Mike Hearn, Foundation's Law & Policy Chair, is pushing blacklists right now

[cypherdoc]

The Bitcoin Foundation starting to show its true colors..

I do not think they are lobbying for Bitcoin user's best interests, but instead to promote their own agenda.

is the entire Foundation onboard with this idea???

Probably not, but there are more influential members than others there. Example, Mike Hearn

Even though Bitcoin is open source, this whole idea of blacklisting goes against everything Bitcoin stands for
You won't be able to send the coins to whoever you want (illicit or non-illicit)
Your coins can be frozen (blacklisted)

Matonis is on record stating he does NOT support blacklisting coins.  he'd better put a stop to this.

[1713545648]

1713545648

[1713545648]

1713545648

[1713545648]

1713545648

[1713545648]

1713545648

[1713545648]

1713545648

[1713545648]

1713545648

[dewdeded]

I suggest we red-list Mike Hearn for his position in the foundation.

Let Mike just keep quiet about this in public.
We haven't heard anything from law enforcement yet.  Wait until we hear from the panel in the upcoming Senate hearings.  If they suggest controls, then it will be time to consider options.  Otherwise, we have no need to implement a blacklist, redlist, or any other restriction.

Wtf is wrong with you? No one cares about your mofo US senate.

Nothing has to be changed.

Fuck USA!

[drawingthesun]

Mike is being naive thinking it will only be used to stop bad guys. We have all seen this before, the filters and restrictions eventually move outwards and infect all areas of a system.

This "redlist" will eventually only allow approved coins that are matched name and address to a government database. In one fell swoop Mike destroys all the positives Satoshi installed in the Bitcoin system.

If the government is not satisfied with your credentials, you will not be allowed to buy things with your coins, the coins will start to have two different values, one value for the government approved coins that can be used to buy things, and another for those dark coins that are no longer useful.

Also no one will have any incentive to accept dark coins because they run the risk of having their business shut down because their wallet got added to the dark coin list by their government.

This will allow the government to trace everyones money, decided what businesses are allowed to do business and quickly destroy the wealth of dissidents and opposition.

My question: Is Mike really this naive?

[corebob]

I suggest we red-list Mike Hearn for his position in the foundation.

Let Mike just keep quiet about this in public.
We haven't heard anything from law enforcement yet.  Wait until we hear from the panel in the upcoming Senate hearings.  If they suggest controls, then it will be time to consider options.  Otherwise, we have no need to implement a blacklist, redlist, or any other restriction.

Wtf is wrong with you? No one cares about your mofo US senate.

Nothing has to be changed.

Fuck USA!

Take it easy, man.
It might be a misunderstanding going on here

[adamstgBit]

I suggest we red-list Mike Hearn for his position in the foundation.

Let Mike just keep quiet about this in public.
We haven't heard anything from law enforcement yet.  Wait until we hear from the panel in the upcoming Senate hearings.  If they suggest controls, then it will be time to consider options.  Otherwise, we have no need to implement a blacklist, redlist, or any other restriction.

Wtf is wrong with you? No one cares about your mofo US senate.

Nothing has to be changed.

Fuck USA!

Take it easy, man.
It might be a misunderstanding going on here

their is no misunderstanding

a project has been proposed and NO ONE wants it.

nothing else matters.

[Severian]

Truth is, you can not trust anyone who voluntarily involve themelves in the corrupt and dirty political games of our current times. The Bitcoin Foundation is politics, wether you want to recognize it or not. That was my motive not to join any Foundation and every day that goes by I'm proven right on my choice. Lobbyism must die.

You are 100% correct. I regret my decision to join the foundation. Even worse, I regret sending them 25 btc way back when if Hearn's idea is the kind of crap it supports. I should have cashed them in and just sent the money directly to a three letter agency instead.

[bitbitcoincoin]

Can we get an at least symbolic vote of "no confidence" in the bitcoin foundation to show the community does not agree with this horrible suggestion?

[Severian]

My question: Is Mike really this naive?

No. He's playing the political game of "Let's Make Some Window Dressing To Look Good For The Regulators".

He's trying to get in good with DC by using Bitcoin as the vehicle.

[millsdmb]

Let Mike just keep quiet about this in public.
We haven't heard anything from law enforcement yet.  Wait until we hear from the panel in the upcoming Senate hearings.  If they suggest controls, then it will be time to consider options.  Otherwise, we have no need to implement a blacklist, redlist, or any other restriction.

There is NO SCENARIO in which Mike Hearn's suggestion make one iota of sense for Bitcoin.

I can't believe what I'm reading him say honestly.

[DeeSome]

From the Mike Hearn quote

" When you receive funds that inherit the redlisting, your wallet client would highlight this in the user interface. Some basic information about why the coins are on the redlist would be presented. You can still spend or use these coins as normal, the highlight is only informational. To clear it, you can contact the operator of the list and say, hello, here I am, I am innocent and if anyone wants to follow up and talk to me, here's how. Then the outputs are unmarked from that point onwards"

What an utter load of bollocks.

Nick Nasty has 500 btc in anonymous wallet xyz****** which he earned by spreading the CryptoLocker virus, he sends these to a newly created wallet which are flagged as dirty coins (redlisted) during the confirmation process.

"Hello is that Mike at the Foundation, hi my name is Nick Nulty and I just got some redlisted coins when I sold some junk from my attic to a guy I don't know who came to my house."

"hello Nick, yes this is Mike at the Foundation, ok we've cleared that redlisting for those coins now. They're now whiter than white and you can use them as you like, have a great day. Oh by the way would you like to make a donation and join the Foundation?"

"No thanks Mike, but you have a great day"

Why are clever people so stupid?

[adamstgBit]

I do not understand why  Mike Hearn hasn't come on any of these threads to say anything at all about this project.

[Gabi]

Great, the mighty "foundation" (aka a group of people who think they are important and have a "chair" somewhere) now want to taint coins.  And maybe they and the government decide how to taint them? Ye well answer is NO

[DeeSome]

Mike is being naive thinking it will only be used to stop bad guys. We have all seen this before, the filters and restrictions eventually move outwards and infect all areas of a system.

This "redlist" will eventually only allow approved coins that are matched name and address to a government database. In one fell swoop Mike destroys all the positives Satoshi installed in the Bitcoin system.

If the government is not satisfied with your credentials, you will not be allowed to buy things with your coins, the coins will start to have two different values, one value for the government approved coins that can be used to buy things, and another for those dark coins that are no longer useful.

Also no one will have any incentive to accept dark coins because they run the risk of having their business shut down because their wallet got added to the dark coin list by their government.

This will allow the government to trace everyones money, decided what businesses are allowed to do business and quickly destroy the wealth of dissidents and opposition.

My question: Is Mike really this naive?

+100

[Kokomoka]

I vaguely remember a concept called "economic majority" by which the network can only undergo a huge upheavel like this is a majority of the users agree with it. Who gave the right to the bitcoin foundation to dictate these changes anyway?

I am passionate about the free market. It is my hope that in the event this change is implemented, a fork of the bitcoin project will occur and a huge majority of users will switch to it.

[millsdmb]

I vaguely remember a concept called "economic majority" by which the network can only undergo a huge upheavel like this is a majority of the users agree with it. Who gave the right to the bitcoin foundation to dictate these changes anyway?

I am passionate about the free market. It is my hope that in the event this change is implemented, a fork of the bitcoin project will occur and a huge majority of users will switch to it.

he, and the foundation, still have to answer to the miners.

[Gabi]

Who gave the right to the bitcoin foundation to dictate these changes anyway?

No one.

This is the self-entitling party. They have a "foundation", a "board", they have "chairs", they "elect" people and so on.

[RodeoX]

Mike does not decide, lawmakers will. Have you contacted your congressman, senator, any regulator? No?, then I guess his opinion trumps yours.
You will get nothing complaining here. Like it or not, bitcoin regulation IS coming to the USA. If you want to be heard then write. Not here, write your representatives. If you want no regulation then write your own code and fork the chain. Maybe someone will use your alt-coin.

[adamstgBit]

Mike does not decide, lawmakers will. Have you contacted your congressman, senator, any regulator? No?, then I guess his opinion trumps yours.
You will get nothing complaining here. Like it or not, bitcoin regulation IS coming to the USA. If you want to be heard then write. Not here, write your representatives. If you want no regulation then write your own code and fork the chain. Maybe someone will use your alt-coin.

its the Foundation's job to fight for us on things like this, not bendover!

[Gabi]

If you want to be heard then write. Not here, write your representatives. If you want no regulation then write your own code and fork the chain. Maybe someone will use your alt-coin.

I disagree. Bitcoin exists exactly to stop with this useless "write your representatives" and to finally MAKE something good and useful. Writing=losing time and paper. Using bitcoin=changing the world, in better.

[Severian]

Like it or not, bitcoin regulation IS coming to the USA.

Then a lot of us will be rich in gold, silver or whatever currency isn't Federal Reserve Notes. The US is now just another market and Bitcoin will do fine without it.