Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 12:12:04 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: How Open Source Projects Survive Poisonous People  (Read 24503 times)
midnightmagic
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 76


View Profile
February 02, 2012, 02:42:16 AM
 #141

For what it's worth, when I sent Gavin that video to watch, I did not send it to him with Luke in mind.

It was more of an ironic self-deprecating statement because I'd assumed everyone had already seen it; and, having not actually contributed public code to bitcoind itself, was trying to convey that my objections to the adoption of either BIP16/17 weren't worth more than that of just a solo-miner (who can code) in terms of actual progress on the project.

The short timelines involved are just very uncomfortable for me given the "millions" of dollars of assets at stake here.

Bitcoin is no longer an experiment.
1481242324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481242324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481242324
Reply with quote  #2

1481242324
Report to moderator
1481242324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481242324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481242324
Reply with quote  #2

1481242324
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481242324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481242324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481242324
Reply with quote  #2

1481242324
Report to moderator
1481242324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481242324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481242324
Reply with quote  #2

1481242324
Report to moderator
1481242324
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481242324

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481242324
Reply with quote  #2

1481242324
Report to moderator
anu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


P2P Everything


View Profile WWW
February 02, 2012, 09:02:24 AM
 #142

Bitcoin is no longer an experiment.

+1

Zero Reserve - A distributed Bitcoin Exchange

Install - Getting Started - BitcoinTalk Thread - Github Source
herzmeister
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile WWW
February 02, 2012, 12:12:46 PM
 #143


https://localbitcoins.com/?ch=80k | BTC: 1LJvmd1iLi199eY7EVKtNQRW3LqZi8ZmmB
RaggedMonk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
February 02, 2012, 07:08:57 PM
 #144

Where is Bruce Wagner on this one?  This is great material for TV!
Bruce was convicted of fraud, he likes prostitutes, and his show is painfully slow.  Let's leave him out of this. 
anu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


P2P Everything


View Profile WWW
February 02, 2012, 08:05:14 PM
 #145

he likes prostitutes

Thank you for that extremely relevant bit of information. That certainly disqualifies him from technical / project management discussion.

Zero Reserve - A distributed Bitcoin Exchange

Install - Getting Started - BitcoinTalk Thread - Github Source
paraipan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924


Firstbits: 1pirata


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2012, 01:14:16 AM
 #146

Wow, some fresh air is welcome, wise words reeses

BTCitcoin: An Idea Worth Saving - Q&A with bitcoins on rugatu.com - Check my rep
casascius
Mike Caldwell
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344


The Casascius 1oz 10BTC Silver Round (w/ Gold B)


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2012, 02:03:10 AM
 #147

BIP16/17 discuss cryptography which is a very technical field with a strong tradition.  There are specific terms and phrases used in this field, many coined by Schneier in Applied Cryptography.  Neither of these proposals follow this terminology. (Where are Eve and Mallory?)  Neither of these proposals is academically rigorous.  Unless there are addenda or appendices, I don't see a mathematical proof beyond "reference implementation."

I'm not sure I agree that these discuss cryptography.  They use cryptography indirectly, but so does my bank (on their website, SSL) when they introduce a new debit card or rewards program, which don't require reference to Mallory or Eve either (unless they are the models showing the vacations you can redeem the points for).  BIP 16 and 17 aren't proposed cryptographic changes and don't discuss mathematical problems, so expectation of a mathematical proof doesn't make any sense.

No one is more qualified as a peer than the developers and users of Bitcoin, any more than we should expect a mechanical engineer with a PhD and expertise building bridges should know more about fixing Acuras than the guy with a community college associates and 10 years experience at the Acura dealership.

Companies claiming they got hacked and lost your coins sounds like fraud so perfect it could be called fashionable.  I never believe them.  If I ever experience the misfortune of a real intrusion, I declare I have been honest about the way I have managed the keys in Casascius Coins.  I maintain no ability to recover or reproduce the keys, not even under limitless duress or total intrusion.  Remember that trusting strangers with your coins without any recourse is, as a matter of principle, not a best practice.  Don't keep coins online. Use paper wallets instead.
ripper234
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


Ron Gross


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2012, 07:01:26 AM
 #148


This cannot be decided on personal issues.  The BIPs affecting the block chain must be rigorously documented and subjected to qualified peer review.  Precedent should be referenced and relevant.


This is the only useful thing you said, and unfortunately we have had a grand total of
zero qualified reviews of either of the BIPs: neither Gavin nor the lunatic qualify
in that regard.

As a matter of fact, bitcoin would _greatly_ benefit from having actual professional
cryptographers doing not only BIP reviews, but also trying to devise actual attacks
against the whole system.


Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?

Please do not pm me, use ron@bitcoin.org.il instead
Mastercoin Executive Director
Co-founder of the Israeli Bitcoin Association
RaggedMonk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308



View Profile
February 03, 2012, 09:59:45 AM
 #149


This cannot be decided on personal issues.  The BIPs affecting the block chain must be rigorously documented and subjected to qualified peer review.  Precedent should be referenced and relevant.


This is the only useful thing you said, and unfortunately we have had a grand total of
zero qualified reviews of either of the BIPs: neither Gavin nor the lunatic qualify
in that regard.

As a matter of fact, bitcoin would _greatly_ benefit from having actual professional
cryptographers doing not only BIP reviews, but also trying to devise actual attacks
against the whole system.


Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?
I would help fund this. 
Gavin Andresen
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1652


Chief Scientist


View Profile WWW
February 03, 2012, 12:37:24 PM
 #150

Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?

Good idea. Who wants to volunteer to do the fundraising and organize this, and let me know how I can help?


How often do you get the chance to work on a potentially world-changing project?
rjk
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 420


1ngldh


View Profile
February 04, 2012, 02:24:40 AM
 #151

Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?

Good idea. Who wants to volunteer to do the fundraising and organize this, and let me know how I can help?


You guys don't think Gavin is sufficiently qualified? Interesting. I would say you were incorrect, but sure more eyes can't hurt.

Mining Rig Extraordinaire - the Trenton BPX6806 18-slot PCIe backplane [PICS] Dead project is dead, all hail the coming of the mighty ASIC!
DannyM
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 275



View Profile
February 04, 2012, 02:51:33 AM
 #152


Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?

I am so bad at detecting sarcasm on these boards.

You do know there is no such thing as a respectable white hat?

Don't take my word for it, a good reference can be found if you google the whiteh8 teachings of PHC and the chronicles of el8.

Cause ain't no such things as half-way crooks.

muyuu
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924



View Profile
February 04, 2012, 11:14:10 AM
 #153

Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?

Good idea. Who wants to volunteer to do the fundraising and organize this, and let me know how I can help?


You guys don't think Gavin is sufficiently qualified? Interesting. I would say you were incorrect, but sure more eyes can't hurt.

It's not a matter of qualification. It's a complex, novel project with extreme needs in terms of security. It needs to go through the scrutiny of many experts for a long time.

GPG ID: 7294199D - OTC ID: muyuu (470F97EB7294199D)
forum tea fund BTC 1Epv7KHbNjYzqYVhTCgXWYhGSkv7BuKGEU DOGE DF1eTJ2vsxjHpmmbKu9jpqsrg5uyQLWksM CAP F1MzvmmHwP2UhFq82NQT7qDU9NQ8oQbtkQ
ripper234
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1260


Ron Gross


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2012, 04:01:35 PM
 #154


Can't we hire respectable white hats to do a professional audit (with pledges)?

I am so bad at detecting sarcasm on these boards.

You do know there is no such thing as a respectable white hat?

Don't take my word for it, a good reference can be found if you google the whiteh8 teachings of PHC and the chronicles of el8.

Cause ain't no such things as half-way crooks.


Zero sarcasm on my side. There are "good hackers" aka white hats.
I don't know whether "Gavin is sufficiently qualified", or if there is such a thing. An extra eye is always good.

In any case, I'm sorry but I don't have time to organize this myself - this was just a suggestion.

Please do not pm me, use ron@bitcoin.org.il instead
Mastercoin Executive Director
Co-founder of the Israeli Bitcoin Association
Sukrim
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
February 04, 2012, 04:10:06 PM
 #155

edit: to the people treating this as a popularity contest please STFU

There's a reason Gavin posted this one to the Bitcoin Discussion section, and not to the Technical discussion section.

The real reason is that they might be approaching stage 4 in their conflict (http://www.mediate.com/articles/jordan.cfm - german Wikipedia is better, but the english one has no article (yet))

I'd love to have a freeze of features for the bitcoin standard (not the bitcoin client!) until there are at least 2-3 other well developed implementations.

Just take a look at miners: First there were just few CPU mining programs, then GPU miners emerged, and current mining programs automatically even adjust fanspeed(!) to keep your card at a steady temperature. Similar with pool software: after some months with horribly inefficient php software, on one end bitcoind was patched to crank out more getworks, but on the other end also new pool software was developed that could talk to multiple bitcoinds, cache getworks, work more reliably with the long polling issue and so on - current pools are running on hardware that would have died with 1/10th the miners before.

Bitcoind itself however seems to be just one single software with no real competitors (yes, I know about bitcoinj) where many people complain a bit about this or that but noone dares/wants to implement their own version. Transactions are already now complex enough to implement, that it seems noone so far even dares to do another implementation.
I really don't want the current bitcoind to become the "Linux Kernel" that is so overly complex, that there's no freakin' way to implement it differently without designing something completely different.

What is really needed here, is some competition, so Gavin or other developers can discuss protocol changes with actually other developers who are on the same level, not having an issue of leadership in his own team. All that currently is happening makes it even harder for others to write their own client - already now you need quite a deep understanding of cryptography to even understand adresses etc., and transactions already now are a quite different beast.

TL,DR:
Before making the "Satoshi" bitcoind more complex or adding to the standard, create/foster alternative clients and some healthy competition in the "bitcoind" market!

https://bitfinex.com <-- leveraged trading of BTCUSD, LTCUSD and LTCBTC (long and short) - 10% discount on fees for the first 30 days with this refcode: x5K9YtL3Zb
Mail me at Bitmessage: BM-BbiHiVv5qh858ULsyRDtpRrG9WjXN3xf
anu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


P2P Everything


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2012, 04:15:29 PM
 #156


I'd love to have a freeze of features for the bitcoin standard (not the bitcoin client!) until there are at least 2-3 other well developed implementations.


2nd

Zero Reserve - A distributed Bitcoin Exchange

Install - Getting Started - BitcoinTalk Thread - Github Source
BitcoinBug
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196


View Profile
February 04, 2012, 04:51:25 PM
 #157


I'd love to have a freeze of features for the bitcoin standard (not the bitcoin client!) until there are at least 2-3 other well developed implementations.


2nd

I disagree. After p2sh gets implemented, I think there are no big changes on the horizon. And I doubt these protocol changes (how many did we have last year?) would seriously delay other implementations.
We have to make as much of our time as possible, now that the hype has settled for a while. Stalling development (protocol) would do no good.
Sukrim
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1848


View Profile
February 04, 2012, 05:07:07 PM
 #158

To me P2SH still sounds like a very specific extension targeted at only one client implementation. There are other ways how more secure wallets could be done, that wouldn't require any change of protocol (creating importable transactions offline for example - import the transaction at a connected node and it gets executed).

I'd rather have 6 months with "nonstandard" transactions in the blockchain and see some feature complete clients implementing these, than standardizing them first in a specific way with (seemingly) only one implementation in mind. As far as I understood, both BIP 16 and 17 would already be available today as nonstandard transaction. I'd rather keep it that way and focus on having completely new written bitcoinds than fighting over what gets implemented in the reference implementation, which means it also becomes the standard as noone can challenge this currently.

https://bitfinex.com <-- leveraged trading of BTCUSD, LTCUSD and LTCBTC (long and short) - 10% discount on fees for the first 30 days with this refcode: x5K9YtL3Zb
Mail me at Bitmessage: BM-BbiHiVv5qh858ULsyRDtpRrG9WjXN3xf
anu
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 938


P2P Everything


View Profile WWW
February 04, 2012, 05:13:18 PM
 #159


I'd love to have a freeze of features for the bitcoin standard (not the bitcoin client!) until there are at least 2-3 other well developed implementations.


2nd

I disagree. After p2sh gets implemented, I think there are no big changes on the horizon. And I doubt these protocol changes (how many did we have last year?) would seriously delay other implementations.
We have to make as much of our time as possible, now that the hype has settled for a while. Stalling development (protocol) would do no good.

The web required 10 years to become adopted. I think this gives a good idea how long it'll take Bitcoin. There is plenty of time to get it right. If this stuff gets released this year or even next year, it is just fine.

Zero Reserve - A distributed Bitcoin Exchange

Install - Getting Started - BitcoinTalk Thread - Github Source
finway
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714


View Profile
February 04, 2012, 05:56:25 PM
 #160

Nice post.
Spring festavle makes me long behind.  Embarrassed

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 »  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!