Bitcoin Forum
October 24, 2017, 02:55:05 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: [Brainstorm] Implications of Blacklisting DPR's Seized Bitcoins  (Read 4636 times)
angelamerkel
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 92



View Profile
October 25, 2013, 09:46:17 PM
 #21

"Bitcoin needs to follow the rules of the Bitcoin network protocol for everyone, without exceptions.  Otherwise it's no different than a centrally controlled currency."

I'm really sad to read that you guys want to force your values and norms on others.  The opposite is true:  Forced neutrality is almost as bad as centrally controlled currency.  


I'd like to download and use a Bitcoin client that displays blacklisted Coins separately.  Any other wallet that receives blacklisted Bitcoins will also be blacklisted if it spends more blacklisted bitcoins than it receives.  It shouldn't be so hard to code, should it? Am i missing something here?

 I believe no core developer or anyone should tell anyone if Bitcoin should be neutral or anything. The people should decide whether they want to use the Blacklist-Client or the original.  I'm willing to donate BTCs for the first coder to provide a Client with a Blacklist option.  
1508813705
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508813705

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508813705
Reply with quote  #2

1508813705
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508813705
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508813705

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508813705
Reply with quote  #2

1508813705
Report to moderator
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 09:53:43 PM
 #22

how is it even possible, technically speaking?

Maybe he plans to completely monopolize the mining space.*

* Actually, that plan has been floated before to eliminate such bad actors as Persians and their ilk from the economy.  I would not rule it out as a practical mechanism with sufficient consolidation of the network infrastructure.  Just gotta get that fucking block size unlimited.


hazek
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:00:38 PM
 #23

the FBI won them fair and square.

yeah, if by won you mean stolen and if by fair you mean using violence and coercion

My personality type: INTJ - please forgive my weaknesses (Not naturally in tune with others feelings; may be insensitive at times, tend to respond to conflict with logic and reason, tend to believe I'm always right)

If however you enjoyed my post: 15j781DjuJeVsZgYbDVt2NZsGrWKRWFHpp
ralree
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518


Manateeeeeeees


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:14:47 PM
 #24

Even if they were blacklisted, couldn't someone mint zerocoins out of them before everyone updates their clients, then withdraw them later?
http://zerocoin.org/
Theoretically, there'd be no way to figure out which coins were the blacklisted ones after the conversion, so the holder would be able to launder them of this blacklisting.  It could either work out well, or kill zerocoin because of association.

1MANaTeEZoH4YkgMYz61E5y4s9BYhAuUjG
Peter R
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:17:00 PM
 #25

the FBI won them fair and square.

yeah, if by won you mean stolen and if by fair you mean using violence and coercion

They now control the private key to those coins.  Does anything else matter?



*I still would love to know how they obtained them.

Run Bitcoin Unlimited (www.bitcoinunlimited.info)
100%digital
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 100


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:35:37 PM
 #26

the FBI won them fair and square.

yeah, if by won you mean stolen and if by fair you mean using violence and coercion

They now control the private key to those coins.  Does anything else matter?



*I still would love to know how they obtained them.

AES-256 ASIC hardware i would imagine... or god forbid a 10 dollar wrench Sad

...as leet as DPR was, he used some pretty shitty judgement along the way, i'd be willing to bet his passphrase was less than stellar -and by stellar i mean 20+ char (special/num/upper).
angelamerkel
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 92



View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:36:31 PM
 #27




I vote for neutrality, but adding a blacklist to a client would not be difficult at all. Keep in mind that a blacklist would be mostly ineffective because it would be relatively easy to circumvent.
[/quote]

How would you circumvent that?  The Blacklist will be handed over as parameter to the Client when it starts  and only the original Address is needed while all others can be calculated.   If the FBI sends 100 BTC to a wallet that already contains 100 BTC and that wallet spends a total of 110 BTC, I would automatically mark the last 10 BTC spent as black Coins.  

The blacklist could be left empty or automatically updated via open market strict or less strict "central" address lists, whatever the user prefers.  It would only make sense to add addresses  which still contain the Bitoins and which are about to stay there for a while untill most clients have updated their black list.

In the end it only works out, when enough people participate. Not sure that will be the case...

mgio
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 546


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:45:20 PM
 #28

the FBI won them fair and square.

yeah, if by won you mean stolen and if by fair you mean using violence and coercion

They now control the private key to those coins.  Does anything else matter?



*I still would love to know how they obtained them.

AES-256 ASIC hardware i would imagine... or god forbid a 10 dollar wrench Sad

...as leet as DPR was, he used some pretty shitty judgement along the way, i'd be willing to bet his passphrase was less than stellar -and by stellar i mean 20+ char (special/num/upper).

No, I bet he gave up the passwords as part of a plea agreement. They definitely did not bother to go crack it themselves. He was intimidated into giving it up.
bobdude17
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 455



View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:47:17 PM
 #29

the FBI won them fair and square.

yeah, if by won you mean stolen and if by fair you mean using violence and coercion

According to reality, that's called fair and square.
TradeFortress
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:48:12 PM
 #30

People use Bitcoin because cryptography controls there money. The advantage of Bitcoin is that nobody can take away your properly secured money except through coercion. Getting rid of this fundamental part of Bitcoin has devastating effects on what Bitcoin stands for.

tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:50:10 PM
 #31


If it is proven that Ulbright attempted hire the torture and execution someone to preclude them from turning states' evidence, then turned around and tried to get a hit on another person who hacked his enterprise, I would actually value the FBI coins *higher* than 'normal' ones.  Catching the guy is one of the relatively few instances where the government is actually doing what I pay them to do.


angelamerkel
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 92



View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:51:20 PM
 #32

People use Bitcoin because cryptography controls there money. The advantage of Bitcoin is that nobody can take away your properly secured money except through coercion. Getting rid of this fundamental part of Bitcoin has devastating effects on what Bitcoin stands for.

Again, who are you to force your fundamentals upon others.  There should be a client with blacklist option and the people are the only ones to decide whether they want to leave their black list blank or not.  I would add the FBI and noone else....

Another important point:
Ross Ulbricht was one of the good guys.  Sooner or Later the really bad guys will discover Bitcoin: blackmailer, hitmen, trafficker, "real" terrorists. Only a few of these guys could pose a serious threat towards Bitcoin. A working blacklist system could prevent certain problems that the current cash money system inherits.

What do you intend to do if bad guys starting kidnapping children from rich guys to extort huge amouts of bitcoin?
justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400



View Profile WWW
October 25, 2013, 10:51:39 PM
 #33

Output scripts are contracts. The contracts precisely specify what conditions are both necessary and sufficient for an output to be spent.

If the Bitcoin network ever stops honouring these contracts, then the currency and the network have a value of zero.
bobdude17
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 455



View Profile
October 25, 2013, 10:59:31 PM
 #34

People use Bitcoin because cryptography controls there money. The advantage of Bitcoin is that nobody can take away your properly secured money except through coercion. Getting rid of this fundamental part of Bitcoin has devastating effects on what Bitcoin stands for.

Again, who are you to force your fundamentals upon others.  There should be a client with blacklist option and the people are the only ones to decide whether they want to leave their black list blank or not.  I would add the FBI and noone else....

 Roll Eyes
benjamindees
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330


View Profile
October 25, 2013, 11:11:35 PM
 #35

I'm not saying this is a good idea, but from an economic perspective we wouldn't even have to "block" the coins indefinitely or even for very long.  Just slowing their re-entry into the Bitcoin economy would be enough.

Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
mootinator
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


View Profile
October 26, 2013, 12:27:47 AM
 #36

Politicization of the reference bitcoin client would inevitably kill it. Don't politicize bitcoin.

Alms for the middle class: 1Mootin8RQCHwb53zm3GTHNxBJfjRkUT15
TTC: TTyCoin4Fep8mEyKPv8uTNgiUtqjiPJ55n
BuhTuglia
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137



View Profile WWW
October 26, 2013, 12:43:09 AM
 #37

A lot of singles end up inside the panty of strippers. I need to find a way to blacklist them too. Smiley

Just whatever you do, don't put money in your mouth. Lord. I have seen some of these women. Probably washing your hands after handling money (especially ones) is a good idea, too.

Just another dust miner... Enquiring Gnomes want to Mine!
Send nothing to 16SVa2iQA6HuNPDGYShpmeEvUBRi2gW7f1
winnate
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62


View Profile
October 26, 2013, 12:45:49 AM
 #38

I don't think the government will end up giving them up or even selling them
Dabs
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1834



View Profile
October 26, 2013, 02:15:53 AM
 #39

Any good or decent mixer is going to either dislocate the original seized coins, or will effectively taint everything else.

See CoinJoin too.

A blacklist simply can not work. Unless it is implemented now while the coins have not yet left that particular address, and used by all miners in the world.

It would be trivial for someone to send coins to shared wallets, to exchanges, to gambling sites, let it sit there for a few days or weeks, then withdraw it. Or they send to an exchange or trade it for an alt-coin. Use the alt-coin to buy bitcoins later from someone else.

And how do you decentralize a blacklist?

Escrow Service (Services) - GPG ID: 32AD7565, OTC ID: Dabs
All messages concerning escrow or with bitcoin addresses are GPG signed. Please verify.
CompTIA A+, Microsoft Certified Professional, MCSA: Windows 10; Windows Server 2012, MCSE: Cloud Platform and Infrastructure; Productivity; Messaging
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2296


View Profile
October 26, 2013, 02:27:38 AM
 #40

...
And how do you decentralize a blacklist?

In a general way that is pretty straightforward.  Publish it.  If it is reliable and respected by the community, and if it is trivial to use, this would probably be fairly effective.  White-list similarly.  Furthermore, different groups could produce different [white|black]lists which either compete for credibility or augment one another.

For addresses or transactions this would be unworkable for latency reasons.  And a disastrous conceptually as well of course.  For blocks, however, it would be a quick-n-dirty way to handle superior resource attacks (aka 51%) which is one of the reasons I never worried to much about them.


Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 »  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!