Ron Paul Bitcoin Cheque

[PrintCoins]

So last night I was thinking about how closely Ron Paul's desires to end fiat currency tie with Bitcoin and came up with a new Bitcoin Cheque Design:



I am selling them for the same price as the normal bitcoin cheques.
http://printcoins.com/

Ron Paul has many very controversial positions on different issues unrelated to fiat currency. Please refrain from political discourse outside of issues related to money & bitcoins.

[1713997797]

1713997797

[1713997797]

1713997797

[1713997797]

1713997797

[1713997797]

1713997797

[1713997797]

1713997797

[casascius]

I like it a lot.  I am ordering some now.

Would you be interested in going in on some physical bitcoin items with two private and public keys, using the ECC addition discussed in another thread?

In other words, you make some of these items, and put your hologram on them, and you give me the PUBLIC key... then I add a 2nd private key and hologram, and compute a combined bitcoin address from both public keys.  The end result is NEITHER of us knows the true private key, but it is easily recalculated when someone peels off both holograms.  It's more secure for everybody, since for us to do a scam, we would have to both collude (and I'm not willing to participate in a scam =) ).

[elggawf]

I have mixed feelings about this, solely because I feel like it uses Dr Paul's name, words and likeness almost to promote Bitcoin.

Also, given that a good many "True Believers®" genuinely believe that Bitcoin's value would be soaring right now were it not for some mysterious "manipulator", the quote chosen almost seems counter-productive: if the allegations of "the manipulator" are true, then Bitcoin is no better than USD, except you have the option not to use Bitcoin.

[casascius]

I have mixed feelings about this, solely because I feel like it uses Dr Paul's name, words and likeness almost to promote Bitcoin.

I think I would share the sentiment if it were something professionally done, but it looks like a small-time homebrew hobby project done on a laser printer in personal quantities, and it seems pretty apparent to me that it's not endorsed by Ron Paul.

If Rob had cranked out 100,000 of these from a printing company, I would probably feel different.

[casascius]

Amateur or not the felling will be the same if/when the lawsuit happens, you are not allowed to use a persons likeness without their permission on a product you are selling.

I don't think Ron Paul will sue us.  If anything, his campaign will politely ask Rob to stop, and Rob will.  Meanwhile, Rob will take the time to answer a couple questions about Bitcoin for the person who calls, who might drop a hint that Paul is interested in the success of Bitcoin but is just keeping his mouth shut while we either work all the bugs out, or get replaced by something better.

[casascius]

So in addition to your other talents your a mind reader too are you? It must be nice knowing Dr. Pauls every thought and what his reaction will be to how his likeness is being used.

I am not that good, I am just using common sense.  I also know that Ron Paul won't point an RPG at an aircraft tomorrow, without needing to read his mind.

Ron Paul suing Rob Kohr over a picture he prints on his home printer would be like using a bazooka to blow Rob off the face of the earth when a phone call would be enough.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I have mixed feelings about this, solely because I feel like it uses Dr Paul's name, words and likeness almost to promote Bitcoin.

Also, given that a good many "True Believers®" genuinely believe that Bitcoin's value would be soaring right now were it not for some mysterious "manipulator", the quote chosen almost seems counter-productive: if the allegations of "the manipulator" are true, then Bitcoin is no better than USD, except you have the option not to use Bitcoin.

Of course it is different.

If a manpulator exists he isn't granted some special powers by the government (and thus indirectly via their police/military force).  He is risking his capital to influence the market (just as every other market participant does).  The size of his wager gives him an advantage but he can still lose.  He is putting capital at risk calling that manipulation is weak IMHO.  If you had two "manipulators" each deploying $1M capital in opposite directions the net effect on the market would be nothing (actually it would be improved price stability).

The difference w/ the fed is they are risking nothing.  When the fed decides to raise or lower the value of the dollar they are operating out of decree.  You can't challenge them in a free market.  They can create or destroy infinite amounts of currency to force their will on the market.  The fed could make the value of the dollar double or get cut in half and there is nothing anyone on the planet could do about it.

[BurtW]

Please hurry and ship mine to me before he finds out and asks you to stop

[PrintCoins]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ron_Paul,_official_Congressional_photo_portrait,_2007.jpg

This United States Congress image is in the public domain. This may be because it is an official Congressional portrait, because it was taken by an official employee of the Congress, or because it has been released into the public domain and posted on the official websites of a member of Congress. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain.

I am not so sure that Dr. Paul would have too much of a say in my use of his image, but of course if he requested that I cease doing it, I would.

I have mixed feelings about this, solely because I feel like it uses Dr Paul's name, words and likeness almost to promote Bitcoin.

I think his stance on alternative currencies at least puts him as a supporter of what bitcoin stands for, and I doubt that he would have any problem with this. I don't think he will ever directly endorse bitcoin though.

Also, given that a good many "True Believers®" genuinely believe that Bitcoin's value would be soaring right now were it not for some mysterious "manipulator", the quote chosen almost seems counter-productive: if the allegations of "the manipulator" are true, then Bitcoin is no better than USD, except you have the option not to use Bitcoin.

I am a True Believer® and I don't believe that bitcoin's value should be soaring. Before it became a hot press item, it has a slow steady appreciation rate, and if you cut out the bubble on the graph, we are pretty much back on track. If Bitcoin had an annual value change of +/-2% I would be happy with that, as it would make a useful currency. 10-20% swings in the course of a week make it a speculation/investment item, and a lousy currency.

Money is a medium of exchange, not an investment item. Holding on to dollars or bitcoins is foolish, and any currency should be diverted into wealth generating or life improvement rather than being hoarded for potential future valuations.

Just two bitcents from a True Believer®

Please include the allegations of "the manipulator" rather than referencing them. I am ignorent of what he has said about anything. From what I can tell he can make the speculators dance, and he helps clear any imbalances in the valuation of bitcoins. On both accounts, I approve.

[PrintCoins]

I like it a lot.  I am ordering some now.

Would you be interested in going in on some physical bitcoin items with two private and public keys, using the ECC addition discussed in another thread?

In other words, you make some of these items, and put your hologram on them, and you give me the PUBLIC key... then I add a 2nd private key and hologram, and compute a combined bitcoin address from both public keys.  The end result is NEITHER of us knows the true private key, but it is easily recalculated when someone peels off both holograms.  It's more secure for everybody, since for us to do a scam, we would have to both collude (and I'm not willing to participate in a scam =) ).

Besides the issues of extra work and cost, it might be a little more complicated for the user. But that is something that can be resolved with pricing and tiers, and maybe a handy tool that does all the work for the user.

Now I am admittedly a little confused as to how this can all be calculated smoothly.

Here is a public and private keypair
19nDePrutBKBNqv7XkAQ5XLBZtiM5gavic
5KAmAqhDs7bazHSYyJBPSenPJVXpBdissXaA9ApUWi9Rj1Aa5h3

This would normally be printed on the bill. So where do we go from here?

[casascius]

Now I am admittedly a little confused as to how this can all be calculated smoothly.

Here is a public and private keypair
19nDePrutBKBNqv7XkAQ5XLBZtiM5gavic
5KAmAqhDs7bazHSYyJBPSenPJVXpBdissXaA9ApUWi9Rj1Aa5h3

This would normally be printed on the bill. So where do we go from here?

The math is complicated, I started a thread about it, but consensus is, it works.  That thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177

Basically, what you have given me is not a public and private keypair, but a Bitcoin address and a private key.  What I would need is the public key.  The public key that goes to the example you just gave me is:

04 92 A6 99 F8 76 DC 73 2F A6 02 F5 BA ED 2A 98 5E 8C 47 53 CC CF DA 3A BE DB 96 3F C6 42 B9 87 0E 45 92 A0 E2 B3 0A F3 61 77 09 06 7D C4 09 41 30 A0 82 0A F8 D1 E4 98 1E 1C ED 24 32 10 8F 78 A4

And I calculated it from the private key you just posted.

From this number alone, I cannot determine the original private key.  But I can mathematically combine it with a second public key from a different keypair, and compute a THIRD public key.  We generate the bitcoin address from that third public key.

To get the private key that matches the third public key, one must have BOTH private keys.  You just take the two private keys, add them together, and divide them by a certain number, keep only the remainder from the division, and you end up with the private key for the third public key.

It provides greater security to the customer, as they can be assured that it's far less likely they will get burned if TWO people must collude to compute their private key, rather than one person deciding to scam on their own.

How the user would redeem the funds: they would use a simple utility program to combine the two private keys into one.  And, MtGox could probably be talked into adding a spot for the 2nd private key on their redeemer screen (it would not be difficult on their end).

[BurtW]

Here is my explaination from another thread:

1) Make the bar or paper bill with spots for two holograms and a final public key address
2) First party gets the item
3) Put the first private key in mini private key format under the first hologram
4) Put the firstbits of the public key address on the outside of the first hologram
5) Ship the item along with the actual public key to the second party
6) Second party puts the second hologram on the item
7) Second private key in mini private key format under the second hologram
8. Firstbits of the second public key address on the outside of the hologram
9) NOW the second party verifies the public key shipped with the item with the public key address on the first hologram
10) then adds the two public keys together, creating the final public key
11) From the final public key calculate the final public key address
12) This final public key adddress is etched/printed on the item.
13) The BTC funds are transmitted to the final public key address

At this point no one could possibly know the private key since it has never even been calculated.

To redeem:

1) Pull off both stickers
2) Get the two private keys
3) At a web site that supports the two key option, enter both private keys (Mt Gox, StrongCoin, etc. could be talked into supporting this option)
4) The web sites that support this option would then simply add the two private keys together
5) You now have the private key for the combined public key address etched/printed on the item
6) Redeem the BTC from the item

[DeathAndTaxes]

Here is my explaination from another thread:

1) Make the bar or paper bill with spots for two holograms and a final public key address
2) First party gets the item
3) Put the first private key in mini private key format under the first hologram
4) Put the firstbits of the public key address on the outside of the first hologram
5) Ship the item along with the actual public key to the second party
6) Second party puts the second hologram on the item
7) Second private key in mini private key format under the second hologram
8. Firstbits of the second public key address on the outside of the hologram
9) NOW the second party verifies the public key shipped with the item with the public key address on the first hologram
10) then adds the two public keys together, creating the final public key
11) From the final public key calculate the final public key address
12) This final public key adddress is etched/printed on the item.
13) The BTC funds are transmitted to the final public key address

The bolded steps are incorrect.  There is no address for the two partial keys.  There is also no reason to record the two partial public keys because they can't be looked up. You can't get a firstbits of a non-existent address.

Remove/change steps 4, 8, 9 and it is a good summary.  In the redeeming section for section 4 I would indicate you have multiple options
a) use a website which supports dual private keys
b) use a standalone client designed for loading dual private keys
c) use a simple non-networked application which generates the single key from the dual private keys and use it anywhere a single private key can be used.

As for what to put print on the hologram
a) nothing
b) some serial number which could be used to lookup the partial public key (not very useful)
c) the combined public key (i.e. step 10).  This would require some pre-coordination between two parties.

A is the easiest.  B isn't too tough but doesn't provide much value. C is the best but may requires some pre-coordination.

[BurtW]

Sounds good.  You are right about not being able to look up firstbits on a nonfunded account (what was I thinking?).  That is why we have peer review, right?

1) Make the item with spots for two holograms and a final public key address
2) First party gets the item
3) Put the first private key in mini private key format under the first hologram
4) Ship the item along with the actual public key to the second party
5) Second party puts the second hologram on the item
6) Second private key in mini private key format under the second hologram
7) then adds the two public keys together, creating the final public key
9) From the final public key calculate the final public key address
10) This final public key adddress is etched/printed on the item somewhere, possibly on the hologram
11) The BTC funds are transmitted to the final public key address

At this point no one could possibly know the private key since it has never even been calculated.

To redeem:

1) Pull off both stickers
2) Get the two private keys
3) At a web site that supports the two key option, enter both private keys (Mt Gox, StrongCoin, etc. could be talked into supporting this option)
4) The web sites that support this option would then simply add the two private keys together
5) You now have the private key for the combined public key address etched/printed on the item
6) Redeem the BTC from the item

The other redemption options mentioned above are also possible.

[BurtW]

I am moving this discussion back to the other thread since it has nothing to do with Ron Paul.  Why don't we all go back to https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177

[DeathAndTaxes]

Getting back on topic ...
I might buy one just to donate it to Ron Paul. 

My guess (and before someone slams me for being a mind reader it is just my opinion) is that if Mr. Paul had anything negative to say it wouldn't be using his image from the public domain but rather the bills could be construed as people putting faith into Mr. Paul.

[deslok]

using the image of a public figure is a poor choice in this case fair use wouldn’t hold up if Mr. Paul didn't like them and decided to take you to court(send him one with a letter explaining what they are and how they work if you insist on using his image)

as far as the quality is concerned, your media doesn’t appear to be something that would hold up if it got wet once too many times i don't see these being something that could be circulated more than a few times esp. considering that the paper you've chosen to use is thin enough i can see the next bill there's nothing to stop me from buying the same hologram, making a good scan and issuing 3 or 4 of the same bill to people (which will check as funded until someone redeems one)

[BurtW]

These are one time checks, not notes for circulation.  They are designed for one time use just like the cheap paper checks in your check book.  They are for those times when I want to give someone some BTC and I want to "write a check" and give it to them.  The expectation is that they would then peel off the sticker and cash the check when they get a chance later on.

Bills for circulation would need custom holograms (two holograms from two different trusted entities is my preference), higher quality paper, etc.  There are a couple other thread discussing the creation of Bitcoin notes for circulation at https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=52998.0 and https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53177.0

If you read these threads you will find that the design is coming along nicely.

[tsvekric]

As a big supporter of bitcoin and Ron Paul, I gotta say I don't like this at all.  Associating the two serves to discredit both from different angles.  There is no reason why they should be linked and Ron Paul's campaign has refused anything associated with bitcoin.  I would not use this.

[PrintCoins]

Due to an unexpected increase in demand, I have had to reorder supplies. A few of the orders that have been placed will be sent out this week, but new orders will be delayed about 5 business days.

I am sorry for the delay,
Rob