The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack - a call to developers of bitcoin

[zylstra]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

It light of many recent, high value bitcoin thefts the Bitcoin community has been discussing freezing stolen coins.  (See for example the discussion that generated this one, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=508971 )  Many are opposed to it because they see it as regulation.  But the regulation does not have to come from a judge or one so-called authoritative entity.  It can come from the votes of the community, i.e. miners.  And this is the way it should be.

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

[1714505448]

1714505448

[1714505448]

1714505448

[cr1776]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

...

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins. The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Go ahead, it is open source.  When it is ready, do a pull request.   Then you can see how many people believe this is a good idea in a democratic fashion.  You'll have your alt-coin, many others will stick with bitcoin.

[zylstra]

Go ahead, it is open source.  When it is ready, do a pull request.   Then you can see how many people believe this is a good idea in a democratic fashion.  You'll have your alt-coin, many others will stick with bitcoin.

Link?

Has a poll for this been taken already?

[tkbx]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

It light of many recent, high value bitcoin thefts the Bitcoin community has been discussing freezing stolen coins.  (See for example the discussion that generated this one, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=508971 )  Many are opposed to it because they see it as regulation.  But the regulation does not have to come from a judge or one so-called authoritative entity.  It can come from the votes of the community, i.e. miners.  And this is the way it should be.

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

1. Miners are all ready "separate". If we were to do things democratically, miners would be the only ones to get votes.
2. Bitcoin isn't a democracy. If you don't like Bitcoin as it is, start your own network. If the Bitcoin network starts stacking the deck to reverse transactions or freeze accounts, it's not Bitcoin, regardless of what we call it. The currency as the whitepaper describes it is Bitcoin.

[BurtW]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

It light of many recent, high value bitcoin thefts the Bitcoin community has been discussing freezing stolen coins.  (See for example the discussion that generated this one, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=508971 )  Many are opposed to it because they see it as regulation.  But the regulation does not have to come from a judge or one so-called authoritative entity.  It can come from the votes of the community, i.e. miners.  And this is the way it should be.

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Quit talking about it and get off your ass and fork the chain code.  I am so sick of all these threads talking about forking the chain code.  Do it already!

[cr1776]

Go ahead, it is open source.  When it is ready, do a pull request.   Then you can see how many people believe this is a good idea in a democratic fashion.  You'll have your alt-coin, many others will stick with bitcoin.

Link?

Has a poll for this been taken already?

Link for what?  Bitcoin?  You can do a search for the bitcoin source on github.  http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bitcoin+github

A poll on this?  Polls are often meaningless, implement the changes, put the software out there and then people will decide where it counts, in reality not just a poll.

This is open source software, make the changes, use github and do a pull request (and fork the client and blockchain), publish your changes.  Then you can see how many people believe this is a good idea or not.  You'll have an alt-coin, many others will stick with bitcoin.  More people may choose your fork, I tend to think not many will, but the only way to find out is if one of these people who thinks it is a good idea decides to do it.  

The benefit is that it will show what a bad idea this is once and for all (well, maybe not, but it would be a start).  Stop talking, start doing.

[Brangdon]

Many are opposed to it because they see it as regulation.  But the regulation does not have to come from a judge or one so-called authoritative entity.  It can come from the votes of the community, i.e. miners.

The logic of a 51% attack not being an attack makes sense when we're talking about changes to the Bitcoin protocol, because that is a field where miners tend to be expert and have an vested interest. This logic does not apply voting as to whether coins are stolen. To establish theft ought to need days in court, evidence, a judge well-versed in law, and an attentive jury. Miners aren't going to be up for that. Their votes will based, at best, on little more than prejudice and what hearsay they may have read on the internet. (No offence, guys.)

Regulation is only one issue. Another is that part of Bitcoin's USP is that transactions are irrevocable. The mere possibility that the coins you paid me with might be taken away from me, or frozen, for any reason, would undermine the protocol even if the feature was never actually used. Therefore I confidentially expect most miners would vote against adding infrastructure to freeze coins. Even talking about it would undermine trust, if there were any chance you'd be taken seriously.

[BurtW]

... if there were any chance you'd be taken seriously.

You would think that after 100 threads on this very same subject people would learn that these proposals cannot and will not be taken seriously.

[zylstra]

1. Miners are all ready "separate". If we were to do things democratically, miners would be the only ones to get votes.
2. Bitcoin isn't a democracy. If you don't like Bitcoin as it is, start your own network. If the Bitcoin network starts stacking the deck to reverse transactions or freeze accounts, it's not Bitcoin, regardless of what we call it. The currency as the whitepaper describes it is Bitcoin.

Call it what you want.  The whitepaper is a starting point.  The goal is to improve upon what it described.  Democratic principles will prevail regardless, whether it be with this coin or another.

Quit talking about it and get off your ass and fork the chain.  I am so sick of all these threads talking about forking the chain.  Do it already!

I understand your impatience.  Bear with me.  I only began thinking about this and discussing it yesterday.  Thank you to all for providing a discussion whereby I am learning.

Link for what?  Bitcoin?  You can do a search for the bitcoin source on github.  http://lmgtfy.com/?q=bitcoin+github

A poll on this?  Polls are often meaningless, implement the changes, put the software out there and then people will decide where it counts, in reality not just a poll.

This is open source software, make the changes, use github and do a pull request (and fork the client and blockchain), publish your changes.  Then you can see how many people believe this is a good idea or not.  You'll have an alt-coin, many others will stick with bitcoin.  More people may choose your fork, I tend to think not many will, but the only way to find out is if one of these people who thinks it is a good idea decides to do it.  

The benefit is that it will show what a bad idea this is once and for all (well, maybe not, but it would be a start).  Stop talking, start doing.

You stated "when it is ready".  By "it" I thought you meant the modification to easily freeze coins.

Polls are a starting point.  I wouldn't pursue a 5% solution but I would a 95% one.

Their votes will based, at best, on little more than prejudice and what hearsay they may have read on the internet. (No offence, guys.)

Just like our current court system, but this one is better since it's more democratic.

[BurtW]

Thank you to all for providing a discussion whereby I am learning.

Great.  Now learn to use the search and find one of the 100s of threads on this very same subject and read it because this has all been discussed ad nauseum.

Here is a starting point:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=352734.0

Read it until you understand it.  Note that the example given, keeping the reward at 25 BTC per block, is just an example of a change that would cause a fork.  Your proposed change of freezing coins you do not like is another example of a forking change.  So, even though the thread I gave you is discussing a fork due to a a group keeping the 25 BTC per block reward going after the protocol says it should be cut to 12.5 BTC per block, the results with your fork would be the same. may or may not directly or indirectly cause a similar fork with similar results.

[cr1776]

One more comment.  We HAVE "democratic money" now. It is the nature of central banks around the world - they respond to the voters and politicians and do insane things.  From 2008-2014 you can read the history of some of them. From the early 1900s until now you can see the impact of "democratic money" on the purchasing power of a dollar, for example.

One value of bitcoin is that it is math based money that can't be devalued, inflated, confiscated, frozen or blacklisted etc. at the protocol level.  Changing those core features changes bitcoin into something that is not bitcoin.

:-)

[tkbx]

1. Miners are all ready "separate". If we were to do things democratically, miners would be the only ones to get votes.
2. Bitcoin isn't a democracy. If you don't like Bitcoin as it is, start your own network. If the Bitcoin network starts stacking the deck to reverse transactions or freeze accounts, it's not Bitcoin, regardless of what we call it. The currency as the whitepaper describes it is Bitcoin.

Call it what you want.  The whitepaper is a starting point.  The goal is to improve upon what it described.  Democratic principles will prevail regardless, whether it be with this coin or another.

I hardly call setting up payment blockades (like Visa and Mastercard) an "improvement". I could care less if someone stole 20.5M Bitcoins, we aren't fucking with other people's transactions or balances.

[FeedbackLoop]

Like everyone is saying just fork off already and enjoy your worthless bailout coins.


Also you got the 51% thing wrong:
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Weaknesses#Attacker_has_a_lot_of_computing_power

[mysidia]

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Except "freezing" is equivalent to destroying coins, and it will hurt innocent people.
 
If I can help it:   I and whatever hashing power I have, will have no part in enabling this destruction of coins.

[HorseCoin]

just like when i stick up the liquor store with my pistol i'm actually voting instead of stealing

[Joshuar]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

...

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins. The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Go ahead, it is open source.  When it is ready, do a pull request.   Then you can see how many people believe this is a good idea in a democratic fashion.  You'll have your alt-coin, many others will stick with bitcoin.

Ahghree.

[amspir]

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Consider your "51% benevolent protocol takeover" another way.  Say you convince the US government that it needs to take control of the bitcoin protocol because there's too much stealing and illegal business being conducted with bitcoin.   The US starts to require that the purchase of ASIC mining rigs requires a license and regulation such that if you are a US citizen, you are legally required to mine according to US government rules.   Then the US government requires submitting all transactions to US government servers to be approved before adding to the block chain, just to make sure blacklisted money isn't being moved. 

If the US government were actual able to make a "51% benevolent protocol takeover" in this way, then usage of bitcoins would probably be sharply diminished, especially by those that don't live in this country.

IMHO,  what you is seek is no different.

[augustocroppo]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

It light of many recent, high value bitcoin thefts the Bitcoin community has been discussing freezing stolen coins.  (See for example the discussion that generated this one, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=508971 )  Many are opposed to it because they see it as regulation.  But the regulation does not have to come from a judge or one so-called authoritative entity.  It can come from the votes of the community, i.e. miners.  And this is the way it should be.

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Quit talking about it and get off your ass and fork the chain.  I am so sick of all these threads talking about forking the chain.  Do it already!

This is becoming a pattern altogether with that threads asking for donations.

When someone is not asking to receive BTC, someone is asking to confiscate BTC.

[surfer43]

One more comment.  We HAVE "democratic money" now. It is the nature of central banks around the world - they respond to the voters and politicians and do insane things.  From 2008-2014 you can read the history of some of them. From the early 1900s until now you can see the impact of "democratic money" on the purchasing power of a dollar, for example.

One value of bitcoin is that it is math based money that can't be devalued, inflated, confiscated, frozen or blacklisted etc. at the protocol level.  Changing those core features changes bitcoin into something that is not bitcoin.

:-)

Republic != Democracy 
We have "republican money"   

[justusranvier]

The 51% "attack" is a vote, not an attack

It light of many recent, high value bitcoin thefts the Bitcoin community has been discussing freezing stolen coins.  (See for example the discussion that generated this one, https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=508971 )  Many are opposed to it because they see it as regulation.  But the regulation does not have to come from a judge or one so-called authoritative entity.  It can come from the votes of the community, i.e. miners.  And this is the way it should be.

I call on the developers of Bitcoin to place a priority on providing to the community and miners a simpler interface through which the miners may freeze particular coins.  The pools that show a high regard for democratic principles will lead the way to a more respected currency.

Nobody is going to fall for your bullshit no matter how much you pollute the forums with it.