Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 04:06:07 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Will you support Gavin's new block size limit hard fork of 8MB by January 1, 2016 then doubling every 2 years?
1.  yes
2.  no

Pages: « 1 ... 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 [611] 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 ... 1560 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 1806861 times)
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 09:45:14 PM
 #12201

Janet Yellen Trolls America's Poor: Tells Them It Is Important To Get Rich:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-16/janet-yellen-trolls-americas-poor-tells-them-it-important-get-rich

Grin
1481256367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256367
Reply with quote  #2

1481256367
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481256367
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256367

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256367
Reply with quote  #2

1481256367
Report to moderator
adamstgBit
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1904


Trusted Bitcoiner


View Profile WWW
September 16, 2014, 09:52:30 PM
 #12202

Janet Yellen Trolls America's Poor: Tells Them It Is Important To Get Rich:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-16/janet-yellen-trolls-americas-poor-tells-them-it-important-get-rich

Grin

the problem with today poor poeple is that they are so poor that they could double their money over night and still be poor!

Janet Yellen tells over leveraged  poor poeple to gamble on the markets?

what the....  Huh

jgarzik
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1470


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 10:00:21 PM
 #12203

Why?  Because there are plenty of red flags.

  • It is marketed like a scammy penny stock.
  • Anon early super large stakeholders + Proof-Of-Stake == the big guys run the table, if they choose. https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf  The central bankers are in place from Day One unless they are super-virtuous and give tons away "fairly."
  • Anon devs
  • Closed dev process.  Source is periodically handed down from the ivory tower to the masses.
  • Certain notable personages (& key stakeholders) that dodge, dodge, dodge, when an obvious attack vector -- mitigated in other crypto-finance projects by known techniques -- is highlighted.
  • Active resistance to making it easier to independently reproduce the software
  • Technical criticism is routinely met with bizarre behavior (notably from come-from-beyond)
  • Attacking critics, rather than responding to criticism.
  • Several security incidents that smell like inside jobs.

This is not something in the past 48 hours, but for the lifetime of the project.

Bitcoin has large stakeholders and large miners, sure, but the two sets are different.  This separation ensures an easier flow of stakeholders and miners in and out of the system, and serves as a bit of check-and-balance between the two groups.

Proof-of-Stake makes it easier to establish a system where early guys control the system, for life.  I'm not saying that is always the case with PoS; that's just how pure-PoS systems can shake out in the field.  Thus, it is easier for PoS to be "gamed" by insiders.  This is inherently, logically true because there are no externalities (electricity, heat) that serve as friction in the process.

In a perfect pure ideal honest world, NXT should reset the chain and develop fully in the open, with provable builds and a better early stake allocation that pays attention to the Central Banker Controls The Timeline Problem.  More honest projects these days run a test chain for months, and then launch once most problems are hammered out, and constructive criticism from the tech community has been incorporated.

I do think PoS has a place in this world... a mixed PoW & PoS system is very interesting.  PoS alone presents a completely enclosed system, where stakeholders are far too integral to the core process of choosing which transactions are to be accepted into the chain.

Remember (from your bitcoin mining classes if nothing else), those who choose what goes into the chain also choose what stays out (censor).  He who controls the timeline controls the universe, to paraphrase Dune.

Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
sidhujag
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 10:19:53 PM
 #12204


Is not the alternative (bolded) more likely?  Is this a true statement?:

   The features of any appcoin can be emulated by a m-of-n oracles system that uses tokens pegged to bitcoin as fuel.  

If that is true, I don't see why, should some useful "app" actually emerge, that the equivalent systems that use bitcoin wouldn't outcompete the appcoins that use proprietary tokens.  Which, like Cypher said, suggests that the value of these proprietary tokens should trend to zero.  

The interesting thing here is that Nxt is the only implementation of an m-of-n oracle I have seen in the wild yet. see multigateway.org. Please, point me to a bitcoin implementation.

Bitshares can do anything NXT can do but better.
valarmg
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 237


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 10:26:39 PM
 #12205


In a perfect pure ideal honest world, NXT should reset the chain and develop fully in the open, with provable builds and a better early stake allocation that pays attention to the Central Banker Controls The Timeline Problem.  More honest projects these days run a test chain for months, and then launch once most problems are hammered out, and constructive criticism from the tech community has been incorporated.

Is this post for real? You want to reset the blockchain of a coin with 40million market cap that has been running on mainnet without problems for months? (That also has the most active asset exchange in the crypto world with additional tens of millions worth of assets https://coinmarketcap.com/assets/ floating on it)

What obvious attack vectors would you like to highlight that have been solved in other crypto-finance projects?

▓▓▓▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀                        Uniting crypto, Rewarding talent, Sharing benefits.                                       ▓▓▓▓
▓▓▓▓         S   U   P   E   R    N   E   T
                                                                                                                        ▓▓▓
▓▓▓▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄     
  Blockchain Technology.        ▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▓▓▓
zeetubes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 371


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 10:50:59 PM
 #12206

Diamonds are not fungible as the quality varies, its harder to ascertain the value in bulk exactly.  That causes more dramatic value shifts and they are high up the speculative value scale apparently, much like sub prime (or even normal commercial) debt altered as the general market shifted so they were never suitable as a core asset.

http://i.imgur.com/ZkqDr0B.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/d00teMO.jpg
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/redrawing-exter-pyramid-paul-mylchreests-latest-observations-flow-funds-and-more

I would rate bitcoin as speculative still unless it became invaluable to emerging market consumers like dollar is used now, not sure on that one but its not true yet imo

In his defense, the commentator did say 'certified' diamonds. The average diamond is worthless. This article is from the Atlantic Monthly and goes all the way back to 1982. An amazing but VERY long read about how to create, develop, control and manipulate a market; in this case, the diamond market, with the perpetrator being De Beers.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/02/have-you-ever-tried-to-sell-a-diamond/4575/
hdbuck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134



View Profile
September 16, 2014, 10:55:53 PM
 #12207

Bitcoin has large stakeholders and large miners, sure, but the two sets are different.  This separation ensures an easier flow of stakeholders and miners in and out of the system, and serves as a bit of check-and-balance between the two groups.

Proof-of-Stake makes it easier to establish a system where early guys control the system, for life.  I'm not saying that is always the case with PoS; that's just how pure-PoS systems can shake out in the field.  Thus, it is easier for PoS to be "gamed" by insiders.  This is inherently, logically true because there are no externalities (electricity, heat) that serve as friction in the process.

In a perfect pure ideal honest world, NXT should reset the chain and develop fully in the open, with provable builds and a better early stake allocation that pays attention to the Central Banker Controls The Timeline Problem.  More honest projects these days run a test chain for months, and then launch once most problems are hammered out, and constructive criticism from the tech community has been incorporated.

I do think PoS has a place in this world... a mixed PoW & PoS system is very interesting.  PoS alone presents a completely enclosed system, where stakeholders are far too integral to the core process of choosing which transactions are to be accepted into the chain.

Remember (from your bitcoin mining classes if nothing else), those who choose what goes into the chain also choose what stays out (censor).  He who controls the timeline controls the universe, to paraphrase Dune.


This is just wonderful. Thank you for your work, it is very reassuring to know bitcoin's core think that way and I hope many more weigh those words.
Let's not loose sight of the objective.

edit: for the kudos ^^

Eadeqa
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616


View Profile
September 16, 2014, 11:02:58 PM
 #12208

    • It is marketed like a scammy penny stock.

    It decentralized crypto. The "marketers" are almost all regular users on bitcointalk who invested in it.

    Quote
    • Anon early super large stakeholders + Proof-Of-Stake == the big guys run the table, if they choose. https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/pos.pdf  The central bankers are in place from Day One unless they are super-virtuous and give tons away "fairly."

    The IPO was open to everyone, and it was open for 2 whole months, and it all happened in public on this exact forum: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=303898.0 and the coins were distributed to everyone who invested, with zero stakes for developer.

    Quote
    • Anon devs

    So was Satoshi.

    Quote
    • Closed dev process.  Source is periodically handed down from the ivory tower to the masses.

    The development repository was open for months. The problem started when clones started releasing new features and untested code before Nxt official release. This was done purely to deal with with that problem, and some of the clone IPOs were outright scams.

    Quote
    • Active resistance to making it easier to independently reproduce the software

    Every official release is open source and can be compiled and run. It is also possible to verify that precompiled class files  match your compiled version as it's NOT obfuscated. This isn't C++.  

    Quote
    http://
    • Technical criticism is routinely met with bizarre behavior (notably from come-from-beyond)

    Your criticism was NOT technical. You lied and claimed that Nxt was closed source. You also implied (last month) that the reason it was closed source was that it got easily hacked when the source was open. Both of these claims were lies.

    Quote
    Several security incidents that smell like inside jobs.[/list]

    That's absolutely nonsense and more shameless behavior.

    Valid criticism is one thing, but your behavior is absolutely ridiculous.



    NXT-GZYP-FMRT-FQ9K-3YQGS
    https://nxtforum.org
    sidhujag
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1302


    View Profile
    September 16, 2014, 11:15:37 PM
     #12209

    I didn't see bitcoin closing down its open source model just because there were IPO scams whatnot? I think if NXT is truly closed source its a very telling telltale that its not what it seems. Either the devs dont have the foresight to understand what open-source means or better yet and more importantly they are similar to what Ripple was trying to do.. own a large portion of the supply and sell P&D style... meaning a total scam. Devs cant really join can they if its closed source? So who would you hand off to after the dump is over?

    Although I think https://bitbucket.org/JeanLucPicard/nxt/src/d9e338ed12c19712bafa3e1ab48c542a7da95939?at=master is the open source repo.. just the thought that they would keep it closed source even for a while tells me alot.
    _mr_e
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 815



    View Profile
    September 16, 2014, 11:41:15 PM
     #12210

    Guys there is really no point in keeping on with this here, it is accomplishing nothing. We can come back once supernet is up and operational and discuss what is a scam then.
    Eadeqa
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 616


    View Profile
    September 16, 2014, 11:53:58 PM
     #12211

    Guys there is really no point in keeping on with this here, it is accomplishing nothing. We can come back once supernet is up and operational and discuss what is a scam then.

    Yeah, but what do you do with guys who outright lie and make up stuff? This guy is bitcoin core developer?  That's really shameful.

    NXT-GZYP-FMRT-FQ9K-3YQGS
    https://nxtforum.org
    Adrian-x
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1330



    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 12:17:18 AM
     #12212

    Guys there is really no point in keeping on with this here, it is accomplishing nothing. We can come back once supernet is up and operational and discuss what is a scam then.

    Yeah, but what do you do with guys who outright lie and make up stuff? This guy is bitcoin core developer?  That's really shameful.
    confiscate his NXT  Huh

    Thank me in Bits 12MwnzxtprG2mHm3rKdgi7NmJKCypsMMQw
    Eadeqa
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 616


    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 12:23:07 AM
     #12213

    Guys there is really no point in keeping on with this here, it is accomplishing nothing. We can come back once supernet is up and operational and discuss what is a scam then.

    Yeah, but what do you do with guys who outright lie and make up stuff? This guy is bitcoin core developer?  That's really shameful.
    confiscate his NXT  Huh

    Given he now has the source code, he should try to confiscate mine to demonstrate his claim that Nxt can be hacked. Otherwise he was blowing hot air.

    NXT-GZYP-FMRT-FQ9K-3YQGS
    https://nxtforum.org
    slothbag
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 369



    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 12:27:23 AM
     #12214

    This whole argument about deterministic builds is pointless.  The only reason it exists for Bitcoin is because compiling Bitcoin is a PITA! Especially on windows, I have never been able to get a working statically linked binary on Windows.. its a very time consuming and complicated process.  The deterministic build process is a great solution to this problem by allowing regular uses to download precompiled binaries and be pretty sure its safe due to several devs producing the same result.

    But with Nxt the compilation is so simple, once you have the JDK installed, its a matter of running the ./compile.sh, and in 2-5 seconds you have your binary.

    In fact its easier/faster to do a git pull; ./compile.sh than it is to download the binaries and install from the website!
    jgarzik
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1470


    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 01:16:17 AM
     #12215

    This whole argument about deterministic builds is pointless.  The only reason it exists for Bitcoin is because compiling Bitcoin is a PITA! Especially on windows, I have never been able to get a working statically linked binary on Windows.. its a very time consuming and complicated process.  The deterministic build process is a great solution to this problem by allowing regular uses to download precompiled binaries and be pretty sure its safe due to several devs producing the same result.

    But with Nxt the compilation is so simple, once you have the JDK installed, its a matter of running the ./compile.sh, and in 2-5 seconds you have your binary.

    In fact its easier/faster to do a git pull; ./compile.sh than it is to download the binaries and install from the website!

    To repeat for the cheap seats:  Wrong.  This is irrelevant, because the majority of users do not do this.  The majority of users just run the pre-built jar (which is what the NXT readme instructs them to do anyway).

    A reproducible build process is helpful because...

    Quote from: jgarzik
    This helps ensure that the release manager is not under duress, unknowingly infected with malware, or corrupt.  No security solution is perfect, but it raises the bar significantly when multiple parties verify the build.

    And on to,

    I didn't see bitcoin closing down its open source model just because there were IPO scams whatnot? I think if NXT is truly closed source its a very telling telltale that its not what it seems.

    Closed dev process.  As I noted the source code snapshot is published, but not live commits and open feedback/criticism like normal open source projects.  NXT is ivory tower.

    Apparently the project has bounced between open and closed source at least once.




    Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
    Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
    Eadeqa
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 616


    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 01:27:19 AM
     #12216

    To repeat for the cheap seats:  Wrong.  This is irrelevant, because the majority of users do not do this.  The majority of users just run the pre-built jar (which is what the NXT readme instructs them to do anyway).

    A reproducible build process is helpful because...

    Quote from: jgarzik
    This helps ensure that the release manager is not under duress, unknowingly infected with malware, or corrupt.  No security solution is perfect, but it raises the bar significantly when multiple parties verify the build.


    It's much easier for multiple parties to verify java classes. This doesn't have to come from Nxt core developer. It could be independent third parties, forum members, and even you. Here is how

    Code:
    cd nxt
    jar xvf nxt.jar
    mv nxt nxt-orig
    rm -f nxt.jar
    ./compile.sh
    jar xvf nxt.jar
    diff -r nxt nxt-orig

    If you don't see a difference, this means the class files contained in the nxt.jar file included in the nxt-client-1.2.8.zip package (now under nxt-orig) are exactly the same as those produced when compiling the jar file yourself, under nxt.

    Why would the verification have to come from multiple core developers? Lets have volunteers/independent third parties who verify it, as it's much easier/trivial with Java



    NXT-GZYP-FMRT-FQ9K-3YQGS
    https://nxtforum.org
    slothbag
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 369



    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 01:30:45 AM
     #12217

    I would argue that the "lazy" people who download and run the JAR rather than compiling their own are probably similar in proportion to the lazy people who download bitcoin-qt without checking the hashes match.. i.e. nearly everyone..

    Its 2 seconds to compile Nxt, its 2 seconds to compare Bitcoin binary hashes.. both are ways to ensure your running what you think your running.. both are seldom used Smiley

    NewLiberty
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1064


    Gresham's Lawyer


    View Profile WWW
    September 17, 2014, 02:12:33 AM
     #12218

    I personally think bitshares x has a better product than nxt with a truly decentralized AND collateralized market.  I believe this achievement is being overlooked because this is the first time in human history that any asset on earth can be traded with actual collateral backing up the trade (btsx) and enforced automatically by an algorithm instead of people.  This is NOT an IOU for an asset, which has been the only option in markets until now.  Also, the DPOS model will be great if it stands the test of time because of the 10s confirmation times.  

    Bitcoin and nxt have both been tested with bailouts/qe/inflation with Mt gox and bter repectively and both have passed the test.  The question remains; is work truly required to give a money it's value?  This is more of a socionomic question and a bit harder to predict but I don't think so.  I believe we will see 3 to 5 dominant chains emerge with Bitcoin being the primary POW, or digital gold.  Other chains will provide other uses but their associated currencies will act as money in many cases.  The alternative is for Bitcoin to survive as the sole form of money with open transactions, side chains, or some type of m of n oracle system to provide collateralized markets with Bitcoin being collateral.  

    Is not the alternative (bolded) more likely?  Is this a true statement?:

       The features of any appcoin can be emulated by a m-of-n oracles system that uses tokens pegged to bitcoin as fuel.  

    If that is true, I don't see why, should some useful "app" actually emerge, that the equivalent systems that use bitcoin wouldn't outcompete the appcoins that use proprietary tokens.  Which, like Cypher said, suggests that the value of these proprietary tokens should trend to zero.  

    The appcoins appear to be further along in development.  As a test on the btsx platform, I successfully sold 124 btsx for $5(bitusd) on Sept 11 and then sold that $5 for 134 btsx on sept 15, keeping in line with overall market prices.  This was all done completely in a decentralized system with btsx as the underlying collateral and enforced automatically by a smart contract, keeping the entire trade in a trustless, yet collateralized environment.  Once I can do this with bitcoin I will definitely take notice.  Perhaps I already can and just don't know about it?  Gold (bitgld) can also be traded.

    Obviously this is in the early stages (alpha) of development and this design has never been tried before so plenty can go wrong.  The client is also buggy at this version.  I am all for a working solution and if devs can make this happen with bitcoin then that would be great.  I own both.

    The appcoins are further along because that's their angle--that's the value proposition they use to monetize their proprietary tokens.  What I'm arguing is that if any of these apps prove useful, then if it is possible to create the same app but using bitcoin as fuel, then someone will create that app, and it will tend to outcompete the proprietary token.  The example you gave about the decentralized BITUSD assets is interesting and a potentially useful product.  But I don't see what's special about BitShares other than it was the first to do this.  This functionality could be built on top of bitcoin (no protocol changes), and, by learning from the BitShares experience, probably executed better.  

    I don't think the bitcoin core devs should do anything in the way of "more features."  Bitcoin is just better money.  Any truly useful apps can be implemented on top using oracles, sidechains or open transactions like you said.  

    I see this as a vastly more robust solution than some hodgepodge cryptocurrency with a feature set that changes from week to week.  

    Well I for one am tired of hearing that x can be built on top of bitcoin using y, z etc etc etc yet constantly seeing nothing delivered. Counterparty was built on top and that is a pretty horrible experience. Open Transactions has been talked about as the answer for years yet still nothing working there either. And sidechains? That is so far from ever getting off the ground that it shouldn't even be mentioned. The reason I got interested in Nxt was because it has a lot of features already implemented and working now! By the time these other things come out it'll already be on to the next thing! Bitcoin doesn't want these things to be added on to it, it is allergic to change. Which is ok, because it does it's job as a layer 1 currency well and that's how it should be.

    Weird, I see Counterparty & OT as more tried, tested and proven than NXT, and they seem to do plenty.  Very fit for purpose. 
    What are these NXT features already implemented that you haven't found elsewhere?

    FREE MONEY1 Bitcoin for Silver and Gold NewLibertyDollar.com and now BITCOIN SPECIE (silver 1 ozt) shows value by QR
    Bulk premiums as low as .0012 BTC "BETTER, MORE COLLECTIBLE, AND CHEAPER THAN SILVER EAGLES" 1Free of Government
    cypherdoc
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1764



    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 02:12:56 AM
     #12219

    I would argue that the "lazy" people who download and run the JAR rather than compiling their own are probably similar in proportion to the lazy people who download bitcoin-qt without checking the hashes match.. i.e. nearly everyone..

    Its 2 seconds to compile Nxt, its 2 seconds to compare Bitcoin binary hashes.. both are ways to ensure your running what you think your running.. both are seldom used Smiley



    i routinely check binary hashes  Cheesy

    as an investor, i very much disagree with how the Bter hack of 5% of all NXT was handled.  i think it's a telling lesson.  the debate was whether to freeze the coins after a hack of 5% of existing NXT, a huge %.  i saw no attempt at a consensus mechanism.  the devs released a patch to freeze the coins and the community rejected the patch.  it was bad enough that the devs would even offer such a freeze and indicated mass confusion as far as i'm concerned and a lack of solid economic principles on the part of the devs.  what if 51% of users accepted the patch?  what would the community have done then?  the devs should actually be embarrassed that they didn't accept the patch.  with the Bitcoin consensus mechanism, a real effort is made beforehand to determine the pulse of the entire community so that any patches released have a very high likelihood of being accepted so that investors like myself have input and don't get skiddish about wishy washy devs or stakeholders making rash unilateral decisions.  eventually, Bter owners had to pay off the hacker with a measly fraction (single digits iirc) of the "market value" of the NXT coins, ironically with BTC.  and yet the hacker still holds some. it was clear Bter (composed of majority NXT stakeholders) was terrified that the hacker would put the NXT up for sale and crash the price. the community claims this was a successful outcome.  i see it as a failure.
    jgarzik
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 1470


    View Profile
    September 17, 2014, 02:16:30 AM
     #12220

    Why would the verification have to come from multiple core developers? Lets have volunteers/independent third parties who verify it, as it's much easier/trivial with Java

    Yes.  As I said,

    The next step is to proactively have developers and community members cross-check each other, to make sure the build produced is the same for all.

    It is important for the community to demand this of themselves.  The community must get into the habit of rigourously checking each release.  "Anyone can check for themselves" is not sufficient, because in practice, people are lazy and do not check before 10000x users have downloaded and run the new release.  Cross-check before massive download.  Anyone in the community can do this.  You do not have to be a developer.  The critical point is establish the habit, the process of protecting users with a cross-check prior to general release.

    If you rely on after-the-fact checking, the release manager (NXT's Jean Luc?) could be infected with malware and be producing an infected jar.  Many users would be impacted, before the problem is noticed.

    Set up processes to protect users.

    I would argue that the "lazy" people who download and run the JAR rather than compiling their own are probably similar in proportion to the lazy people who download bitcoin-qt without checking the hashes match.. i.e. nearly everyone..

    Its 2 seconds to compile Nxt, its 2 seconds to compare Bitcoin binary hashes.. both are ways to ensure your running what you think your running.. both are seldom used Smiley

    Quite true on both points.

    That's why the community must have a quick cross-check of the release manager's output before opening up to large numbers of downloads (and potentially infecting large numbers of users).

    The software protects Real Money, people.  It must be held to strict security and accountability standards.  For any project, bitcoin, NXT or anything crypto-finance, you must be able to (a) prove the developers are not backdoor'ing you, by reviewing source code + checking build output, and (b) fire the developers (by forking) if they add something unexpected that the user base dislikes.

    Reading "I trust JLP!" posts on the NXT forum just makes for one big facepalm.  The processes should be in place so that the community doesn't have to trust.


    Jeff Garzik, bitcoin core dev team and BitPay engineer; opinions are my own, not my employer.
    Donations / tip jar: 1BrufViLKnSWtuWGkryPsKsxonV2NQ7Tcj
    Pages: « 1 ... 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 [611] 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 ... 1560 »
      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!