreading bitcoin further and spending them on projects to get the masses use bitcoin. By not doing so they put a bomb under bitcoin. Again, if that analysis is true.

So the question is, why does a handful of people have 7,000.000 bitcoins doing nothing ? Or just run them from A to B to C ? Bitcoin can only scale if there is a flow of it.

PS: not talking about people with 1000's of bitcoins or even 10,000's, just specifically about that little group who controls 7,000.000 coins. And again, if that analysis is true !

[PerfectAgent]

Well, it looks like fear is speaking instead of thinking. What those few people (less then 10 ?) controlling 7,000.000 coins want with hoarding that amount ? If their intentions were good they would be spreading bitcoin further and spending them on projects to get the masses use bitcoin. By not doing so they put a bomb under bitcoin. Again, if that analysis is true.

So the question is, why does a handful of people have 7,000.000 bitcoins doing nothing ? Or just run them from A to B to C ? Bitcoin can only scale if there is a flow of it.

PS: not talking about people with 1000's of bitcoins or even 10,000's, just specifically about that little group who controls 7,000.000 coins. And again, if that analysis is true !

They've earned it all fair and square, following the rules set in the bitcoin protocol. Changing it up like that will tank bitcoin so fast. Also, no matter how well off they are, it's morally reprehensible to just try and destroy one's savings just because they do what you don't want with it.

[biggie]

Well, it looks like fear is speaking instead of thinking. What those few people (less then 10 ?) controlling 7,000.000 coins want with hoarding that amount ? If their intentions were good they would be spreading bitcoin further and spending them on projects to get the masses use bitcoin. By not doing so they put a bomb under bitcoin. Again, if that analysis is true.

So the question is, why does a handful of people have 7,000.000 bitcoins doing nothing ? Or just run them from A to B to C ? Bitcoin can only scale if there is a flow of it.

PS: not talking about people with 1000's of bitcoins or even 10,000's, just specifically about that little group who controls 7,000.000 coins. And again, if that analysis is true !

They've earned it all fair and square, following the rules set in the bitcoin protocol. Changing it up like that will tank bitcoin so fast. Also, no matter how well off they are, it's morally reprehensible to just try and destroy one's savings just because they do what you don't want with it.

A planned event like bitcoin and then massively hoarding that amount is not what i call fair and square. But it's not up to me, at the end the masses decide and if they decide to exclude those specific hoarders then so be it. This will sooner or later come back and bite us as in the community in the ass, mark my words.

[justusranvier]

Whenever I see FUD directed at Bitcoin on this forum I automatically assume that it can be traced back to someone wanting to pump alt coins.

[WaverleyStreet]

"The hoarders, in effect, possess an off switch for Bitcoin."

This assumes that no one would buy the Bitcoins at USD 0.001 each and start over.

are weee talkin' bout TESTNET coins or reel BTC???

>>>apples and pears???

[andrewsg]

The ignorance and misinformation is strong in this one.

OP, please educate yourself.

https://gist.github.com/jgarzik/3901921

[Trongersoll]

this thread needs a kill switch. 

[WaverleyStreet]

The ignorance and misinformation is strong in this one.

OP, please educate yourself.

https://gist.github.com/jgarzik/3901921

 love that ^^^^^^ Bitcoin false key assumptions i'm getting to know how the BTC kill switch works!!!! +1xxxxxxxxxxx !!!!!!!!!

[Kais]

Here's something that I'm wondering...

It seems to me that (IF a small group of) the people who own the 7 million just permanently deleted their wallets, that would help kill it off, right?

Or what if the government bought (or is buying) hundreds of thousands and just threw them away?

That's my question.