Bitcoin Forum
September 29, 2016, 10:10:19 AM *
News: Due to DDoS attacks, there may be periodic downtime.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Defending Bitcoin against interventionists  (Read 4933 times)
kiba
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980


View Profile
July 20, 2010, 04:16:09 PM
 #21

Possibly related though: Can the bitcoin project survive if Satoshi is hit by the bus tomorrow?
Yes, all the source code is available, anyone can compile the client or modify it, fork it, etc.

I meant an orderly succession, not a thousand forks of bitcoin.

1475143819
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1475143819

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1475143819
Reply with quote  #2

1475143819
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
knightmb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308


Timekoin - Save Electricity, Don't Waste It!


View Profile WWW
July 20, 2010, 05:40:02 PM
 #22

Possibly related though: Can the bitcoin project survive if Satoshi is hit by the bus tomorrow?
Yes, all the source code is available, anyone can compile the client or modify it, fork it, etc.

I meant an orderly succession, not a thousand forks of bitcoin.
If Satoshi disappeared today? Then those that worked with him and wanted to put in the effort to run the project would be the natural selection logically. Otherwise, it just rolls down until someone wants to take charge. If that failed, I would considered heading the project myself if no one else was left that wanted to.

throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
July 23, 2010, 01:29:38 PM
 #23

If Satoshi disappeared today? Then those that worked with him and wanted to put in the effort to run the project would be the natural selection logically. Otherwise, it just rolls down until someone wants to take charge. If that failed, I would considered heading the project myself if no one else was left that wanted to.

The more evil thing may happen if Satoshi start to have evil intentions and will start to manipulate the rules.
Forking the code will not help Bitcoin system to sustain.
Do you personally know him?
Do you meet IRL?
Do you know his mind?
Is he a real person Smiley ?
Haven't he dissappeared already long time ago?

The trust to the system depends on the answers to that questions.

Developers are the central authority of Bitcoin.
We all download the code produced by some single source - a group of developers.
Now we cannot decentralize the code development, developers must agree on some common rules for the system,
or the system will break.

http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=547.0
throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
July 23, 2010, 01:51:44 PM
 #24

If he were to try to push an obnoxious software update with new rules, most people would continue to use the existing software, or would recompile the new version to remove whatever was obnoxious.

Yep.
If they will notice, that the update contains some "wrong" rules, that will hurt their wallets, ofcourse...
But if they don't? Do you regularly read code updates Smiley ?
I don't, having a better things to do, like talking with you.
Would you notice that? Would you tell us then?
Would you prove to us, that the update was "obnoxious"?
Will we trust you Smiley ? Who are you Smiley ?
And, by the way, developers have the reputation, that gives them some authority, and there is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plausible_deniability to prevent losing that reputation.

The problem of the central authority arises with Bitcoin too.
Well, it will not arise, as soon, as development finishes and the rules in the code
become static and widely recognized and approved by majority.
But that moment is in the future.
throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
July 23, 2010, 04:01:22 PM
 #25

Would you prove to us, that the update was "obnoxious"?
No-one feels the need to prove anything about the code to you. Because there's no centralized control, you're free to use an obnoxious update if you like.

Of course not everyone can read source code. But some people can, and some people do. The choice to run or not run the code is up to you, and no-one will be trying to "prove" to you why you must or must not run it.

Yes! That is what I am trying to say! Agreed with you!

No-one will be trying to "prove" to you or me why you (or me) must or must not run it.

And we will just continue to use it. That is an easiest way to intervene the project - just subtly intervene the code, so noone notices.
1. Hijack the hosting, that distibutes the binaries, and you will affect the majority of users, that do not compile by themselves.
2. Hijack the developers' workplaces, and you will get the ability to subtly affect the source code.
3. Hijack the source control system, and you will control the source and the binaries.
And don't think, that the "evil Cool powers" will be forced to do that via Internet access only.
Whenever the government comes to play, or the hugest businesses, then physically hijacking the servers is the cheapest attack on the Bitcoin.

Bitcoin as a payment system suffers from the threats to Bitcoin as a software project.
They are the common threats, not Bitcoin-specific, I think they are obvious to every opensource programmer.

Yes, there are some countermeasures to protect Bitcoin as a payment system from such attacks, like developing a standard first, not a software. But AFAIK they are not deployed NOW, standard may change, and users cannot affect to veto the changes, unless they coordinate, which is, well, unlikely  without a sound reason.
That's all I can say.
Quantumplation
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 84


View Profile
July 23, 2010, 04:09:36 PM
 #26

And when people start noticing that it's been hijacked, they'll make posts on forums, and that general knowledge will pass by word of mouth and people will stop using it.

Just because we're not trying to "prove" to you that it's valid/invalid doesn't mean we won't say "Uhhhh, I wouldn't use this anymore."

As less people use the client, it will become less valuable to use.  Thus, the people who DON'T listen to word of mouth will have no point to use it.

Against my better judgement... 1ADjszXMSRuAUjyy3ShFRy54SyRVrNDgDc
throughput
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 158


View Profile
July 23, 2010, 04:50:33 PM
 #27

And when people start noticing that it's been hijacked, they'll make posts on forums, and that general knowledge will pass by word of mouth and people will stop using it.

Just because we're not trying to "prove" to you that it's valid/invalid doesn't mean we won't say "Uhhhh, I wouldn't use this anymore."

As less people use the client, it will become less valuable to use.  Thus, the people who DON'T listen to word of mouth will have no point to use it.
So, let's start!

I have noticed, that Quantumplation's account on this forum is hijacked by some evil power, like chinese government, or some international banking corporation, don't know exactly. He advocates against the possibility of such event affecting the Bitcoin's security.

He-he.  Cool

I suppose, that in the future, the user base may outgrow the developers community, making it more feasible to attack Bitcoin users by attacking Bitcoin by attacking it's codebase and standards base, for example, by hijacking the developers.

I wish it never happens. But what prevents that, except it being my paranoia?
NewLibertyStandard
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 252



View Profile WWW
July 23, 2010, 05:07:09 PM
 #28

And when people start noticing that it's been hijacked, they'll make posts on forums, and that general knowledge will pass by word of mouth and people will stop using it.

Just because we're not trying to "prove" to you that it's valid/invalid doesn't mean we won't say "Uhhhh, I wouldn't use this anymore."

As less people use the client, it will become less valuable to use.  Thus, the people who DON'T listen to word of mouth will have no point to use it.
So, let's start!

I have noticed, that Quantumplation's account on this forum is hijacked by some evil power, like chinese government, or some international banking corporation, don't know exactly. He advocates against the possibility of such event affecting the Bitcoin's security.

He-he.  Cool

I suppose, that in the future, the user base may outgrow the developers community, making it more feasible to attack Bitcoin users by attacking Bitcoin by attacking it's codebase and standards base, for example, by hijacking the developers.

I wish it never happens. But what prevents that, except it being my paranoia?
And I've noticed the user throughput trying to disrupt the Bitcoin community by making false claims about community members.  Wink

Treazant: A Fullever Rewarding Bitcoin - Backup Your Wallet TODAY to Double Your Money! - Dual Currency Donation Address: 1Dnvwj3hAGSwFPMnkJZvi3KnaqksRPa74p
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
April 01, 2012, 12:26:50 PM
 #29

he's been hit by a bus?  Shocked

https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
blablahblah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 775


View Profile
April 01, 2012, 08:48:28 PM
 #30

Yes! That is what I am trying to say! Agreed with you!

No-one will be trying to "prove" to you or me why you (or me) must or must not run it.

And we will just continue to use it. That is an easiest way to intervene the project - just subtly intervene the code, so noone notices.
1. Hijack the hosting, that distibutes the binaries, and you will affect the majority of users, that do not compile by themselves.
2. Hijack the developers' workplaces, and you will get the ability to subtly affect the source code.
3. Hijack the source control system, and you will control the source and the binaries.
And don't think, that the "evil Cool powers" will be forced to do that via Internet access only.
Whenever the government comes to play, or the hugest businesses, then physically hijacking the servers is the cheapest attack on the Bitcoin.

Bitcoin as a payment system suffers from the threats to Bitcoin as a software project.
They are the common threats, not Bitcoin-specific, I think they are obvious to every opensource programmer.

Yes, there are some countermeasures to protect Bitcoin as a payment system from such attacks, like developing a standard first, not a software. But AFAIK they are not deployed NOW, standard may change, and users cannot affect to veto the changes, unless they coordinate, which is, well, unlikely  without a sound reason.
That's all I can say.

I find it fascinating how Bitcoin demonstrates how immense power can be wielded where there is a knowledge gap. The cleverest miners with the best technology mine the most coins for the lowest cost. Developers have a literacy advantage over non-developers. And the community as a whole appears to be several steps ahead of the financial kakistocracy Cheesy
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1722

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.


View Profile
April 01, 2012, 10:58:28 PM
 #31

Yes! That is what I am trying to say! Agreed with you!

No-one will be trying to "prove" to you or me why you (or me) must or must not run it.

And we will just continue to use it. That is an easiest way to intervene the project - just subtly intervene the code, so noone notices.
1. Hijack the hosting, that distibutes the binaries, and you will affect the majority of users, that do not compile by themselves.
2. Hijack the developers' workplaces, and you will get the ability to subtly affect the source code.
3. Hijack the source control system, and you will control the source and the binaries.
And don't think, that the "evil Cool powers" will be forced to do that via Internet access only.
Whenever the government comes to play, or the hugest businesses, then physically hijacking the servers is the cheapest attack on the Bitcoin.

Bitcoin as a payment system suffers from the threats to Bitcoin as a software project.
They are the common threats, not Bitcoin-specific, I think they are obvious to every opensource programmer.

Yes, there are some countermeasures to protect Bitcoin as a payment system from such attacks, like developing a standard first, not a software. But AFAIK they are not deployed NOW, standard may change, and users cannot affect to veto the changes, unless they coordinate, which is, well, unlikely  without a sound reason.
That's all I can say.

I find it fascinating how Bitcoin demonstrates how immense power can be wielded where there is a knowledge gap. The cleverest miners with the best technology mine the most coins for the lowest cost. Developers have a literacy advantage over non-developers. And the community as a whole appears to be several steps ahead of the financial kakistocracy Cheesy
Do you mean Tyler Durden clever? Or do you mean Pirate Bay, MegaUpload, Wikileaks clever?

Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
blablahblah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 775


View Profile
April 02, 2012, 12:09:22 AM
 #32

Do you mean Tyler Durden clever? Or do you mean Pirate Bay, MegaUpload, Wikileaks clever?
Lazy wording on my part. Presumably those guys are all busy on other projects and/or getting deported, so no. Strictly speaking it'll be a broad group, including but not exclusive to:
teens experimenting with their gaming rig because they heard about the "free money", engineering students borrowing FPGA kits, IT admins kitting out their server room at work, young parents running a start-up...

They may or may not be financially literate... But with various challenges being thrown their way, they can only improve.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!