Bitcoin Forum
November 19, 2017, 01:06:52 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [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 ... 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 [1107] 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 ... 1558 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP.  (Read 2009266 times)
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:12:29 PM
 #22121

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!


1511096812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511096812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511096812
Reply with quote  #2

1511096812
Report to moderator
1511096812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511096812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511096812
Reply with quote  #2

1511096812
Report to moderator
1511096812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511096812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511096812
Reply with quote  #2

1511096812
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511096812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511096812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511096812
Reply with quote  #2

1511096812
Report to moderator
1511096812
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511096812

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511096812
Reply with quote  #2

1511096812
Report to moderator
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:13:27 PM
 #22122

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


Looks like Alex Waters has capitulated on this. In one of the comments on reddit he flat out said that fungibility of Bitcoin was paramount to success. No white listing.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:18:59 PM
 #22123

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!



Why haven't you sold  all your coins then?

Answer: because Bitcoin just might turn out better than you think.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:30:22 PM
 #22124

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


Looks like Alex Waters has capitulated on this. In one of the comments on reddit he flat out said that fungibility of Bitcoin was paramount to success. No white listing.

I guess that settles it.  The guy who joined with Mellon and formed a company writes on reddit that he changed his mind.  I'm glad that danger passed.

Frankly, the fact that Waters and Mellon even talked about their effort in public at all sort of indicates that they are world-class idiots who probably don't have much of a chance for that reason alone.  On the other hand, the idea of whitelisting was so obvious and acceptable to so many of the main Bitcoin players at the 2013 SJ conference that I suppose it's possible that they really didn't see the brick wall of community reaction coming.  It's also the case that the only real criteria for getting a successful validation service going is to play well with the government.  The govt is the one key element that makes such a service economically viable (and probably wildly so!) and it doesn't take a lot of brain power to pull that off.

People in the community need to recognize that the movers and shakers in Bitcoin land who have the connections and resources to get things done on an industrial level are a whole different class of animal than the run-of-the-mill libertarian who populate troll-talk and the dopey little neighborhood meet-ups.  Usually not even the same species with a few exceptions for some amount of hybridization.


tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:34:16 PM
 #22125

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!


Why haven't you sold  all your coins then?

Answer: because Bitcoin just might turn out better than you think.

Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time. 

Besides, as I've mentioned already, I don't see this as a good selling point.  You remember my strategy of buying low and selling high, right?


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:37:51 PM
 #22126

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?
ssmc2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1092


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:38:45 PM
 #22127

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


We should talk!

Seriously, there was a time when I would have sacrificed a lot for native Bitcoin.  At this point, given the makeup of the ecosystem, hodler community, existence of the Bitcoin Foundation and it's minions (including the 'chief scientist' who they pay) and so forth it would be damn difficult for me to justify taking a BB, much less a bullet.  I mean, what would one be sacrificing for?

I actually might take the same tact as you (or at least what you say/believe will be your possition will be.)  The only reason I would do this would be if a replacement for a demonstrably corrupt and useless native Bitcoin was likely, and likely to obtain it's value from a blockchain fork.  Thus, if I could pick up some discounted BTC which have a reasonable chance of being re-valued higher I might be inclined to play that angle.  To help support the current bunch of whales and a system which TPTB from mainstream-land have managed to subvert?  Fuck no!


Why haven't you sold  all your coins then?

Answer: because Bitcoin just might turn out better than you think.

Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time. 

Besides, as I've mentioned already, I don't see this as a good selling point.  You remember my strategy of buying low and selling high, right?



Speaking of, any recent news from Blockstream?
_mr_e
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 817



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 10:40:02 PM
 #22128

Decentralized exchanges will destroy any fungability worries because there will be no way to choose what kind of coins get traded to you or that you can trade to someone else.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 11:11:52 PM
 #22129

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?

Just make people register.  That was Yifu's angle as a principle at CoinValidation.  UTXO's which are not registered to a known user or entity (e.g., Coinbase or blockchain.info) would halt a transaction from being valid.  Very easy to justify in the name of 'fighting terrorism and child exploitation' and whatever.  You can go before congress and argue all kinds of economic mumbo-jumbo about fungibility and freedom and what-not if you like.  Good luck with that.

Sharp eyed viewers might notice that if one does not register, one cannot pay one's taxes.  And there are well established ways to make people pay their taxes in almost all but the most failed of states.  I'll register my stash the day I'm mandated to do so (which is why my conception of the best strategy is to avoid a mandate ever being practical rather than to resist compliance after it is been mandated.)

As a function of my Coin Validation service, I'd also run a service for miners so that they can ensure that they don't waste their time mining unvalidated UTXO's as inputs and their transaction set thus remain clean.  If the choice is between taking this easy and popular step of using my government chartered service, and facing shutdown of their network support and confiscation of their gear, it will be a fairly easy decision in most cases.  It seems to me that the new inverted bloom filter thing it could be remarkably efficient for a miner to ensure that they are not wasting their time with transactions which are going to be legally invalid because they contain unvalidated inputs.  A side benefit of using a sorted transaction set.

I also find your suggestion that the likes of Russia and China are going to change their policies and welcome crypto-currencies with open arms to be laughable.  And in case you have not noticed, piss-ant countries without nukes pretty much do what they are told by whoever's sphere of influence they fall under.  Sure, there is a chance that your rosy dreams about totalitarian countries suddenly discovering the joys of individual freedom and geo-political power politics will come to pass, but I'm not betting a huge percentage of my financial statement on it.


tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 22, 2015, 11:23:55 PM
 #22130


Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time. 
...

Speaking of, any recent news from Blockstream?

I just checked their blog and it hasn't changed from when Iast looked a some weeks ago.  That's a little disappointing.  I've not really even researched things enough to know if they have some public code repo.  That's often a way to tell something about the activity of a project.  Lastly, I don't really out very often on troll-talk these days and don't know of any active conversations like the enjoyable one we had with Adam a few months ago.   I should follow things more closely for personal financial reasons, but I've been more interested in other things lately.


cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 22, 2015, 11:29:17 PM
 #22131

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?

Just make people register.  That was Yifu's angle as a principle at CoinValidation.  UTXO's which are not registered to a known user or entity (e.g., Coinbase or blockchain.info) would halt a transaction from being valid.  Very easy to justify in the name of 'fighting terrorism and child exploitation' and whatever.  You can go before congress and argue all kinds of economic mumbo-jumbo about fungibility and freedom and what-not if you like.  Good luck with that.

Sharp eyed viewers might notice that if one does not register, one cannot pay one's taxes.  And there are well established ways to make people pay their taxes in almost all but the most failed of states.  I'll register my stash the day I'm mandated to do so (which is why my conception of the best strategy is to avoid a mandate ever being practical rather than to resist compliance after it is been mandated.)

As a function of my Coin Validation service, I'd also run a service for miners so that they can ensure that they don't waste their time mining unvalidated UTXO's as inputs and their transaction set thus remain clean.  If the choice is between taking this easy and popular step of using my government chartered service, and facing shutdown of their network support and confiscation of their gear, it will be a fairly easy decision in most cases.  It seems to me that the new inverted bloom filter thing it could be remarkably efficient for a miner to ensure that they are not wasting their time with transactions which are going to be legally invalid because they contain unvalidated inputs.  A side benefit of using a sorted transaction set.

I also find your suggestion that the likes of Russia and China are going to change their policies and welcome crypto-currencies with open arms to be laughable.  And in case you have not noticed, piss-ant countries without nukes pretty much do what they are told by whoever's sphere of influence they fall under.  Sure, there is a chance that your rosy dreams about totalitarian countries suddenly discovering the joys of individual freedom and geo-political power politics will come to pass, but I'm not betting a huge percentage of my financial statement on it.



Iirc, Yifu's idea was to white list addresses, not UTXO's. So your idea is to taint UTXO'?  How do you do that given they can be split, joined ad infinitum?
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 23, 2015, 12:05:52 AM
 #22132

...

Iirc, Yifu's idea was to white list addresses, not UTXO's.

Yifu was specifically interested in identifying in pinning individual identification meta-data to that which exists in the blockchain as I recall things.

So your idea is to taint UTXO'?  How do you do that given they can be split, joined ad infinitum?

We've been through this years ago.  Of course you taint UTXO's and summate them to characterize a wallet (as if it matters.)  It's not only possible to have a percent taint, it's relatively trivial.  It's also fairly trivial to associate UTXO's to other metadata and flags.  That would be the heart of a validation service, and it is very far from rocket science.

You are trying to say that Bitcoin has no scaling problems and because there is no danger of to many UTXO's (which pretty much will always need to be in fast access (which is, parenthetically, a long ago solved problem for large players who operate football field sized datacenters)) and at the same time that the UTXO set is so complex that they could not be analyzed even though the entire system is highly deterministic.  Which is it, bro?

People who use multibit-type clients will probably not even know any difference.  Let the server to the heavy lifting.  Just push the 'upgrade' button and a nice little 'percent taint' is a new addition which rapidly becomes one more feature.  The handful of ancient dinosaurs who run a full node can easily check transactions against my government chartered service as needed.  In fact, for PR reasons, I'll even make this free.  This will allow folks to call Bitcoin a 'peer-2-peer' system if they can stifle a chuckle when doing so.


marcus_of_augustus
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2436



View Profile
March 23, 2015, 12:07:50 AM
 #22133

If whitelisting becomes a thing, I will make a point by only accepting black (non-whitelisted) coins.


whitelisting is dead on arrival. The technologies already exist to partially if not mostly obviate any such mis-guided efforts, it is only a matter of time for refinement, usability, improvements and probably even better fundamental advancements.

At this stage, I would say bitcoins are about as good as cash. If someone robs a bank and gets away with a bag of loot they cannot just go around spending that in size at will. It might be left to go mouldy under the ground somewhere or divided up into hundreds or thousands of smaller parts. Bitcoins are similar, you could sit on "hot" coins for years or divide them up, wash them through Cayman's accounts. But being programmable money those features will inevitably be improved upon. Law enforcement needs to look ahead and start making plans for when solving crime is not as simple as "follow the money", which was always a bad idea anyway since it ushered in the police state of money and took away basic freedoms.

smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
March 23, 2015, 12:09:50 AM
 #22134


Sidechains could address all of these recently mentioned problems and many more.  I'm holding out to see if people come to their senses in time.  
...

Speaking of, any recent news from Blockstream?

I just checked their blog and it hasn't changed from when Iast looked a some weeks ago.  That's a little disappointing.  I've not really even researched things enough to know if they have some public code repo.  That's often a way to tell something about the activity of a project.  Lastly, I don't really out very often on troll-talk these days and don't know of any active conversations like the enjoyable one we had with Adam a few months ago.   I should follow things more closely for personal financial reasons, but I've been more interested in other things lately.

Adam still posts, he posted an update on a ring signature cryptographic scheme yesterday: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=972541.msg10842017#msg10842017

Here's their repo: https://github.com/Blockstream
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 23, 2015, 12:11:00 AM
 #22135

tv,

Would you mind telling me exactly how, from a technical standpoint, you would even white or black list BTC?

Given that there is no such thing as a coin but just a series of inputs and outputs, what do you taint and how is that sustainably identifiable throughout the life of a "coin"?

Just make people register.  That was Yifu's angle as a principle at CoinValidation.  UTXO's which are not registered to a known user or entity (e.g., Coinbase or blockchain.info) would halt a transaction from being valid.  Very easy to justify in the name of 'fighting terrorism and child exploitation' and whatever.  You can go before congress and argue all kinds of economic mumbo-jumbo about fungibility and freedom and what-not if you like.  Good luck with that.

Sharp eyed viewers might notice that if one does not register, one cannot pay one's taxes.  And there are well established ways to make people pay their taxes in almost all but the most failed of states.  I'll register my stash the day I'm mandated to do so (which is why my conception of the best strategy is to avoid a mandate ever being practical rather than to resist compliance after it is been mandated.)

As a function of my Coin Validation service, I'd also run a service for miners so that they can ensure that they don't waste their time mining unvalidated UTXO's as inputs and their transaction set thus remain clean. If the choice is between taking this easy and popular step of using my government chartered service, and facing shutdown of their network support and confiscation of their gear, it will be a fairly easy decision in most cases.  It seems to me that the new inverted bloom filter thing it could be remarkably efficient for a miner to ensure that they are not wasting their time with transactions which are going to be legally invalid because they contain unvalidated inputs.  A side benefit of using a sorted transaction set.

I also find your suggestion that the likes of Russia and China are going to change their policies and welcome crypto-currencies with open arms to be laughable.  And in case you have not noticed, piss-ant countries without nukes pretty much do what they are told by whoever's sphere of influence they fall under. Sure, there is a chance that your rosy dreams about totalitarian countries suddenly discovering the joys of individual freedom and geo-political power politics will come to pass, but I'm not betting a huge percentage of my financial statement on it.



this is exactly the sort of drivel i'd expect from your socialistic mindset.  "i'd just mandate it be so".

notice that there is no depth to your assertions as they just represent your lips flapping once again.  let me spell it out for you.  the working assumption here is that there will be mass disobedience of your pronouncements as most ppl who are even remotely familiar with how the protocol works understands that it is impossible to "taint coins" as there is no such concept in reality.  the trick for you is how to enforce your pronouncements.  there are just inputs and outputs which get split & joined constantly giving "coins" that are ever lessening shades of grey as time goes by.  and w/o a mechanism to identify owners of whatever unit you choose to monitor be it addresses or UTXO's, there is plausible deniability at every hop.  the only way to prove someone guilty of a theft is to catch them with the private keys on their computer used at the time of the theft.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 23, 2015, 12:24:08 AM
 #22136

...

Iirc, Yifu's idea was to white list addresses, not UTXO's.

Yifu was specifically interested in identifying in pinning individual identification meta-data to that which exists in the blockchain as I recall things.

So your idea is to taint UTXO'?  How do you do that given they can be split, joined ad infinitum?

We've been through this years ago.  Of course you taint UTXO's and summate them to characterize a wallet (as if it matters.)  It's not only possible to have a percent taint, it's relatively trivial.  It's also fairly trivial to associate UTXO's to other metadata and flags.  That would be the heart of a validation service, and it is very far from rocket science.

You are trying to say that Bitcoin has no scaling problems and because there is no danger of to many UTXO's (which pretty much will always need to be in fast access (which is, parenthetically, a long ago solved problem for large players who operate football field sized datacenters)) and at the same time that the UTXO set is so complex that they could not be analyzed even though the entire system is highly deterministic.  Which is it, bro?

People who use multibit-type clients will probably not even know any difference.  Let the server to the heavy lifting.  Just push the 'upgrade' button and a nice little 'percent taint' is a new addition which rapidly becomes one more feature.  The handful of ancient dinosaurs who run a full node can easily check transactions against my government chartered service as needed.  In fact, for PR reasons, I'll even make this free.  This will allow folks to call Bitcoin a 'peer-2-peer' system if they can stifle a chuckle when doing so.



the concept of taint is all or none.  either coins are spendable or they're not.  for a UTXO that has 25% taint, is it spendable or not, bro?

you still haven't answered my question about how the US gvt could get away with the hypocrisy of auctioning off the SR coins while at the same time tainting others drug coins.  that is more of a political question and i already know your answer.
tvbcof
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2324


View Profile
March 23, 2015, 01:51:01 AM
 #22137


the concept of taint is all or none.  either coins are spendable or they're not.  for a UTXO that has 25% taint, is it spendable or not, bro?

WTF are you talking about?  If you want to send me a transaction consisting of 100% validated UTXO's, I'll except them at 100% face value.  If you want to throw in a fraction which are unvalidated I'll discount them accordingly.  If/when unvalidated UTXO's cannot be mined or take a long time I'll stop accepting them altogether or accept an accourdingly deeper discount.  This is utterly trivial.  Coinbase will do it automatically which is why I'll just accept payment from you through them.

you still haven't answered my question about how the US gvt could get away with the hypocrisy of auctioning off the SR coins while at the same time tainting others drug coins.  that is more of a political question and i already know your answer.

Not hypocritical at all.  You bought some coins at the auction?  Register and validate them.  No big deal.

I anticipate that as things are rolled out probably every single UTXO will be considered clean by default.  Nobody is stopping you from validating any of them so you've got no complaints...unless you are a criminal or whatever and don't want to register...


smooth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1596



View Profile
March 23, 2015, 02:07:43 AM
 #22138

you still haven't answered my question about how the US gvt could get away with the hypocrisy of auctioning off the SR coins while at the same time tainting others drug coins.

It is written into the law that seizure auctions clean the title, same as with seized cars, houses, etc. If anything that might be one reason for strong interest in these auctions. If you are a buyer with repetitional concerns the only two ways to buy known untainted coins are from a government auction or direct from a (reputable and verifiable) miner.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764



View Profile
March 23, 2015, 02:20:35 AM
 #22139


the concept of taint is all or none.  either coins are spendable or they're not.  for a UTXO that has 25% taint, is it spendable or not, bro?

WTF are you talking about?  If you want to send me a transaction consisting of 100% validated UTXO's, I'll except them at 100% face value.  If you want to throw in a fraction which are unvalidated I'll discount them accordingly.  If/when unvalidated UTXO's cannot be mined or take a long time I'll stop accepting them altogether or accept an accourdingly deeper discount. This is utterly trivial.  Coinbase will do it automatically which is why I'll just accept payment from you through them.

you still haven't answered my question about how the US gvt could get away with the hypocrisy of auctioning off the SR coins while at the same time tainting others drug coins.  that is more of a political question and i already know your answer.

Not hypocritical at all.  You bought some coins at the auction?  Register and validate them.  No big deal.

I anticipate that as things are rolled out probably every single UTXO will be considered clean by default.  Nobody is stopping you from validating any of them so you've got no complaints...unless you are a criminal or whatever and don't want to register...



that's assuming you or anyone else has the ability to determine whether or not a UTXO has 100% cleanliness.  i'd say it depends on who is doing the analysis.  you yourself admitted, after i pointed it out, that you might indeed have stolen coins from allinvain in your wallet.  should we lock down your coins?

if it's so trivial, tell us how splitting out UTXO's works technically.  wallet software follows a particular logic of UTXO selection when assembling for a specific tx which i've not been able to get a good sense of and i'm sure you haven't either.  there's no such thing as "UTXO control" like there is "coin control" for addresses, afaik.  tell us how you would construct a tx to select or exclude certain UTXO's that you'd deem tainted.  from what i do know, the wallets select the most suitably "sized" UTXO's which when combined together fits the tx amount so as to minimize splitting and efficiently packages the tx at the least cost in terms of fees and data requirements.  furthermore, for a UTXO that has 0.15% "taint", tell us how you'd split that out practically.  stop pretending that Coinbase has a way to do this when you don't know that.

what you're proposing is "possible" is mostly likely not possible and certainly is not "practical".  i've never seen any wallet with the ability to allow users to spend certain UTXO's.  what would be the point except to satisfy your socialistic mandates?
Erdogan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812


View Profile
March 23, 2015, 02:22:11 AM
 #22140


the thing is, the gvt is not going to get involved in a situation where drug dealers steal coin from other drug dealers and then try to sell them off on an anonymous exchange in Bulgaria.  they only care if they themselves can get their hands on the BTC which in this Evo case, they cannot.  so they'll just let the community shoot it out and the final result will be just like every other theft in Bitcoinland since Day 1; nothing.

The govt's role is super simple:

 - Mandate a license and enforce it on key retailers and service providers of the on-line wallet type (e.g., Coinbase...who probably won't take much convincing...)

 - Charter a service (e.g., CoinValidation) or two which do validation.

The licensee just uses a simple API from the validator.

When this occurs I will require that if you want to send me BTC, you do it through my Coinbase account.  Yes, I'm vehemently opposed to the whole system, but I'm not going to take a bullet by absorbing your unvalidated BTC which I may not be able to spend and have to trade to someone else who will also will value unvalidated BTC at a lower rate.

To make matters worse, anyone who is enough of a chump to accept unvalidated BTC will find people wishing to dump them beating a path to one's door.

I would also caution against assuming that a validation solution cannot work because of the difficulty of the task.  Validation need not be anything remotely precise or even accurate.  I think we'll find that the amount of liability protection afforded to a validating service in association with their charter would make the vaccine manufactures blush.

TPTB have a good friend in Mr. Andresen and thus a very strong hand.  I won't go into the game theory, but there are still a bunch of ways to overplay the hand that they have here.  A person who is on the ball, and who has a bit of luck, may be able to come out of this thing fairly well.



It's not super simple. There is a reason why you do not pay tax when you buy firewood from your neigbor. He and you say no. There is a reason why they can not say: You to can not have sexual intercource, how could you think that, here it is WE who decide who is to have sex and not to have sex. But the people says no, no way. There is a reason they can not say that you have to go to church every sunday. Everybody say no, no way, basta! This is also what people will say to the blacklists or the whitelists. They will say, no, not a chance, basta, the coins are mine. Mine! Get out of my face. That is what everybody will say. Not super simple at all. Without support, they can do nothing. Whitout you giving them resources, they have no resources. Bitcoin will make that clear to a lot of people.



Pages: « 1 ... 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 [1107] 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 ... 1558 »
  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!