Cypherpunk - Bitcoin

Fifty Years of Cypherpunk: History, Personalities, And Spread of its ideas

In this review, we tell how the ideas of cypherpunk were born, how they influenced cryptocurrencies, and modern technologies, who formed the basis and why its popularity these days has grown again.

From the early days to today: the chronology of key events of the cypherpunk

In the early 1970s, James Ellis of the UK Government Communications Center put forward the concept of public-key cryptography. In the early 1980s, small groups of hackers, mathematicians and cryptographers began working on the realization of this idea. One of them was an American cryptographer, Ph.D. David Chaum, who is sometimes called the godfather of cypherpunk. This new culture has proclaimed computer technology as a means of destroying state power and centralized management systems.Key figure among the cypherpunk of the 80s — Intel specialist Timothy C. May. His dream was to create a global system that allows anonymous exchange of information. He created the concept of the BlackNet system. In September 1988, May wrote The Crypto-Anarchist Manifesto: people themselves, without politicians, manage their lives, use cryptography, use digital currencies, and other decentralized tools.In 1989, David Chaum founded DigiCash an eCash digital money system with its CyberBucks and with the blind digital signature technology.Since 1992, Timothy May, John Gilmore (Electronic Frontier Foundation), and Eric Hughes (University of California) have begun holding secret meetings and regular PGP-encrypted mailing through anonymous remailer servers. And finally, in 1993 Eric Hughes published a fundamental document of the movement — А Cypherpunk's Manifesto. The importance of confidentiality, anonymous transactions, cryptographic protection — all these ideas were subsequently implemented in cryptocurrencies.The term "cypherpunk" was first used by hacker and programmer Jude Milhon to a group of crypto-anarchists.In 1995, Julian Assange, the creator of WikiLeaks, published his first post in cypherpunk mailing.In 1996, John Young and Deborah Natsios created the Cryptome, which published data related to security, privacy, freedom, cryptography. It is here that subsequently will be published data from the famous Edward Snowden.In 1997, cryptographer Dr. Adam Back (you know him as CEO of Blockstream) created Hashcash, a distributed anti-spam mechanism.In 1998, computer engineer Wei Dai published two concepts for creating a b-money digital payment system:
In April 2001, Bram Cohen developed the BitTorrent protocol and application.In 2002, Paul Syverson, Roger Dingledine and Nick Mathewson presented the alpha version of the anonymity network named TOR Project.In 2004, cypherpunk Hal Finney created the Reusable Proof of Work (RPoW) algorithm. It was based on Adam Back's Hashcash but its drawback was centralization.In 2005, cryptographer Nick Szabo, who developed the concept of smart contracts in the 1990s, announced the creation of Bit Gold — a digital collectible and investment item.In October 2008, legendary Satoshi Nakamoto created the manifesto “Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System”, which refers to the works of the cypherpunk classics Adam Back and Wei Dai.In 2011, Ross William Ulbricht aka Dread Pirate Roberts created the Silk Road, the first major market for illegal goods and services on the darknet.In 2016, Julian Assange released the book "Cypherpunks: Freedom and the future of the Internet."At the beginning of 2018, Pavel Durov, the creator of Telegram, announced the launch of the TON multi-blockchain platform and mentioned his plans to launch TON ICO.In 2019, the Tor Project‌ introduced an open anti-censorship group.

Cypherpunk 2020

Plenty of services, products, and technologies were inspired by cypherpunk: Cryptocurrencies, HD (Hierarchical Deterministic) crypto wallets, Coin Mixers, ECDHM addresses, Privacy Coins. The ideas of distribution and anonymity were also implemented in the torrents and VPN. You can see the embodiment of cybersecurity ideas in the electronic signatures and protected messengers (Telegram, Signal, and many others).Why there were so many talks about cypherpunk this spring? In April 2020, Reddit users suggested that the letter from the famous cypherpunks mailing dated September 19, 1999, was written by Satoshi Nakamoto himself (or someone close to him). This letter is about the functioning of ecash. Anonymous (supposed Satoshi) talks about the "public double-spending database" and Wei Dai's b-money as a possible foundation for ecash.In addition, researchers of the mystery "Who is Satoshi Nakamoto?" periodically make some noise and discover the next "secret" about one or another legendary cypherpunks. So, in May 2020, Adam Back wrote in response to videos and new hype discussions that, despite some coincidences, he is not Satoshi.Other heroes of the scene are not idle too: in April 2020, David Chaum received $9.7 million during the presale of the confidential coin xx, created to encourage venture investors.

Conclusion

As you can see from the Satoshi Nakamoto's mentions and from the stories of DigiCash, Hashcash, RPoW, Bit Gold, the movement of cypherpunk influenced a lot the emergence of cryptocurrencies. As governments and corporations restrict freedom and interfere with confidentiality, cypherpunk ideas will periodically rise in popularity. And this confrontation will not end in the coming decades.
submitted by CoinjoyAssistant to bitcoin_uncensored [link] [comments]

The Intellectual Foundation of Bitcoin比特幣的智識基礎. By Chapman Chen, HKBNews

The Intellectual Foundation of Bitcoin比特幣的智識基礎. By Chapman Chen, HKBNews

https://preview.redd.it/w6v3l8n3zxu41.jpg?width=2551&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fb0338a36a1a321d3781f43ff5eb6929d8b92edc
Summary: Bitcoin was invented by the anonymous Satoshi Nakamoto as recently as 2008, but it is backed up by a rich intellectual foundation. For instance, The 1776 First Amendment separates church and state, and contemporary American liberation psychologist Nozomi Hayase (2020) argues that money and state should similarly be separated. Just as Isaac Newton’s study of alchemy gave rise to the international gold standard, so has the anonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto's desire for a “modernized gold standard” given rise to Bitcoin. Indeed, Bloomberg's 2020 report confirms Bitcoin to be gold 2.0. Montesquieu (1774) asserted that laws that secure inalienable rights can only be found in Nature, and the natural laws employed in Bitcoin include its consensus algorithm and the three natural laws of economics (self-interest, competition, and supply and demand). J.S. Mill (1859) preferred free markets to those controlled by governments. Ludwig von Mises (1951) argued against the hazards of fiat currency, urging for a return to the gold standard. Friedrich Hayek (1984) suggested people to invent a sly way to take money back from the hands of the government. Milton Friedman (1994) called for FED to be replaced by an automatic system and predicted the coming of a reliable e-cash. James Buchanan (1988) advocated a monetary constitution to constrain the governmental power of money creation. Tim May (1997) the cypherpunk proclaimed that restricting digital cash impinges on free speech, and envisioned a stateless digital form of money that is uncensorable. The Tofflers (2006) pictured a non-monetary economy. In 2016, UCLA Professor of Finance Bhagwan Chowdhry even nominated Satoshi for a Nobel Prize.
Full Text:
Separation between money and state
The 1791 First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution enshrines free speech and separates church and state, but not money and state. "Under the First Amendment, individuals’ right to create, choose their own money and transact freely was not recognized as a part of freedom of expression that needs to be protected," Japanese-American liberation psychologist Nozomi Hayase (2020) points out (1).
The government, banks and corporations collude together to encroach upon people's liberties by metamorphosing their inalienable rights into a permissioned from of legal rights. Fiat currencies function as a medium of manipulation, indulging big business to generate market monopolies. "Freedom of expression has become further stifled through economic censorship and financial blockage enacted by payment processing companies like Visa and MasterCard," to borrow Hayase's (2020) words.
Satoshi is a Modern Newton
Although most famous for discovering the law of gravity, Isaac Newton was also a practising alchemist. He never managed to turn lead into gold, but he did find a way to transmute silver into gold. In 1717, Newton announced in a report that, based on his studies, one gold guinea coin weighed 21 shillings. Just as Isaac Newton’s study of alchemy gave rise to the international gold standard, so has the desire for a “modernized gold standard” given rise to Bitcoin. "In a way, Satoshi is a modern Newton. They both believed trust is best placed in the unchangeable facets of our economy. Beneath this belief is the assumption that each individual is their own best master," as put by Jon Creasy (2019) (2).
J.S. Mill: free markets preferable to those controlled by governments
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) the great English philosopher would be a Bitcoiner were he still around today. In On Liberty (1859), Mill concludes that free markets are preferable to those controlled by governments. He argues that economies function best when left to their own devices. Therefore, government intervention, though theoretically permissible, would be counterproductive. Bitcoin is precisely decentralized or uncontrolled by the government, unconfiscatable, permissonless, and disinflationary. Bitcoin regulates itself spontaneously via the ordinary operations of the system. "Rules are enforced without applying any external pressure," in Hayase's (2020) words.
Ludwig von Mises (1958): Liberty is always Freedom from the Government
In The Free Market and its Enemies, theoretical Austrian School economist Ludwig von Mises (1951) argues against the hazards of fiat currency, urging for a return to the gold standard. “A fiat money system cannot go on forever and must one day come to an end,” Von Mises states. The solution is a return to the gold standard, "the only standard which makes the determination of the purchasing power of money independent of the changing ideas of political parties, governments, and pressure groups" under present conditions. Interestingly, this is also one of the key structural attributes of Bitcoin, the world’s first, global, peer-to-peer, decentralized value transfer network.
Actually, Bloomberg's 2020 report on Bitcoin confirms that it is gold 2.0. (3)
Von Mises prefers the price of gold to be determined according to the contemporaneous market conditions. The bitcoin price is, of course, determined across the various global online exchanges, in real-time. There is no central authority setting a spot price for gold after the which the market value is settled on among the traders during the day.
Hayek: Monopoly on Currency should End
Austrian-British Nobel laureate Friedrich Hayek’s theory in his 1976 work, Denationalization of Money, was that not only would the currency monopoly be taken away from the government, but that the monopoly on currency itself should end with multiple alternative currencies competing for acceptance by consumers, in order "to prevent the bouts of acute inflation and deflation which have played the world for the past 60 years." He forcefully argues that if there is no free competition between different currencies within any nation, then there will be no free market. Bitcoin is, again, decentralized, and many other cryptocurrencies have tried to compete with it, though in vain.
In a recently rediscovered video clip from 1984, Hayek actually suggested people to invent a cunning way to take money out of the hands of the government:- “I don’t believe we shall ever have a good money again before we take the thing out of the hands of government, that is, we can’t take them violently out of the hands of government, all we can do is by some sly roundabout way introduce something they can’t stop” (4). Reviewing those words 36 years hence and it is difficult not to interpret them in the light of Bitcoin.
Milton Friedman Called for FED to be Replaced by an Automatic System
Nobel laureate economist Milton Friedman (1994) was critical of the Federal Reserve due to its poor performance and felt it should be abolished (5). Friedman (1999) believed that the Federal Reserve System should ultimately be replaced with a computer program, which makes us think of the computer code governing Bitcoin (6).[\](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_the_Federal_Reserve#cite_note-:2-12) He (1970) favored a system that would automatically buy and sell securities in response to changes in the money supply. This, he argued, would put a lid on inflation, setting spending and investment decisions on a surer footing (7). Bitcoin is exactly disflationary as its maximum possible supply is 21 million and its block reward or production rate is halved every four years.
Friedman passed away before the coming of bitcoin, but he lived long enough to see the Internet’s spectacular rise throughout the 1990s. “I think that the Internet is going to be one of the major forces for reducing the role of government," said Friedman in a 1999 interview with NTU/F. On the same occasion, he sort of predicted the emergence of Bitcoin, "The one thing that’s missing, but that will soon be developed, is a reliable e-cash, a method whereby on the Internet you can transfer funds from A to B, without A knowing B or B knowing A." (8)
Of course, Friedman didnt predict the block chain, summed up American libertarian economist Jeffery Tucker (2014). “But he was hoping for a trustless system. He saw the need. (9).
Bitcoin Computer Code as Constitution in the Buchananian Sense
American economist cum Nobel laureate James Buchanan (1988) advocates constitutional constraints on the governmental power to create money (10). Buchanan distinguishes a managed monetary system—a system “that embodies the instrumental use of price-level predictability as a norm of policy”—from an automatic monetary system, “which does not, at any stage, involve the absolute price level” (Buchanan 1962, 164–65). Leaning toward the latter, Buchanan argues that automatic systems are characterized by an organization “of the institutions of private decision-making in such a way that the desired monetary predictability will emerge spontaneously from the ordinary operations of the system” (Buchanan 1962, 164). Again, "Bitcoin regulates itself through the spontaneous force of nature, flourishing healthy price discovery and competition in the best interest of everyone" (Hayase 2020).
Shruti Rajagopalan (2018) argues that the computer code governing how the sundry nodes/computers within the Bitcoin network interact with one another is a kind of monetary constitution in the Buchananian sense. One of Buchanan's greatest inputs is to differentiate the choice of rules from the choice within rule (Buchanan 1990). One may regard the Bitcoin code as a sort of constitution and "the Bitcoin network engaging in both the choice of rules and choice within rules" (Rajagopalan 2018) (11).
Tim May: Restricting Digital Cash may Impinge on Free Speech
Cypherpunks are activists who since the 1980s have advocated global use of strong cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies as a route to social and political liberation. Tim May (Timothy C. May [1951-2018]), one of the influential cypherpunks published The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto in September 1992, which foretold the coming of Bitcoin (12). Cypherpunks began envisioning a stateless digital form of money that cannot be censored and their collaborative pursuit created a movement akin to the 18th Enlightenment.
At The 7th Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy, Burlingame, CA. in 1997, Tim May equated money with speech, and argued that restricting digital cash may impinge on free speech, for spending money is often a matter of communicating orders to others, to transfer funds, to release funds, etc. In fact, most financial instruments are contracts or orders, instead of physical specie or banknotes (13).
Montesquieu: Laws that secure inalienable rights can only be found in Nature
In his influential work The Spirit of Laws (1748), Montesquieu wrote, “Laws ... are derived from the nature of things … Law, like mathematics, has its objective structure, which no arbitrary whim can alter". Similarly, once a block is added to the end of the Bitcoin blockchain, it is almost impossible to go back and alter the contents of the block, unless every single block after it on the blockchain is altered, too.
Cypherpunks knew that whereas alienable rights that are bestowed by law can be deprived by legislation, inalienable rights are not to be created but can be discovered by reason. Thus, laws that secure inalienable rights cannot be created by humankind but can be found in nature.
The natural laws employed in Bitcoin to enshrine the inalienable monetary right of every human being include its consensus algorithm, and the three natural laws of economics (self-interest, competition, and supply and demand) as identified by Adam Smith, father of modern economics.
Regarding mathematics, bitcoin mining is performed by high-powered computers that solve complex computational math problems. When computers solve these complex math problems on the Bitcoin network, they produce new bitcoin. And by solving computational math problems, bitcoin miners make the Bitcoin payment network trustworthy and secure, by verifying its transaction information.
Regarding economic laws, in accordance with the principle of game theory to generate fairness, miners take part in an open competition. Lining up self-interests of all in a network, with a vigilant balance of risk and rewards, rules are put in force sans the application of any exterior pressure. "Bitcoin regulates itself through the spontaneous force of nature, flourishing healthy price discovery and competition in the best interest of everyone," to borrow the words of Hayase (2020).
A Non-monetary Economy as Visualized by the Tofflers
In their book, Revolutionary Wealth (2006), futurists Alvin Toffler and his wife Heidi Toffler toy with the concept of a world sans money, raising a third kind of economic transaction that is neither one-on-one barter nor monetary exchange. In the end, they settle on the idea that the newer non-monetary economy will exist shoulder-to-shoulder with the monetary sector in the short term, although the latter may eventually be eclipsed by the former in the long run. What both the Tofflers' The Third Wave (1980) and Revolutionary Wealth bring into question is the very premise of monetary exchange. The vacuum left over by cash in such a non-monetary economy may be filled up by Bitcoin as a cryptocurrency.
Satoshi Nakamoto Nominated for Nobel Prize by UCLA Finance Prof.
UCLA Anderson School Professor of Finance Bhagwan Chowdhry nominated Satoshi Nakamoto for the 2016 Nobel Prize in Economics on the following grounds:-
It is secure, relying on almost unbreakable cryptographic code, can be divided into millions of smaller sub-units, and can be transferred securely and nearly instantaneously from one person to any other person in the world with access to internet bypassing governments, central banks and financial intermediaries such as Visa, Mastercard, Paypal or commercial banks eliminating time delays and transactions costs.... Satoshi Nakamoto’s Bitcoin Protocol has spawned exciting innovations in the FinTech space by showing how many financial contracts — not just currencies — can be digitized, securely verified and stored, and transferred instantaneously from one party to another (14).
Fb link: https://www.facebook.com/hongkongbilingualnews/posts/947121432392288?__tn__=-R
Web link: https://www.hkbnews.net/post/the-intellectual-foundation-of-bitcoin%E6%AF%94%E7%89%B9%E5%B9%A3%E7%9A%84%E6%99%BA%E8%AD%98%E5%9F%BA%E7%A4%8E-by-chapman-chen-hkbnews
Disclaimer: This article is neither an advertisement nor professional financial advice.
End-notes
  1. https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-is-the-technology-of-dissent-that-secures-individual-liberties
  2. https://medium.com/hackernoon/why-sir-isaac-newton-was-the-first-bitcoin-maximalist-195a17cb6c34
  3. https://data.bloomberglp.com/professional/sites/10/Bloomberg-Crypto-Outlook-April-2020.pdf
  4. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYhEDxFwFRU&t=1161s
  5. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6fkdagNrjI
  6. http://youtu.be/mlwxdyLnMXM
  7. https://miltonfriedman.hoover.org/friedman_images/Collections/2016c21/IEA_1970.pdf
  8. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MnQJFEVY7s
  9. https://www.coindesk.com/economist-milton-friedman-predicted-bitcoin
  10. https://www.aier.org/research/prospects-for-a-monetary-constitution/
  11. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3238472
  12. https://www.activism.net/cypherpunk/crypto-anarchy.html
  13. http://osaka.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/tcmay.htm
  14. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/i-shall-happily-accept-th_b_8462028
Pic credit: Framingbitcoin
#bitcoin #bitcoinhalving #jamesBuchanan #MiltonFriedman #AlvinToffler #FirstAmendment #LudwigVonMises #TimMay #freeMarket # SatoshiNakamoto #FriedrichHayek #Cypherpunk #Cryptocurrency #GoldStandard #IsaacNewton
submitted by HKBNews to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

None of the Bitcoin projects are actually Bitcoin.

None of the Bitcoin projects are actually Bitcoin. I can say that simply and categorically because 'what Bitcoin is' was laid out clearly and simply in the Bitcoin white paper entitled "Bitcoin: A peer to peer electronic cash system". The clue is in the title. It's electronic cash.
So why is BTC, BCH, BSV etc etc not electronic cash? Well, let's take a look at the properties of cash. Wiki lists the properties as being Fungibility, Durability, Portability, Cognizability and Stability.
So let's look at fungibility. Fungibility means all coins are of equal value. If a coin/address can have a history then it isn't fungible. Fungibility in Blockchain requires privacy by default at the base layer.
People mistakenly use fungibility to mean 'cleaned'. But if you think about it, the fact that coins might need to be cleaned (ie they weren't of equal value) shows the currency to not be fungible.
Do any of the Bitcoin projects pass the fungibility test? No, categorically and emphatically no. We've already seen freshly minted BTC commanding a higher price than circulated BTC. Also we've seen circulated BTC trade for less than market value on DEXs like Bisq.
Why is fungibility important? Well, fungibility ensures that a merchant can confidently accept a coin, and that when he goes to spend it, he isn't told that actually that particular coin is tainted and is infact worth significantly less than market value (or confiscated outright).
So why don't any of the Bitcoin projects switch to private by default to become sound money?
Well a number of reasons. Firstly, it would require a hardfork, something a lot of OG bitcoiners would consider an action of last resort. A change like this would break a lot of the existing infrastructure (wallets etc) that have been built on the transparent blockchain technology.
Secondly, people are fearful that a 'private by default' Bitcoin would become a target for regulators. That it would be banned. "But surely the whole cypherpunk ethos of Bitcoin is decentralized censorship resistance?" It was in it's beginning, however over the years (and the increase in price) it has become more centralized, and more utilized as a speculative vehicle than an actual government resistant currency. A lot of people's fortunes and security are tied up in Bitcoin continuing to raise steadily in value. Even the hint of a regulatory crackdown wouldn't sit right with them at all.
So the outcome? We have multiple projects that all claim to be Bitcoin, while infact none of them are. And while they all still might give you a return during the next speculative bullrun, the underlying utility that promised their future value is missing and unlikely to ever be reclaimed.
submitted by Kukri4321 to CryptoCurrency [link] [comments]

Urbit meetup in North Texas

Hi everybody, I'm holding a meetup in the DFW area for people interested in Urbit next month. If you're interested in the project or want to learn more about it, come hang out! Details are at the end of the post. I've got the blessing of u/ZorbaTHut to post this here contingent on explaining why Urbit is interesting, both in general and for this audience, so I'll give you a brief outline of the project if you're not familiar, and answer questions you may have once I'm home from work on Monday (though I encourage anybody else who'd like to to chime in until then -- I have to go to bed soon.)

What is Urbit?

Urbit is an interenet decentralization project, and a full networked computing stack from the ground up. Urbit's ultimate goal is to build a new internet on top of the old one, that is architecturally designed to avoid the need for centralized services by allowing individuals to run and program robust personal servers that are simple to manage. When Urbit conquers the world, your digital identity will be something you personally permanently own as a cryptographic key, not an line in a corporation's database; Facebook and Twitter will be protocols -- encrypted traffic and data shared directly between you and your friends & family, with no middlemen spying on you; your apps, social software and anything you program will have secure cryptocurrency payment mechanisms as a system call, payed out of a wallet on a device you fully control; and you will tangibly own and control your computer and the networked software you use on it.
As I said, Urbit is a stack; at its core is Nock, a minimal, turing-complete function. Nock is built out into a deterministic operating system, Arvo, with its own functional programming language. For now, Arvo runs as a process, with a custom VM/interpreter on *nix machines. Your Arvo instance talks to other instances over a native, encrypted peer-to-peer network, though it can interface with the normal internet as well. Urbit's identity management system is called Azimuth, a public key infrastructure built on Ethereum. You own proof of your Urbit instance's identity as a token in the same way you own your Bitcoin wallet.
Because the peer-to-peer network is built into Arvo, you get it 'for free' with any software you write or run on it. You run your own personal server, and run all the software you use to communicate with the world yourself. Because all of your services are running on computer you control using a single secure identity system, you can think of what it aspires to like a decentralized, cypherpunk version of WeChat -- a programmable, secure platform for everything you want to do with your computer in one place, without the downsides of other people running your software.

Why is it interesting?

Urbit is extremely ambitious and pretty strange. Why throw out the entire stack we've spent half a century building? Because it's a giant ball of mud -- millions of lines of code in the Linux kernel alone, with all the attendant security issues and complexity. You can run a personal server today if you're technically sophisticated; spin up a VPS, install all the software you need, configure everything and keep it secure. It's doable, but it sucks, and your mom can't do it. Urbit is designed from the beginning to avoid the pitfalls that led to cascading system complexity. Nock has 12 opcodes, and Arvo is somewhere in the neighborhood of 30,000 lines of code. The core pieces of Urbit are also ticking towards being 'frozen' -- reaching a state where they can no longer be changed, in order to ensure that they remain absolutely minimal. The point of all of this is to make a diamond-hard, unchanging core that a single person can actually understand in its entirety, ensure the security of the architecture, prevent insane dependency hell and leaky abstractions from overgrowing it, and allow for software you write today to run in a century. It also aims to be simple enough that a normal person can pay a commodity provider $5/mo (or something), log into their Urbit on their devices, and control it as easily as their phone.
Urbit's network also has a routing hierarchy that is important to understand; while the total address space is 128-bit, the addresses are partitioned into different classes. 8-bit and 16-bit addresses act as network infrastructure, while human instances use 32-bit addresses. To use the network, you must be sponsored by the 16-bit node 'above' you -- which is to say 'be on good terms'. If you aren't on good terms, that sponsorship can be terminated, but that goes both ways -- if you don't like your sponsor, you can exit and choose another. Because 32-bit addresses are finite, they're scarce and have value, which disincentivizes spam and abuse. To be clear, the sponsor nodes only sign/deliver software updates, and perform peer discovery and NAT traversal; your connections with other people are direct and encrypted. Because there are many sponsor nodes, you can return to the network if you're kicked off unfairly. In the long term, this also allows for graceful political fragmentation of the network if necessary.
The world created by Urbit is a world where individuals control their own data and digital communities live according to their mores. It's an internet that isn't funded by mass automated surveillance and ad companies that know your health problems. It's also the internet as a frontier like it once was, at least until this one is settled. Apologies if this comes off a little true-believer-y, but this project is something I'm genuinely excited about.

For TheMotte

The world that Urbit aims to build is one not dissimilar from Scott's archipelago communism -- one of voluntaristic relations and communities, and exit in the face of conflict & coercion. It's technical infrastructure to move the internet away from the chokepoints of the major social media platforms and the concentration of political power that comes with centralized services. The seismic shifts affecting our institutions and society caused by the internet in the last decade have been commented on at length here and elsewhere, but as BTO said, you ain't seen nothin' yet. I suspect many people with a libertarian or anti-authoritarian bent would appreciate the principle of individual sovereignty over their computing and data. The project is also something I've discussed a few times with others on here, so I know there's some curiosity about it.
The original developer of Urbit is also rather well known online, especially around here. Yarvin is a pretty controversial figure, but he departed the project in early 2019.

Meetup

There's a lot more that I haven't mentioned, but I hope this has piqued your interest. If you're in DFW, you can find details of the first meetup here. There will be free pizza and a presentation about Urbit, help installing & using it (Mac & Linux only for now), as well as the opportunity to socialize. All are welcome! Feel free to bring a friend.
If you're not in North Texas but are interested, there are also other regional meetups all over the world coming up soon.

Further reading:

submitted by p3on to TheMotte [link] [comments]

Back to the Future

Back to the Future
Recently, there were so many articles about Satoshi and who could he be. To be honest, I have my theory and I do think that he should remain anonymous. Anyway, today I decided to dig a bit into history, without any particular expectation, mainly to learn about great people who made it all possible.
First thing that come to my mind is to learn about Wei Dai, his interests and evolution. Wasn't sure where to start, but I did know that he was involved in onion routing, so I went to onions archive. When I started reading their discussions, first thing that I noticed is how almost all members are "old school". It's way easier to find people who use double space than the ones who doesn't :)
It's a list full of amazing people, starting with Michael G. Reed, Paul Syverson, David Goldschlag, of course Wei Dao and people like Austin Hill from Zero Knowledge Systems (where Adam Back worked at that time).
Anyway, one person who made me curious and did not use double space, had a signature:
=-----------------------------------------------------------------------=
Jeremey Barrett VeriWeb Internet Corp.
Crypto, Ecash, Commerce Systems http://www.veriweb.com/
PGP Key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64
=-----------------------------------------------------------------------=
and after some time it went to:
Jeremey Barrett BlueMoney Software Corp. Crypto,
Ecash, Commerce Systems http://www.bluemoney.com/
PGP key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64
=-----------------------------------------------------------------------=
It made me curious. This was in 1997 (more than 20 years ago) so I did wanna check who this guy is considering that he is promoting Ecash / Commerce Systems (aka markets). It did strike me immediately as someone who would eventually be interested in bitcoin 10 years latter. So, I did check his sites. veriweb was a big surprise, first thing that I noticed was:
BlueMoney logo
That B did look familiar ;) It's all about "Secure Transactions for Internet Shopping". One more thing I that stroke me is sentence "Cyberspace is like ether, part of the sky, which is blue". So 12 years before bitcoin is even made they were using something that's really similar to BTC symbol and also "Ether" ;) veriweb was just a parent company, their product was BlueMoney. and site looked like this. You will notice another similar logo:

BlueMoney logo
I did try to search for this company and one of the rare articles does explain it and who are founders "The company was founded in May 1996 by John Sweet, President and CEO; Jeremey Barrett, Chief Technology Officer; and Ben Kavanagh, Vice President of Operations.".

This made me really really curious. So, I did some additional search on Jeremey. He was an user on cryptoanarchy.. You can see some of his posts there but two of them stroke me as important. First one with subject "World's first Ecash note" and second one that was a reply to Adam Back's and his incentive to create alt.cypherpunks. He was the first one to reply.

No, he is not Satoshi, but I did suspect for a moment. There was a clear connection to Wei Dai and Adam Back, first two persons that Satoshi contacted and asked for feedback on his whitepaper. Just that "like bitcoin" logo was enough to make me excited ;)
I've spent a lot of time today on this, went through hundreds of sites and don't wanna bother you with details about this You can do your own "mini investigation".
I can only say that none of them is Satoshi Nakamoto, I'm almost sure about it. On other hand, finding real Satoshi on Onion routing / TOR mailing lists wouldn't be a surprise, it would be expected IMHO. I don't buy the story that he have come from nowhere and had no previous experience there. I'll just leave it to this, I wanted to share some interesting details and how "BTC" logo, or something that looks like it, existed in 1996. It's fascinating.
This thread will probably be buried in bitcoin but if it somehow get traction I will make some edits, future explanations and details about my "one day research".
submitted by NekoNormalan to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Brief History Of Bitcoin

Brief History Of Bitcoin
Pre-history of advanced cash (1989-2007)

While Bitcoin is the leader of the cryptographic money crowd, it isn't the principal venture to present the idea of advanced cash. In spite of the fact that the first accomplished the state being referred to in a decentralized manner, taking care of the Byzantine general's concern that most antecedents of Bitcoin battled with.

Truth be told, there was something other than one endeavor to bring a computerized variant of money and even gold, at first to monetary organizations and corporate organizations, and later to the standard open, beginning as right on time as the late 80s.

From DigiCash and B-Money to e-gold and Bit Gold, there are various ideas that may be considered as 'advanced monetary standards' that were acquainted earlier with Bitcoin. While not every one of them made it to the advanced the truth, being for quite some time overlooked as simply one more understudy's proposition, Satoshi Nakamoto himself makes reference to a portion of the creators of the above ventures in his unique Bitcoin white paper, clarifying that Bitcoin was in reality dependent on cryptographic ideas as imagined by cypherpunk networks and PC researchers 'once upon a time'.

https://preview.redd.it/84kgcvait8e41.jpg?width=739&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1dbbada460cbcf83cffea3a966175a4b443ca2a3
The minority of such items that figured out how to 'make it' to the market in the end bombed because of the nonappearance of some essential qualities found in widespread worth trade mediums, for example, gold. That made Bitcoin for all intents and purposes what it is on account of the reality it was explicitly intended to match and convey gold's most significant characteristics including its shortage.

The introduction of the Bitcoin blockchain (2008-2009)

Precisely eleven years back, on October 31, 2008, an examination paper entitled "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" was distributed among a cryptographer-situated mailing list by a netizen self-named as 'Satoshi Nakamoto', basically portraying a dream of a decentralized disseminated advanced cash framework, which depended on existing cypherpunk ideas that were already never joined in a solitary task.

Two or three months in and Nakamoto had distributed the primary form of the open-source Bitcoin programming on SourceForge in January 2009, starting interest and energy among cryptography specialists and specialists, however influencing essentially nobody else outside that small rundown.

The first Bitcoin exchange at any point was performed between Satoshi Nakamoto himself and Hal Finney, an early Bitcoin adopter who many estimate could be one of only a handful scarcely any individuals who know Nakamoto's actual personality (or characters).

More coders began to trade thoughts and tinker with the open-source code that was by the late spring of that year accessible on Github, and numerous Bitcoin-explicit discussions were made so as to engage genuine engineers to get composed with the undertaking.

It is said that before the finish of 2009, only 309 IPs were diverted to Wiki's Bitcoin page, while BTC, the local money of the Bitcoin organize didn't yet have a market cost.

Strangely, at that point, there was only one Bitcoin Wallet accessible and it required the full Bitcoin blockchain - proportionate to 6GB in those days - to be downloaded and adjusted all together for the wallet to be usable.

Vitalik Buterin, the now youthful prime supporter of Ethereum ETH, 0.02%, was all the while functioning as a writer in those days, and his audit of the wallet read:
submitted by Bitcoin12investment to u/Bitcoin12investment [link] [comments]

Monero Deep Dive: The Cryptocurrency To Use If You Want True Anonymity, Far More Anonymous Than Bitcoin

http://www.cypherpunklabs.com/monero-deep-dive-the-cryptocurrency-to-use-if-you-want-true-anonymity-far-more-anonymous-than-bitcoin/
In the early days of cryptocurrency Bitcoin was considered the best payment method for those who wished to stay anonymous. At the time this was true, since Bitcoin required no personal identification information while fiat payment methods like banks and PayPal required a full suite of personal identification information. However, all Bitcoin transactions in history are stored on a publicly accessible block explorer, and with the rise of blockchain forensics it is now possible to figure out who owns a Bitcoin address and what they have been doing with their Bitcoin. Although it is possible to increase Bitcoin’s anonymity by using Tor, VPNs, and CoinJoin, as will be discussed in future Cypherpunk Labs articles, Bitcoin can only be considered pseudo-anonymous rather than fully anonymous.
Nicolas van Saberhagen recognized that Bitcoin lacked full anonymity, in addition to the fact that it is a slow and difficult process to change Bitcoin’s code. Saberhagen proposed to create a new cryptocurrency that was far more anonymous, in addition to correcting some other apparent deficiencies in Bitcoin, and wrote up these ideas in the CryptoNote White Paper.
The first cryptocurrency to utilize the ideas in the CryptoNote White Paper was Bytecoin (BCN), which is a lesser known but still functional stealth cryptocurrency. Bitcointalk user thankful_for_today modified the code from Bytecoin and created BitMonero), but there was community criticism since not everything in the CryptoNote White Paper was adopted. This caused thankful_for_today to apparently abandon the project, but a group of users led by Johny Mnemonic quickly took over and renamed the cryptocurrency Monero (XMR).
One of the most critical pieces of stealth technology that Monero uses is ring signatures. With Bitcoin a transaction is signed with a user’s private key and can be verified with the public key. With a ring signature a transaction is signed by your key as well as the public keys from several other outputs on the blockchain using a triangular distribution method. Essentially, each Monero transaction is signed by a group of keys, and it is not possible to distinguish which key the transaction originated from. This can be thought of as decentralized and trustless mixing, and ultimately ring signatures hide the destination and origin of a transaction.
Eventually Monero upped the ante and implemented ring signature confidential transactions (RingCT), which uses multi-layered linkable spontaneous anonymous group signatures to hide the amount of a transaction. However, RingCT transactions required a large amount of data in order to ensure that the sum of inputs and outputs equaled zero, and bulletproofs were implemented to solve this problem. More about bulletproofs can be read in this paper. Essentially, bulletproofs helped reduce transaction size, lowering transaction fees on the Monero network, and also made it cheaper to create transactions with higher degrees of complexity.
Another critical piece of technology that makes Monero anonymous is stealth addresses. The sender creates a random one-time address for every transaction on behalf of the recipient. This allows a recipient to have just one published address but all of their incoming transactions go to different addresses on the blockchain. Thanks to stealth addresses, only the sender and receiver can determine where a payment was sent, while an outside observer cannot figure that out.
A Monero user can see incoming transactions with their view key, and anyone without the view key cannot see the incoming transactions to any particular address. This view key can be shared, so Monero can be considered optionally transparent, but the default is stealth.
When a Monero user decides to spend their coins, the Monero in a stealth address is broken down into its components and combined with other equivalent components via ring signatures. For example, if 42.42 Monero is sent, then the coins are split into 40 + 2 + 0.4 + 0.02 and combined with other 40’s, 2’s, 0.4’s, and 0.02’s somewhere else in the blockchain. This renders outputs fundamentally indistinguishable, and Unlike Bitcoin’s CoinJoin, no participation from anyone else is needed since already present outputs are being mixed.
Further, Monero tried to increase decentralization of its network by being incompatible with application specific integrated circuits (ASICs) via the CryptoNight protocol. This was originally accomplished by requiring a MB of internal memory, which was unacceptable to ASICs at the time. Also, Monero fit into the L3 cache of modern CPUs, while simultaneously being slower on GPUs, hindering the efficiency of GPU mining firms. That being said, it seems if a cryptocurrency is valuable enough then an ASIC is eventually created for it, and the Monero developers have been in a long term battle where they have to periodically change their mining protocol in order to prevent ASICs from overtaking the network. Monero is expected to release their new mining algorithm, RandomX, in October in order to stomp out the ASICs once again.
It seems the Monero developers are succeeding in their fight against ASIC centralization, and generally Monero is the most profitable cryptocurrency to mine on a personal computer while it is not that profitable with ASICs. This is important because it allows regular joes to mine Monero on their personal computer, decentralizing the network hash rate, as opposed to Bitcoin which is practically impossible to mine on a personal computer and most of the hash rate is in the hands of big mining farms.
Also, Monero uses dynamic block sizes, ensuring low transaction fees and fast confirmation times, as opposed to Bitcoin which often has a clogged mempool which can lead to long waits for confirmations and high transaction fees.
Additionally, Monero technically has an infinite supply since the minimum block reward is 0.6 XMR, and this will be reached in 2040. This ensures that miners will always have an incentive to secure the network long term, even if transaction fees are kept as low as possible. Compare this to Bitcoin where block rewards will approach zero, which may wreck the mining community if transaction fees are not high enough.
Thus, Monero’s ring signatures, RingCT, bulletproofs, and stealth addresses combine to obfuscate the sender, receiver, and amount of the transaction, and transactions are split into chunks that are indistinguishable from other transactions. This provides far more privacy than Bitcoin, since Bitcoin transactions are easily traced on a block explorer. It is clear that Monero is an excellent choice for those that want true anonymity when using cryptocurrency. That being said, it is important to use encrypted messaging as well when organizing a Monero transaction, since anonymity can be compromised if a message regarding a Monero transaction is intercepted.
submitted by turtlecane to Monero [link] [comments]

[Blockchain Classroom] Lesson 6:What is crypto punk?

Satoshi Nakamoto's Bitcoin whitepaper was first published on "crypto punk". In a narrower sense, "crypto punk" is an encrypted email system.

In 1992, Tim May, a senior scientist at Intel, launched the password punk mailing list organization. In 1993, Eric Hughes wrote a book called Crypto Punk Manifesto. This is also the first time that the term "cypherpunk" has appeared.

"Cryptopunk" has about 1,400 users. The topics discussed include mathematics, cryptography, computer technology, politics and philosophy, as well as personal issues. Early members include many IT elites, such as Assange, the founder of "WikiLeaks", Bram Cohen, author of BT Download, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the inventor of the World Wide Web, and Nick Szabo who proposed the concept of smart contracts, Sean Parker, one of the founders of Facebook.

Of course, it also includes Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin. According to statistics, before the birth of Bitcoin, as many as 10 kinds of cryptocurrencies and payment systems have been discussed and invented by punk members., but all failed.
submitted by BitRabbit_Team to u/BitRabbit_Team [link] [comments]

Vitalik's response to Tuur

I interlaced everything between Vitalik and Tuur to make it easier to read.
1/ People often ask me why I’m so “against” Ethereum. Why do I go out of my way to point out flaws or make analogies that put it in a bad light?
Intro
2/ First, ETH’s architecture & culture is opposite that of Bitcoin, and yet claims to offer same solutions: decentralization, immutability, SoV, asset issuance, smart contracts, …
Second, ETH is considered a crypto ‘blue chip’, thus colors perception of uninformed newcomers.
Agree! I personally find Ethereum culture far saner, though I am a bit biased :)
3/ I've followed Ethereum since 2014 & feel a responsibility to share my concerns. IMO contrary to its marketing, ETH is at best a science experiment. It’s now valued at $13B, which I think is still too high.
Not an argument
4/ I agree with Ethereum developer Vlad Zamfir that it’s not money, not safe, and not scalable. https://twitter.com/VladZamfistatus/838006311598030848
@VladZamfir Eth isn't money, so there is no monetary policy. There is currently fixed block issuance with an exponential difficulty increase (the bomb).
I'm pretty sure Vlad would say the exact same thing about Bitcoin
5/ To me the first red flag came up when in our weekly hangout we asked the ETH founders about to how they were going to scale the network. (We’re now 4.5 years later, and sharding is still a pipe dream.)
Ethereum's Joe Lubin in June 2014: "anticipate blockchain bloat—working on various sharding ideas". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJG9g0lCPU8&feature=youtu.be&t=36m41s
The core principles have been known for years, the core design for nearly a year, and details for months, with implementations on the way. So sharding is definitely not at the pipe dream stage at this point.
6/ Despite strong optimism that on-chain scaling of Ethereum was around the corner (just another engineering job), this promise hasn’t been delivered on to date.
Sure, sharding is not yet finished. Though more incremental stuff has been going well, eg. uncle rates are at near record lows despite very high chain usage.
7/ Recently, a team of reputable developers decided to peer review a widely anticipated Casper / sharding white paper, concluding that it does not live up to its own claims.
Unmerciful peer review of Vlad Zamfir & co's white paper to scale Ethereum: "the authors do NOT prove that the CBC Casper family of protocols is Byzantine fault tolerant in either practice or theory".
That review was off the mark in many ways, eg. see https://twitter.com/technocrypto/status/1071111404340604929, and by the way CBC is not even a prerequisite for Serenity
8/ On the 2nd layer front, devs are now trying to scale Ethereum via scale via state channels (ETH’s version of Lightning), but it is unclear whether main-chain issued ERC20 type tokens will be portable to this environment.
Umm... you can definitely use Raiden with arbitrary ERC20s. That's why the interface currently uses WETH (the ERC20-fied version of ether) and not ETH
9/ Compare this to how the Bitcoin Lightning Network project evolved:
elizabeth stark @starkness: For lnd: First public code released: January 2016 Alpha: January 2017 Beta: March 2018…
Ok
10/ Bitcoin’s Lightning Network is now live, and is growing at rapid clip.
Jameson Lopp @lopp: Lightning Network: January 2018 vs December 2018
Sure, though as far as I understand there's still a low probability of finding routes for nontrivial amounts, and there's capital lockup griefing vectors, and privacy issues.... FWIW I personally never thought lightning is unworkable, it's just a design that inherently runs into ten thousand small issues that will likely take a very long time to get past.
11/ In 2017, more Ethereum scaling buzz was created, this time the panacea was “Plasma”.
@TuurDemeester Buterin & Poon just published a new scaling proposal for Ethereum, "strongly complementary to base-layer PoS and sharding": plasma.io https://twitter.com/VitalikButerin/status/895467347502182401
Yay, Plasma!
12/ However, upon closer examination it was the recycling of some stale ideas, and the project went nowhere:
Peter Todd @peterktodd These ideas were all considered in the Treechains design process, and ultimately rejected as insecure.
Just because Peter Todd rejected something as "insecure" doesn't mean that it is. In general, the ethereum research community is quite convinced that the fundamental Plasma design is fine, and as far as I understand there are formal proofs on the way. The only insecurity that can't be avoided is mass exit vulns, and channel-based systems have those too.
13/ The elephant in the room is the transition to proof-of-stake, an “environmentally friendly” way to secure the chain. (If this was the plan all along, why create a proof-of-work chain first?)
@TuurDemeester "Changing from proof of work to proof of stake changes the economics of the system, all the rules change and it will impact everything."
Umm... we created a proof of work chain first because we did not have a satisfactory proof of stake algo initially?
14/ For the uninitiated, here’s a good write-up that highlights some of the fundamental design problems of proof-of-stake. Like I said, this is science experiment territory.
And here's a set of long arguments from me on why proof of stake is just fine: https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-FAQ. For a more philosophical piece, see https://medium.com/@VitalikButerin/a-proof-of-stake-design-philosophy-506585978d51
15/ Also check out this thread about how Proof of Stake blockchains require subjectivity (i.e. a trusted third party) to achieve consensus: https://forum.blockstack.org/t/pos-blockchains-require-subjectivity-to-reach-consensus/762?u=muneeb … and this thread on Bitcoin: https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/59t48m/proofofstake_question/
Yes, we know about weak subjectivity, see https://blog.ethereum.org/2014/11/25/proof-stake-learned-love-weak-subjectivity/. It's really not that bad, especially given that users need to update their clients once in a while anyway, oh and by the way even if the weak subjectivity assumption is broken an attacker still needs to gather up that pile of old keys making up 51% of the stake. And also to defend against that there's Universal Hash Time.
16/ Keep in mind that Proof of Stake (PoS) is not a new concept at all. Proof-of-Work actually was one of the big innovations that made Bitcoin possible, after PoS was deemed impractical because of censorship vulnerability.
@TuurDemeester TIL Proof-of-stake based private currency designs date at least back to 1998. https://medium.com/swlh/the-untold-history-of-bitcoin-enter-the-cypherpunks-f764dee962a1
Oh I definitely agree that proof of work was superior for bootstrap, and I liked it back then especially because it actually managed to be reasonably egalitarian around 2009-2012 before ASICs fully took over. But at the present time it doesn't really have that nice attribute.
17/ Over the years, this has become a pattern in Ethereum’s culture: recycling old ideas while not properly referring to past research and having poor peer review standards. This is not how science progresses.Tuur Demeester added,
[email protected] has been repeatedly accused of /criticised for not crediting prior art. Once again with plasma: https://twitter.com/DamelonBCWS/status/895643582278782976
I try to credit people whenever I can; half my blog and ethresear.ch posts have a "special thanks" section right at the top. Sometimes we end up re-inventing stuff, and sometimes we end up hearing about stuff, forgetting it, and later re-inventing it; that's life as an autodidact. And if you feel you've been unfairly not credited for something, always feel free to comment, people have done this and I've edited.
18/ One of my big concerns is that sophistry and marketing hype is a serious part of Ethereum’s success so far, and that overly inflated expectations have lead to an inflated market cap.
Ok, go on.
19/ Let’s illustrate with an example.
...
20/ A few days ago, I shared a critical tweet that made the argument that Ethereum’s value proposition is in essence utopian.
@TuurDemeester Ethereum-ism sounds a bit like Marxism to me:
  • What works today (PoW) is 'just a phase', the ideal & unproven future is to come: Proof-of-Stake.…
...
21/ I was very serious about my criticism. In fact, each one of the three points addressed what Vitalik Buterin has described as “unique value propositions of Ethereum proper”. https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/5jk3he/how_to_prevent_the_cannibalism_of_ethereum_into/dbgujr8/
...
22/ My first point, about Ethereum developers rejecting Proof-of-Work, has been illustrated many times over By Vitalik and others. (See earlier in this tweetstorm for more about how PoS is unproven.)
Vitalik Non-giver of Ether @VitalikButerin: I don't believe in proof of work!
See above for links as to why I think proof of stake is great.
23/ My second point addresses Ethereum’s romance with the vague and dangerous notion of ‘social consensus’, where disruptive hard-forks are used to ‘upgrade’ or ‘optimize’ the system, which inevitably leads to increased centralization. More here:
See my rebuttal to Tuur's rebuttal :)
24/ My third point addresses PoS’ promise of perpetual income to ETHizens. Vitalik is no stranger to embracing free lunch ideas, e.g. during his 2014 ETH announcement speech, where he described a coin with a 20% inflation tax as having “no cost” to users.
Yeah, I haven't really emphasized perpetual income to stakers as a selling point in years. I actually favor rewards being as low as possible while still being high enough for security.
25/ In his response to my tweet, Vitalik adopted my format to “play the same game” in criticizing Bitcoin. My criticisms weren't addressed, and his response was riddled with errors. Yet his followers gave it +1,000 upvotes!
Vitalik Non-giver of Ether @VitalikButerin: - What works today (L1) is just a phase, ideal and unproven future (usable L2) is to come - Utopian concept of progress: we're already so confident we're finished we ain't needin no hard forks…
Ok, let's hear about what the errors are...
26/ Rebuttal: - BTC layer 1 is not “just a phase”, it always will be its definitive bedrock for transaction settlement. - Soft forking digital protocols has been the norm for over 3 decades—hard-forks are the deviation! - Satoshi never suggested hyperbitcoinization as a goal.
Sure, but (i) the use of layer 1 for consumer payments is definitely, in bitcoin ideology, "just a phase", (ii) I don't think you can make analogies between consensus protocols and other kinds of protocols, and between soft forking consensus protocols and protocol changes in other protocols, that easily, (iii) plenty of people do believe that hyperbitcoinization as a goal. Oh by the way: https://twitter.com/tuurdemeestestatus/545993119599460353
27/ This kind of sophistry is exhausting and completely counter-productive, but it can be very convincing for an uninformed retail public.
Ok, go on.
28/ Let me share a few more inconvenient truths.
...
29/ In order to “guarantee” the transition to PoS’ utopia of perpetual income (staking coins earns interest), a “difficulty bomb” was embedded in the protocol, which supposedly would force miners to accept the transition.
The intended goal of the difficulty bomb was to prevent the protocol from ossifying, by ensuring that it has to hard fork eventually to reset the difficulty bomb, at which point the status quo bias in favor of not changing other protocol rules at the same time would be weaker. Though forcing a switch to PoS was definitely a key goal.
30/ Of course, nothing came of this, because anything in the ETH protocol can be hard-forked away. Another broken promise.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Looks like another Ethereum hard-fork is going to remove the "Ice Age" (difficulty increase meant to incentivize transition to PoS). https://www.cryptocompare.com/coins/guides/what-is-the-ethereum-ice-age/
How is that a broken promise? There was no social contract to only replace the difficulty-bombed protocol with a PoS chain.
31/ Another idea that was marketed heavily early on, was that with ETH you could program smart contract as easily as javascript applications.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: I forgot, but in 2014 Ethereum was quite literally described as "Javascript-on-the-blockchain"
Agree that was over-optimistic, though the part of the metaphor that's problematic is the "be done with complex apps in a couple hours" part, NOT the "general-purpose languages are great" part.
32/ This was criticized by P2P & OS developers as a reckless notion, given that every smart contracts is actually a “de novo cryptographic protocol”. In other words, it’s playing with fire. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1427885.msg14601127#msg14601127
See above
33/ The modular approach to Bitcoin seems to be much better at compartmentalizing risk, and thus reducing attack surfaces. I’ve written about modular scaling here...
To be fair, risk is reduced because Bitcoin does less.
34/ Another huge issue that Ethereum has is with scaling. By putting “everything on the blockchain” (which stores everything forever) and dubbing it “the world computer”, you are going to end up with a very slow and clogged up system.
Christopher Allen @ChristopherA: AWS cost: $0.000000066 for calc, Ethereum: $26.55. This is about 400 million times as expensive. World computer? https://hackernoon.com/ether-purchase-power-df40a38c5a2f
We never advocated "putting everything on the blockchain". The phrase "world computer" was never meant to be interpreted as "everyone's personal desktop", but rather as a common platform specifically for the parts of applications that require consensus on shared state. As evidence of this, notice how Whisper and Swarm were part of the vision as complements to Ethereum right from the start.
35/ By now the Ethereum bloat is so bad that cheaply running an individual node is practically impossible for a lay person. ETH developers are also imploring people to not deploy more smart contract apps on its blockchain.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: But... deploying d-apps on the "Ethereum Virtual Machine" is exactly what everyone was encouraged to do for the past 4 years. Looks like on-chain scaling wasn't such a great idea after all.
Umm.... I just spun up a node from scratch last week. On a consumer laptop.
36/ As a result, and despite the claims that running a node in “warp” mode is easy and as good as a full node, Ethereum is becoming increasingly centralized.
@TuurDemeester Finally a media article touching on the elephant in the room: Ethereum has become highly centralized. #infura https://www.coindesk.com/the-race-is-on-to-replace-ethereums-most-centralized-layeamp?__twitter_impression=true
See above
37/ Another hollow claim: in 2016, Ethereum was promoted as being censorship resistant…
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Pre TheDAO #Ethereum presentation: "uncensorable, code is law, bottom up". http://ow.ly/qW49302Pp92
Yes, the DAO fork did violate the notion of absolute immutability. However, the "forking the DAO will lead to doom and gloom" crowd was very wrong in one key way: it did NOT work as a precedent justifying all sorts of further state interventions. The community clearly drew a line in the sand by firmly rejecting EIP 867, and EIP 999 seems to now also be going nowhere. So it seems like there's some evidence that the social contract of "moderately but not infinitely strong immutability" actually can be stable.
38/ Yet later that year, after only 6% of ETH holders had cast a vote, ETH core devs decided to endorse a hard-fork that clawed back the funds from a smart contract that held 4.5% of all ETH in circulation. More here: ...
See above
39/ Other potential signs of centralization: Vitalik Buterin signing a deal with a Russian government institution, and ETH core developers experimenting with semi-closed meetings: https://twitter.com/coindesk/status/902892844955860993 …,
Hudson Jameson @hudsonjameson: The "semi-closed" Ethereum 1.x meeting from last Friday was an experiment. The All Core Dev meeting this Friday will be recorded as usual.
Suppose I were to tomorrow sign up to work directly for Kim Jong Un. What concretely would happen to the Ethereum protocol? I suspect very little; I am mostly involved in the Serenity work, and the other researchers have proven very capable of both pushing the spec forward even without me and catching any mistakes with my work. So I don't think any argument involving me applies. And we ended up deciding not to do more semi-closed meetings.
40/ Another red flag to me is the apparent lack of relevant expertise in the ETH development community. (Check the responses…)
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Often heard: "but Ethereum also has world class engineers working on the protocol". Please name names and relevant pedigree so I can follow and learn. https://twitter.com/TuurDemeestestatus/963029019447955461
I personally am confident in the talents of our core researchers, and our community of academic partners. Most recently the latter group includes people from Starkware, Stanford CBR, IC3, and other groups.
41/ For a while, Microsoft veteran Lucius Meredith was mentioned as playing an important role in ETH scaling, but now he is likely distracted by the failure of his ETH scaling company RChain. https://blog.ethereum.org/2015/12/24/understanding-serenity-part-i-abstraction/
I have no idea who described Lucius Meredith's work as being important for the Serenity roadmap.... oh and by the way, RChain is NOT an "Ethereum scaling company"
42/ Perhaps the recently added Gandalf of Ethereum, with his “Fellowship of Ethereum Magicians” [sic] can save the day, but imo that seems unlikely...
Honestly, I don't see why Ethereum Gandalf needs to save the day, because I don't see what is in danger and needs to be saved...
43/ This is becoming a long tweetstorm, so let’s wrap up with a few closing comments.
Yay!
44/ Do I have a conflict of interest? ETH is a publicly available asset with no real barriers to entry, so I could easily get a stake. Also, having met Vitalik & other ETH founders several times in 2013-’14, it would have been doable for me to become part of the in-crowd.
Agree there. And BTW I generally think financial conflicts of interest are somewhat overrated; social conflicts/tribal biases are the bigger problem much of the time. Though those two kinds of misalignments do frequently overlap and reinforce each other so they're difficult to fully disentangle.
45/ Actually, I was initially excited about Ethereum’s smart contract work - this was before one of its many pivots.
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: Ethereum is probably the first programming language I will teach myself - who wouldn't want the ability to program smart BTC contracts?
Ethereum was never about "smart BTC contracts"..... even "Ethereum as a Mastercoin-style meta-protocol" was intended to be built on top of Primecoin.
46/ Also, I have done my share of soul searching about whether I could be suffering from survivor’s bias.
@TuurDemeester I just published “I’m not worried about Bitcoin Unlimited, but I am losing sleep over Ethereum” https://medium.com/p/im-not-worried-about-bitcoin-unlimited-but-i-am-losing-sleep-over-ethereum-b5251c54e66d
Ok, good.
47/ Here’s why Ethereum is dubious to me: rather than creating an open source project & testnet to work on these interesting computer science problems, its founders instead did a securities offering, involving many thousands of clueless retail investors.
What do you mean "instead of"? We did create an open source project and testnet! Whether or not ETH is a security is a legal question; seems like SEC people agree it's not: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/14/bitcoin-and-ethereum-are-not-securities-but-some-cryptocurrencies-may-be-sec-official-says.html
48/ Investing in the Ethereum ICO was akin to buying shares in a startup that had “invent time travel” as part of its business plan. Imo it was a reckless security offering, and it set the tone for the terrible capital misallocation of the 2017 ICO boom.
Nothing in the ethereum roadmap requires time-travel-like technical advancements or anything remotely close to that. Proof: we basically have all the fundamental technical advancements we need at this point.
49/ In my view, Ethereum is the Yahoo of our day - an unscalable “blue chip” cryptocurrency:
Tuur Demeester @TuurDemeester: 1/ The DotCom bubble shows that the market isn't very good at valuing early stage technology. I'll use Google vs. Yahoo to illustrate.
Got it.
50/ I’ll close with a few words from Gregory Maxwell from 2016,: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1427885.msg14601127#msg14601127
See my rebuttal to Greg from 2 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/ethereum/comments/4g1bh6/greg_maxwells_critique_of_ethereum_blockchains/
submitted by shouldbdan to ethtrader [link] [comments]

RE: You should decide for yourself if managing your own keys is the right choice.

This is in response to this post
While I whole heartily agree with the headline, not so much with the post it-self.
you don’t need to manage your keys to participate in crypto responsibly. If you don’t trust yourself to secure your money, it’s fine to trust a 3rd party to help you. Coinbase or Binance are both better at securing money than the average crypto user.
Let’s not forget about the entire point of this crypto movement. Before crypto “currency” it was using crypto to secure privacy
A cypherpunk is any activist advocating widespread use of strong cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies as a route to social and political change. Originally communicating through the Cypherpunks electronic mailing list, informal groups aimed to achieve privacy and security through proactive use of cryptography. Cypherpunks have been engaged in an active movement since the late 1980s.
The currency aspect of "crypto" was with the advent of Bitcoin. It was a continuation of these cypherpunk principles (and the ones who created it). It wasn’t about smart contracts (which are awesome), trading, getting rich, lambos (despite my name), trading, HOLD’ing, using exchanges, etc. It’s about control. It’s to bank the un-banked, remove the middle man & the banks, give complete control to the individual.
That said, some of OP’s points are valid. Those points are summed up by knowing your limits and assessing your own risk in securing your funds. But relying on 3rd party’s on securing your funds is not “fine”. Following the basic principles of “crypto” does not make you a “anarcho-radicalism” – it’s the entire reason why crypto has value in the first place. I use Chase and Bank of America, they work great for me. I invest, control and use crypto for different reasons. If we look at Coinbase and Binance as trusted sources, it blurs the line from traditional finance and crypto.
There are many resources out there on how to properly create paper wallets and how to secure them, using hardware wallets, full nodes (Parity, Geth), and other means such as MEW. I encourage those new to the space to investigate these even if you’re not technical. You would at least be able to assess your options when handling your crypto.
Some of the posts I’ve made regarding security
For those who don't know the phrase, “Not your keys, not your Bitcoin”
submitted by OneSmallStepForLambo to ethtrader [link] [comments]

Burstcoin (BURST): A Dark Horse That Could Become A Major Cryptocurrency, The King of Proof of Capacity

Burstcoin (BURST): A Dark Horse That Could Become A Major Cryptocurrency, The King of Proof of Capacity
https://preview.redd.it/nt1qbc9cq4221.png?width=572&format=png&auto=webp&s=d867a4c98e7ab7e9c37c7dc23cc7fb251a5ecec7
https://cryptoiq.co/burstcoin-burst-a-dark-horse-that-could-become-a-major-cryptocurrency-the-king-of-proof-of-capacity/
Currently the cryptocurrency space is flooded with copycat coins and initial coin offering (ICO) tokens, most of which are moving steadily down the ranks on CoinMarketCap as the bear market of 2018 continues. This bear market is weeding out cryptocurrencies that have little long term potential, and cryptocurrencies that have strong communities and unique technology are rising to the top. Burstcoin (BURST) is one such cryptocurrency that is rising to the top, like cream in a glass of fresh milk. This is because the Burstcoin community is filled with diehard Cypherpunks, and BURST is the king of Proof of Capacity.
Back in the middle of October 2018 BURST was at #248 on CoinMarketCap, which was before the ‘nuclear’ bear market took effect, where the support level was broken due to the Bitcoin Cash hard fork, Bakkt delaying the launch of physical Bitcoin futures, and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) initiating its first civil enforcement penalties against ICOs. BURST has decreased in price like every other cryptocurrency, but is rising relative to other cryptocurrencies, and as of 3 December 2018 sits at #199 on CoinMarketCap with a market cap of USD 13.5 million.
This increase in the price of BURST relative to other cryptocurrencies is due to Burstcoin’s unique technology. Burstcoin is the king of Proof of Capacity, a mining algorithm that uses the hard drive, versus raw computational power like with Proof of Work, and is much more energy efficient than Proof of Work. Proof of Capacity works by writing cryptographic hashes to an allotted segment of a hard drive called a plot. This plot is then read during mining to find the correct cryptographic hash, and whoever finds the cryptographic hash the fastest receives the block reward. More hard drive space dedicated to the plot equals more cryptographic hashes available, making it easier to find an answer and earn the BURST block reward.
Currently 1TB generates 1-2 BURST per day, and even though this is only equivalent to about a penny, it is all profit since reading the plot file requires a negligible amount of energy, and BURST miners can use their computer for other activities without impediment. Compare this to Proof of Work, which slows down personal computers and costs more electricity than the cryptocurrency it mines. BURST is one of the only cryptocurrencies that can be profitably mined on personal computers.
Further, unlike with Proof of Work where specialized mining equipment is required like application specific integrated circuits (ASICs), anyone with a computer or even mobile phone can mine BURST, and if they decide to stop mining BURST they can simply delete their plot file and use the hard drive space for other things. This is unlike ASICs, which cannot be used for anything but mining, so if someone decides to stop mining they lose all the money invested into the ASIC.
The ease of mining and negligible energy usage has led to the formation of a strong BURST mining community, with over 200,000 TB securing the BURST network. This is equivalent to hundreds of thousands of personal computers. The expansive mining community gives BURST value, and some of these miners are blockchain developers, and they have been building a full suite of technology based on the Burstcoin blockchain.
CloudBurst immutably stores files directly on the Burstcoin blockchain, for a small 1-time fee. Real blockchain storage is a rarity in the cryptocurrency world. The file will be stored as long as the Burstcoin blockchain exists, which is the foreseeable future and beyond considering the expansive BURST mining community. Cloudburst would be useful if you lost your computer and all of your backups in a natural disaster like a hurricane, and is a more secure solution than cloud storage like Google. Also, the Burstcoin wallet can be used to easily issue cryptocurrencies that are based off of the Burstcoin blockchain, and there is a decentralized exchange built-in to the wallet to trade these crypto assets.
Cryptocurrency scalability is a problem even for major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum, but Burstcoin has tackled and solved this problem with the launch of the Dymaxion. The scalability of the Dymaxion is so powerful that it can handle all the non-cash transactions in the world. This is done via the utilization of tangle-based lightning networks on top of the Burstcoin blockchain. Transactions done via the Dymaxion are instant, with no fees and practically no energy expenditure. The Dymaxion gives Burstcoin the room to grow as much as it needs to.
When people look for the cryptocurrencies that will survive long term, it can be confusing due to the 2,000+ cryptocurrencies listed on CoinMarketCap. However, it is clear that cryptocurrencies with truly unique and useful technology, as well as strong communities will always be around and gain value long term relative to all the ICOs and copycats. Bitcoin is the king of SHA-256, Litecoin is the king of Scrypt, Ethereum is the king of blockchain-based dApps, Dogecoin is the king of the shibes on Reddit, Dash is the King of X11, Monero is the king of privacy coins, IOTA is the king of Directed Acyclic Graphs (DAGs), and Burstcoin is the king of Proof of Capacity. These kings of cryptocurrency will definitely be the winners and survivors when the fallout from the ICO apocalypse is over.
This is for educational purposes only and is not investment advice. We are not paid by BURST to write this article.
submitted by turtlecane to burstcoin [link] [comments]

They Biked, Ran and Swam Over 200 Miles Across Europe — All for Bitcoin

They Biked, Ran and Swam Over 200 Miles Across Europe — All for Bitcoin

https://preview.redd.it/ruflmh1c7cj31.png?width=860&format=png&auto=webp&s=ef27f9e1c0c2c8f66eebe7349be9c7b6ba5f75ab
A group of bitcoin enthusiasts just ran, biked and swam across Europe, all to promote the cryptocurrency they believe is leaving a powerful, positive mark on the world.
The first “Satoshi Freeathlon” officially finished this weekend, in which a group of seven bitcoin enthusiasts flexing their athletic abilities by journeying from Switzerland’s “Crypto Valley” in the tiny city of Zug, Switzerland, to Munich, Germany — a 221-mile adventure in total.
Running purely on bitcoin donations, the loose group dubbed “Team Satoshi” embarked on the quest in an attempt to raise positive awareness of bitcoin, which even 10 years after its release as open-source software, they believe gets too much negative press in the media.
The brainchild of Vitus Zeller, a German who started the project with a 10-day adventure of his own dubbed “Tour de Satoshi,” Zeller used bitcoin to pay for his hotel stays as he biked across the country.
He told CoinDesk:
“In mainstream perception, bitcoin is mostly the money of the dark web [for buying drugs], an energy over-consuming technology or a purely speculative asset.”
Zeller’s idea was to promote the values of bitcoin, including freedom of information and privacy, in a new way. “Bitcoin needs all kinds of voices that make people get curious about it,” he said.
Meanwhile, sports spark a more rosy image. “Sports is a deeply emotional topic for humans. For thousands of years, sportsmen have been admired. Emperors in ancient times, as well as rulers in modern times, have been using sports for political reasons,” Zeller contended.

‘Monster lake’ and beyond

Preparing for the “freeathlon” took quite a bit of time.
“We have now together many hundreds of hours of intense training for this event. I, for example, ran about each week a half marathon,” Zeller said, which is running a distance of 21 kilometers.
“The preparation meant truly a lot of going above and beyond my own personal boundaries,” he added.
But after months of training for each of the participants, they were ready for the journey. Three of the Team Satoshi crew (Zeller, as well as Moritz Biersack and Thomas Bette) slogged through all four days.
The rest of the group (including bitcoin podcast host Anita Posch, LocalBitcoins founder Jeremias Kangas, and Veronika Kuett) participated in one or more days of the event.

https://preview.redd.it/t0znv3wg7cj31.png?width=1000&format=png&auto=webp&s=e6341aab892521d1cf48c9b0f56697d432a6af16
Day 2 was swimming across a Bodonsee, a lake where Austria, Switzerland and Germany meet, which Zeller repeatedly called a “monster.” Measuring 12 kilometers in distance, it took the crew five hours to cross.
“Crossing this monster lake […] was a crazy experience. The waves, the streams and the fact that for the longest time we didn’t even see the other side until it cleared up,” he said.
For this, it wasn’t as simple as just doing the swim. Zeller said they “needed a doctors note as well as a cold water certification to prove that we know what we are doing and can endure this large distance swim.”
Right across the lake, the team started Day 3 by cycling 190 kilometers (about 118 miles) from Friedrichshafen to Starnberg, cities in Germany.
“With my 49 years of age the biggest challenge for me was keeping up with the young guys in the uphill sections. I think I managed that quite well, which is great,” said Anita Posch, bitcoin podcast host and one of the Satoshi Team.
The last day was a marathon, running and sweating all the way to Munich. They hit the pub for a welcome celebration once they crossed the finish line.

Cypherpunk sports

Zeller’s idea with all this is a bold one: to promote cypherpunk values, honoring those who were among the first to warn about how the internet could introduce new privacy concerns.
He refers specifically to “A Cypherpunk’s Manifesto” as a sort of guiding force — a short essay written by Eric Hughes in 1993, just a couple of years before the internet, tackling the topic of privacy.
“With Team Satoshi I had the idea to create a decentralized …] marketing instrument for bitcoin and the values it represents (freedom of information, freedom of opinion, privacy, freedom of transaction and human rights) which derive from the Cypherpunk Manifesto,” Zeller said.
It sounds like an odd idea to advocate for with sports, but Zeller makes a sincere argument for joining the two themes together.
“Sports has been a powerful political tool to manipulate the people,” he said, pointing to gladiators, who entertained Roman people with life-threatening fights. He even pointed to the Olympic games, which pits members of different nationalities against one another.
His idea is that anyone in the world can create their own Team Satoshi event: “[Anyone] can create [sports] challenges on their own,” he said, by updating the wiki website with the event.
As far-fetched as it sounds, Zeller wonders if this could morph into a profession someday: “Team Satoshi members can even try to make this a profession all over the world, if they can find sponsors or people out of the ecosystem that support them.”
He added:
“I believe Team Satoshi can potentially become a powerful movement as a soft marketing layer on top of bitcoin which connects bitcoin to the rest of the world and helps push it to mainstream adoption.”
Images via Team Satoshi
submitted by GTE_IO to u/GTE_IO [link] [comments]

Mapping Out Some Collateral Developments to Blockchain Technology

Mapping Out Some Collateral Developments to Blockchain Technology

https://preview.redd.it/rx58r3mci7a31.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=cdfc1136fac75421de5164239dd13b837ce86914
Guest Blogger: Andrew Rossow, Esq.
Every once and while, a new technology comes around that positively impacts innovation in several fields, even some outside of its initially intended sector. Blockchains, more specifically Bitcoin, is increasingly showing the signs of doing the very same.
From the expansion and further development of zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) to sharding, a seemingly golden age of cryptography, improved privacy, and permissionless financial products have branched out from Bitcoin’s meteoric rise.
ZKPs and a New Era of Privacy
Obviously central to the name “cryptocurrencies,” is the cryptography component that underpins Bitcoin’s transaction scheme and that of the many altcoins. Bitcoin is pseudonymous, which is becoming increasingly clear with the likes of blockchain forensics companies emerging left and right — attracting government support in the process.
However, that realization has led to some fascinating downstream effects in the development of better cryptography.
For example, research into a full-scale implementation of Schnorr Signatures, widely considered to be the best cryptographic signature primitive, recently materialized into a formal proposal for inclusion into Bitcoin. Dubbed, “MuSig,” Schnorr Signatures would confer better scalability and privacy to the legacy cryptocurrency.
But the innovation does not stop there.
Out of the demand for anonymity came altcoins like Monero and ZCash, predicated on novel cryptographic techniques for completely masking the identities of users and the amounts transferred.
For example, Monero, a “CryptoNote Coin,” leverages the power of ring signatures — a technique for obfuscating the originator of a signed digital message that has been around for years but never applied on the scale as it is with Monero.
Researchers even released a new implementation of formalized ring signatures for enhanced privacy, called OmniRing, designed to scale up privacy transactions without the feared “trusted setup.” Similarly, the production of “Bulletproofs” out of the famed Stanford Applied Cryptography Group enhanced the efficiency of privacy-preserving transactions, which have historically been data-heavy.
The concept builds on the notion of ZKPs, which have attracted the nickname of “crypto magic” for being unfathomably complex from a mathematical perspective while furnishing near-complete anonymity.
All of these developments, while built on technologies preceding Bitcoin, have accelerated over the last few years. Even banks, like JP Morgan, are joining in on the fun, building their own implementations of ZKPs for private transactions.
The snowballing innovation in the field of cryptography comes at an opportune time. Once hailed by cypherpunks as the last vestige of hope against a surveillance state, cryptography is a powerful shield against the repeated data malpractice of tech firms and government snooping.
What began as an era of openly sharing on social media platforms, has spun into a complicated mix of wanting social media but without corporations and governments having access to the data — privacy is now at a premium.
Distributed Computing — Scaling Decentralized Networks
Similar to the rise in cryptography over the last several years, there has been an explosion in distributed computing, particularly scaling decentralized networks. Emerging out of the need for public, permissionless blockchain networks (i.e., Ethereum) to scale better, a confluence of efficiency improvements and innovative technologies are seeking to power public blockchains with the same performance level as their centralized counterparts.
For example, the concept of sharding — horizontally partitioning a database — has gained prominence among several platforms, including Ethereum, as a way to enable groups (i.e., shards) of nodes process transactions in parallel. Ethereum’s foray into sharding is known as its Serenity upgrade, which is pending rollout following more extensive research and testing of the underlying concept.
Other projects, like Elrond, are pushing the envelope even farther. Elrond is working on a bleeding-edge form of state sharding known as “Adaptive State Sharding” in conjunction with their secure Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. Compared to the other forms of sharding, transaction and network, state sharding is the most technically complex and widely considered to have enormous potential in boosting the performance of public blockchains. Elrond implements all three in an ambitious take on scaling decentralized networks.
Take the case of Elrond, whose Testnet is already live, and has reached a peak performance capacity of nearly 12,000 transactions per second (TPS). For context, Ethereum’s current iteration process roughly 15 – 20 TPS.
Sharding, similar to the aforementioned privacy technologies, is not a new concept either. Sharding is prevalent for improving database efficiency and has been around for many years. It is only recently that it began garnering attention in crypto circles as a method to improve the scalability of decentralized networks.
The sheer scale of development of sharding applied to distributed networks is nothing short of impressive so far.
The convergence of technologies like sharding with new consensus designs, like PoS, is sure to usher in a new generation of blockchains, supplemented by better privacy and scalability. It is not surprising that such developments have flown under the radar, as they are highly esoteric, but their downstream advantages for mainstream consumers and app users are promising.
Bitcoin may have birthed a spectacular invention of money, but its collateral effects in the form of distributed computing and cryptography may come to have a more dynamic impact on society than a P2P digital currency.
Andrew L. Rossow is a millennial attorney, law professor, entrepreneur, writer, and speaker on privacy, cybersecurity, A.I., AVR, blockchain, and digital monies. He has written for many outlets, most notably Forbes and HuffPost
Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn
submitted by bolyus21 to CryptoCurrencyTrading [link] [comments]

Burstcoin (BURST) PoCC Resigns after Scandal; Community Optimistic It Can Continue Without PoCC

Burstcoin (BURST) PoCC Resigns after Scandal; Community Optimistic It Can Continue Without PoCC

https://preview.redd.it/ds0whak8l9821.png?width=690&format=png&auto=webp&s=38eaebf873273639f1d228c921c2e9f2c3cdfdf0
https://cryptoiq.co/burstcoin-burst-pocc-resigns-after-scandal-community-optimistic-it-can-continue/
The Burstcoin (BURST) community was rocked last week by a scandal involving the Proof of Capacity Consortium (PoCC), a group of semi-official Burstcoin developers. The PoCC commandeered miner’s hard drives without consent in order to merge mine Bitcoin HD (BHD).
The PoCC offered no compensation and sold all of the BHD they mined for profit, instead of giving the BHD to the Burstcoin miners who earned it. That despite the fact that merge mining BHD led to increased electricity costs since Bitcoin HD is less efficient than Burstcoin.
Further, the PoCC merge mined BHD to attack Bitcoin HD, diverting most of the mining rewards from actual BHD miners and dumping BHD to crash the market. An anonymous Bitcoin HD miner has already threatened that the BHD team will retaliate against BURST with a 51 percent attack.
A community backlash ensued after this scandal came to light, and now the PoCC is resigning according to its official statement:
We always said we owe this community nothing and some of us even said they doubt there is such a thing as “the community. There is a more or less loosely coupled bunch of (self-)interest groups, so when we talk about community, we, in fact, mean “community. There always has been a very unhealthy expectation attitude within the community. You give us stuff. We gladly take it and may even utter a cheerio or two.” There also is a severe misconception about the role of the PoCC. We are not just developers. We are a team of highly skilled individuals with a lot of experience. Statements we heard in the past days and the perceived sentiment made us re-evaluate our position and ambition within the Burst ecosystem. While we absolutely believe we could have led Burst to the top 10, we have come to the conclusion that such an endeavor needs undeviating coherence of core team and a determined goal-oriented community. We also came to the conclusion, that there is not a healthy culture of give and take between core team and community and what’s worse, that it is unlikely to establish such. We do not feel to have been in any sort of power, certainly nothing we would need to cling to. The past days made our decision to leave Burst easy. There will be no power struggles, fights or anything warmonger-ish we have heard in the past days. It’s all yours – good riddance!
The PoCC resignation statement made no comment regarding the scandal that caused this resignation in the first place. The PoCC says it is halting development but will keep running critical infrastructure like the block explorer, the semi-official Burstcoin news page, and the Burstcoin wiki, but may shut them down in the future. The PoCC states that it will sell this critical infrastructure at “fair cost covering terms,” and not simply give the infrastructure over to people willing to run it.
Further, PoCC says it now has the right to dump its coins, whereas before it was required to hold the coins.
The PoCC members have agreed to waive the requirement to hold BURST and can freely decide what to do with their coins. Some have decided to sell and to do so in a fair manner. Their hodl accounts are being transferred to the exchanges shortly after the publication of this letter.
The price of BURST has already crashed 20 percent today, following this announcement, likely a combination of panic selling and PoCC dumping BURST. The coins that PoCC is referring to are likely from the 1.5 percent fee on their pool, which was previously used as a development fund.
This entire saga shows the danger of giving too much power to a centralized development team. PoCC abused its power to make a profit by merge mining Bitcoin HD, and now it is possibly holding critical infrastructure hostage and dumping all of the BURST that was earmarked for development. Further, the PoCC is leaving the Burstcoin community with a messy situation in which Bitcoin HD’s team may attack the Burstcoin blockchain.
Hope For A Future Without The PoCC
An anonymous Burstcoin cypherpunk said, “Burstcoin was good without the PoCC and will survive with or without them. Anyone interested in working on BURST should reach out to the community and try to get involved in some of the work. Burstcoin is not dead. Burstcoin was around 3 years before the PoCC, it was around for 1 year with the PoCC. The PoCC did some stuff but not everything. There’s a lot of broken stuff the PoCC has not released. There’s a lot of stuff that isn’t finished, numerous things that they got people excited about but did not deliver. They walked away. Burstcoin will live, it just will not live in the way the PoCC wants. The development now must become community driven rather than PoCC driven”.
Indeed, Burstcoin (BURST) is the king of Proof of Capacity (PoC), a unique mining algorithm that is highly energy efficient, making BURST profitable to mine on any personal computer, versus Proof of Work which is not profitable unless Application-Specific Integrated Circuits (ASICs) are used.
In the long run, Burstcoin (BURST) will likely be quite successful since it’s one of the only unique cryptocurrencies. Further, BURST has an expansive community full of cypherpunks, and the community is quite capable of continuing development.
submitted by turtlecane to burstcoin [link] [comments]

Encryption is No Longer an Option - Ways to Restore Your Natural Right to Privacy

Encryption is No Longer an Option
“If the State’s going to move against you, it’s going to move against you. Now, that doesn’t mean you need to be reckless of course. I’m awful careful you guys, and even my degree of care and control ultimately won’t be enough if they get mad enough. There will always be something…I’ve done what I hope is the best any man can do. So…I hope when they finally do get me, it’s obvious that they just made it up. I don’t go out of my way to make it easy.” – Cody Wilson
For all Anarchists our love for freedom unites us and guides us. I recently had a conversation with a mutual friend that Cody and I have in common and he stated something very insightful:
CryptoAnarchy is like the Lord of the Rings. You have to cooperate with people that you don’t know where they are or what they’re up to. That is, you just know that we are all figuring out at the same time on how to take down Sauron.
Anarchy is guided by the natural instinct for self-preservation. You can trust that others are also actively working in keeping us all free.
For us all to move into more synergistic cooperation we need more motivation. Nothing is more motivating than our movement away from an impending harmful evil. The persecution that Cody Wilson has gone through since he started his activism is testament to the evil that awaits the entire world if we do not fight against the impending digital global prison. Just note how easy it was to find Cody. Government indoctrinated brownshirts and surveillance are everywhere.
As Jeff recently said in London, “CryptoAnarchy is about the cryptography.” Cryptocurrency is only possible due to the privacy offered by cryptography. A true cryptocurrency is completely fungible, anonymous, and private. Blockchains without on-chain privacy set by default, are dangerous and offer nothing other than accurate surveillance.
That is, the moment you destroy a coin’s fungibility you corrupt its incentive structure. This is because you would then have two classes of the same coin within a transparent blockchain; these are coins that are “tainted” or “untainted” according to government. This differentiation created by blockchain surveillance leads “tainted” coins to be priced differently from “untainted” coins. Once this happens you destroy the functionality of a currency as a medium of exchange.
Imagine the headache of retailers in having to tell clients that they only accept “untainted” bitcoins. The result of not having a fungible medium of exchange is that you destroy the incentive structure of the network effect of a coin. You simply end up with a useless and unwanted network where value is supposed to be exchanged. If the units within the medium of exchange do not themselves contain the same value in the market, the utility of the network effect is destroyed.
The economic ramifications of non-fungible SurveillanceCoins are so bad that they make fiat currencies of central banks look good. In spite of their centralized proof of government violence, fiat currencies are more fungible and private than a coin based on a transparent blockchain.
For much time within crypto we would call the majority of blockchains as “pseudo-anonymous” because we knew the importance of fungibility. At that time blockchain analysis had not caught up to our technology. Now companies like Elliptic and Chainalysis have made the vast majority of blockchains in the market transparent.
Sadly, most blockchain communities have not upgraded their privacy to be on chain by default- making them transparent. However, some more intelligent communities- like Monero- are at the same time growing because they understand the importance of fungibility.
Please understand that we at TDV are ahead of the pack in understanding where all of this is going. The vast majority of people won’t tell you these harsh truths about the Blockchain space, but it is our moral imperative to inform you as best as possible.
As time goes on, we will continue to champion actual fungible CryptoCurrencies and we will continue to make clear distinctions between a SurveillanceCoin and an actual CryptoCurrency.
It is important that we take a step back from CryptoCurrencies and focus on just cryptography. You can never be too careful. Throughout our groups we have had various requests as to how to better use different wallets.
Yes, we will cover all of that in our upcoming surprise for our community, but what is most important is that you protect yourself at the network layer, your identity, and your communication.
CryptoAnarchy began way before Bitcoin. If you want to know what will be happening to CryptoCurrencies and CryptoAnarchy in the near future, you need to read Timothy C. May’s 1992 prophetic Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.
On reading this, you cannot afford to be idle regarding your privacy. This is not the time for you to easily give up what is most personal about you; your thoughts and identity. Your privacy is sacred. You need to protect your privacy as much as possible at all times. Don’t give into the defeatist notions of future technology being capable of deanonymizing any cryptography you currently use. Your goal is to be private right now in the present moment.
You are up against a global digital tyranny- that is already here!
...Cazes was not a US citizen and the Alphabay servers and Cazes were not caught on US soil. Just because crimes involving narcotic deals took place in America, weirdly enough, the US seemingly has the right above anyone to seize Cazes’ property, and charge him and his accomplices in US trials...
Use Secure Hardware That Protects You
Be paranoid. Stay paranoid. The more paranoid you are the better. Currently the five eyes are moving to strip away all of your privacy. They are on the direct path to force all companies to hand over back doors to software and hardware encryption.
This is a new breach on individual rights. The backdoors in hardware have existed since the 90’s via Trusted Computing and Digital Rights Management (DRM). The difference is that now companies will be fined and forced by governments (all governments) to open up backdoors for the surveillance of all- in both software and hardware. Australia is leading the charge since they are the only ones within the five eyes without a Bill of Rights.
If you really want to be secure, then you need to start with your hardware. Almost all laptops and hardware chips are engineered with unsafe software. These chips can transmit voice, your networking, pictures, and even video signals. Many of these chips are used to install spyware, malware and viruses.
The market has provided us with two easy plug-and-play hardware solutions.
Purism is a CryptoAnarchist company dedicated in offering us the safest computers in the market. Purism’s line of Librem Laptops is manufactured with software and hardware built from the ground up, where you can be at ease knowing there are no back doors built within it. They work with hardware component suppliers and the Free software community in making hardware that respects and protects your security. Every chip is individually selected with emphasis on respecting freedom. (Purism Librem laptops have built in Kill-Switches for your microphone/camera and wireless/Bluetooth)
All of the necessary components that you would have to bundle up together- by yourself- from a community vetted place like Prism-Break are already installed and ready to go within Librem laptops. Even if you were to install all of the necessary open-source encrypted alternatives, you still would not be able to 100% trust your current computer’s hardware.
Purism Librem laptops come with their own PureOS (operating system). Purism also offers compatibility with Qubes OS in a flash-drive (similar to Tails) to give you even another layer of protection on top of PureOS. Qubes OS is what Edward Snowden uses. PureOs is a derivative of Debian GNU/Linux. Qubes is free and open-source software (FOSS).
Purism is currently having a pre-sale for their first phone the Librem 5.
Another popular safe hardware computer market alternative is ORWL. ORWL is a desktop PC. ORWL comes with a physical encryption key that looks like a keychain. If anyone ever tries to physically tamper with the ORWL computer, sensors will automatically detect the intrusion and erase everything. ORWL comes with the operating system options of Qubes OS, Ubuntu, or Windows.
ORWL does not receive payment for their products in Crypto. Purism on the other hand accepts payment in BitcoinCore, BitcoinCash, Litecoin, Ethereum, Decred, Dogecoin, and Monero.
ORWL is a good alternative for more computer savvy people. If you are not the most competent person with computers, Purism is the way to go. With Purism everything is ready to go.
Once you get good hardware don’t use this new computer for anything other than crypto stuff. That is, don’t use it with anything that requires your slave identity. Don’t access social media with your name, don’t access bank accounts, don’t access crypto exchanges, don’t access old email accounts, definitely don’t access anything that requires KYC and AML, and don’t access any identifying log-in that is related to any of your previous internet identities. Create new identities from scratch for this new computer.
Watch this video and learn about the basics on operational security (OPSEC). Take everything written here, and spoken at the conference in the video above, as barely the preliminary basic requirements of OPSEC. You should definitely continue your own research upon getting your new secure hardware computer.
(It would be best if you purchased this computer using crypto- Monero preferably- and have it mailed to a mailing address not associated with any of your addresses; think along the lines of JJ Luna).
Encrypt Your Communication
“This generation being born now... is the last free generation.You are born and either immediately or within say a year you are known globally. Your identity in one form or another –coming as a result of your idiotic parents plastering your name and photos all over Facebook or as a result of insurance applications or passport applications– is known to all major world powers.” – Julian Assange
The vast majority of our community uses Facebook. Unfortunately its network effect is something we all rely on to some degree. Fortunately for us a friend of our community created FaceMask. Through FaceMask we can still use Facebook in complete privacy- away from Zuckerberg's prying eyes. In the near future we will implement FaceMask into our TDV groups as optional privacy for our posts. We will provide our subscribers with the keys necessary to encrypt and decrypt the messages and posts. Again, this is optional. For now please go to the link above and familiarize yourself with Facemask and its technology.
Don’t use Google. If you are using Google start transitioning out of it. If you are using Gmail, start moving towards encrypted services like ProtonMail or TutaNota. They both offer a free option, try them both out and choose your favorite. Use two factor authentication on everything that requires you to log-in that allows for the use of two factor authentication. Most people use Google Authenticator and Authy. I personally prefer the open source options of FreeOTP & andOTP. Use the one that you find best suited for you. Using one is paramount for security nowadays.
If you are one that uses Google Docs with your team, move instead to CryptPad. The more you use CryptPad the more addicting it becomes; your collaborated work is encrypted and private. You no longer will have to worry about knowing that Google is capturing all of your collaborated work. You can also start using CryptPad for free.
If you are using Skype for conference calls, switch to Jitsi. Jitsi is even easier to use than Skype. If you use their MeetJitsi feature you can just access the encrypted conferencing via any browser by agreeing with your other party on the same predetermined passphrase.
Don’t use regular text messaging. Rather, use Signal, Wickr, Keybase, or Telegram.
Use a VPN
A VPN (virtual private network) encrypts all of your traffic via a private network of servers scattered throughout the world. This process anonymizes your IP address. Make sure you don’t use your identity when using a VPN- that would just give away your identity as being connected with the VPN servers you are using.
Many VPN providers register your activity and can hand it over to government if they so demand it. They break their promises to their clients all the time. Let’s minimize risk by staying away from the most draconian of jurisdictions.
To lessen this issue, do not ever use a VPN that is based out of any of the 5 eyes:
-United Kingdom
-United States
-Australia
-Canada
-New Zealand
Furthermore, avoid VPNs based out of the following nine countries, that combined with the first 5 make up the 14 eyes:
-Denmark
-France
-The Netherlands
-Norway
-Germany
-Belgium
-Italy
-Spain
-Sweden
No VPN is a complete safeguard. In spite of this, it is still best to use one. We recommend you ONLY use it (turn it on) when doing crypto-related things and only crypto-related things on your regular computer. For your new encrypted hardware computer have it on at all times. If you use it to access an actual bank account, or another personal account (including crypto accounts that require your personal information; read coinbase, or any other exchange) — then, again, the use of the VPN use becomes trite.
Here are six VPN options outside of the 14 eyes that we recommend you research further and use at your own discretion:
NordVPN (Panama)
CyberGhost (Romania)
HideMe (Malaysia)
Astrill (Seychelles)
TrustZone (Seychelles)
iVPN (Gibralter)
Like all things in the market now, some VPNs take Crypto as payment—others do not. It is best if you bought your VPN with crypto not not your credit card, debit card, or paypal.
TOR (The Onion Router)
The Onion Router is software that you use as a browser. It protects you by bouncing your communications around a distributed network- throughout the world- of relays runned by volunteers. This prevents evesdroppers from learning your IP address, spying on you, and disclosing your physical location. TOR also allows you to access sites that are blocked.
You can use TOR and a VPN simultaneously. If you are new to all of this, it is best that you just learn how to use the features of your new computer coupled with your preferred VPN. The use of TOR is a little more complicated and you will have to configure it according the specifications of your preferred VPN. As you begin this process, as long as you are using your VPN correctly you should be fine.
Fincen and crypto-exchanges
ShapeShift is now stuck having to require its users to deanonymize their transactions in order to meet KYC and AML requirements; it pretty clear that they got ShapeShift under the Bank Secrecy Act. Stay away from Shapeshift (sorry @erikvorhees).
“Very disappointed that @ShapeShift_io is implementing KYC. Just goes to show that any centralized entity will be pushed in that direction, which is why LN, atomic swaps and Decentralized Exchanges are the only way to resist a surveillance economics.” - Andreas Antonopoulos
As the news of ShapeShift broke out, the market was quick to answer with alternatives. Among the private centric alternatives to ShapeShift we find Godex, ChangeHero, XMR.TO, and Bisq.
ChangeHero and Godex are pretty much the same business concept as ShapeShift. The only difference is that they do not require you to become transparent. XMR.TO allows you to make BTC payments by using Monero.
That is, by using Monero together with XMR.TO you can pay any BTC address in the world while protecting your privacy.
Bisq is the Best Option
The most important to focus on is Bisq. Bisq is a complete decentralized exchange. Bisq is instantly accessible- there is no need for registration or approval from a central authority. The system is decentralized peer-to-peer and trading cannot be stopped or censored.
Bisq is safe. Unlike MtGox and the rest of centralized exchanges, Bisq never holds your funds. Bisq provides a system of decentralized arbitration with security deposits that protect traders. The privacy is set where no one except trading partners exchange personal identifying information. All personal data is stored locally.
All communication on Bisq is end-to-end encrypted routed over Tor. Upon downloading and running Bisq TOR runs on Bisq automatically. Every aspect of the development of Bisq is open source.
Bisq is easy to use. If you are accustomed to centralized exchanges, you might find Bisq a little different. If you want anonymity and privacy, this is the best crypto exchange we have. Tell your friends about Bisq. Just download Bisq and take it for a test drive, you will feel fresh freedom of entering into peaceful voluntary exchange with your fellow man. Do it, it’s good for the soul.
On Cody
I would like to personally thank all of our subscribers for generously donating to Defense Distributed on our last issue. At the moment of us putting out our last newsletter, DefDist had raised less than 100k USD. After our Newsletter got out, his donations went past 300k USD.
Thank you very much for helping out our friends in their continual fight for freedom!
Please pray for Cody, his friends, and his family.
I once asked Cody what his background was- because idk his mannerisms have always been interesting to me. He answered; “I am Romani- I am a Gypsy.”
Thank you for helping out our Gypsy friend and his band of rebels! They will very much be using your generous donations now that things got much more serious.
If you haven’t donated, please consider donating. Blessings!
By Rafael LaVerde
Excerpt taken from The Dollar Vigilante September 2018 Issue
https://dollarvigilante.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/TDV-September-2018-Issue.pdf
submitted by 2012ronpaul2012 to C_S_T [link] [comments]

Mapping Out Some Collateral Developments to Blockchain Technology

Mapping Out Some Collateral Developments to Blockchain Technology

https://preview.redd.it/jxfwqo5sou931.png?width=1024&format=png&auto=webp&s=25f025b3f030e8fefc628bf536f600f2c9689c88
Guest Blogger: Andrew Rossow, Esq.
Every once and while, a new technology comes around that positively impacts innovation in several fields, even some outside of its initially intended sector. Blockchains, more specifically Bitcoin, is increasingly showing the signs of doing the very same.
From the expansion and further development of zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) to sharding, a seemingly golden age of cryptography, improved privacy, and permissionless financial products have branched out from Bitcoin’s meteoric rise.

ZKPs and a New Era of Privacy

Obviously central to the name “cryptocurrencies,” is the cryptography component that underpins Bitcoin’s transaction scheme and that of the many altcoins. Bitcoin is pseudonymous, which is becoming increasingly clear with the likes of blockchain forensics companies emerging left and right — attracting government support in the process.
However, that realization has led to some fascinating downstream effects in the development of better cryptography.
For example, research into a full-scale implementation of Schnorr Signatures, widely considered to be the best cryptographic signature primitive, recently materialized into a formal proposal for inclusion into Bitcoin. Dubbed, “MuSig,” Schnorr Signatures would confer better scalability and privacy to the legacy cryptocurrency.
But the innovation does not stop there.
Out of the demand for anonymity came altcoins like Monero and ZCash, predicated on novel cryptographic techniques for completely masking the identities of users and the amounts transferred.
For example, Monero, a “CryptoNote Coin,” leverages the power of ring signatures — a technique for obfuscating the originator of a signed digital message that has been around for years but never applied on the scale as it is with Monero.
Researchers even released a new implementation of formalized ring signatures for enhanced privacy, called OmniRing, designed to scale up privacy transactions without the feared “trusted setup.” Similarly, the production of “Bulletproofs” out of the famed Stanford Applied Cryptography Group enhanced the efficiency of privacy-preserving transactions, which have historically been data-heavy.
The concept builds on the notion of ZKPs, which have attracted the nickname of “crypto magic” for being unfathomably complex from a mathematical perspective while furnishing near-complete anonymity.
All of these developments, while built on technologies preceding Bitcoin, have accelerated over the last few years. Even banks, like JP Morgan, are joining in on the fun, building their own implementations of ZKPs for private transactions.
The snowballing innovation in the field of cryptography comes at an opportune time. Once hailed by cypherpunks as the last vestige of hope against a surveillance state, cryptography is a powerful shield against the repeated data malpractice of tech firms and government snooping.
What began as an era of openly sharing on social media platforms, has spun into a complicated mix of wanting social media but without corporations and governments having access to the data — privacy is now at a premium.

Distributed Computing — Scaling Decentralized Networks

Similar to the rise in cryptography over the last several years, there has been an explosion in distributed computing, particularly scaling decentralized networks. Emerging out of the need for public, permissionless blockchain networks (i.e., Ethereum) to scale better, a confluence of efficiency improvements and innovative technologies are seeking to power public blockchains with the same performance level as their centralized counterparts.
For example, the concept of sharding — horizontally partitioning a database — has gained prominence among several platforms, including Ethereum, as a way to enable groups (i.e., shards) of nodes process transactions in parallel. Ethereum’s foray into sharding is known as its Serenity upgrade, which is pending rollout following more extensive research and testing of the underlying concept.
Other projects, like Elrond, are pushing the envelope even farther. Elrond is working on a bleeding-edge form of state sharding known as “Adaptive State Sharding” in conjunction with their secure Proof-of-Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism. Compared to the other forms of sharding, transaction and network, state sharding is the most technically complex and widely considered to have enormous potential in boosting the performance of public blockchains. Elrond implements all three in an ambitious take on scaling decentralized networks.
Take the case of Elrond, whose Testnet is already live, and has reached a peak performance capacity of nearly 12,000 transactions per second (TPS). For context, Ethereum’s current iteration process roughly 15 – 20 TPS.
Sharding, similar to the aforementioned privacy technologies, is not a new concept either. Sharding is prevalent for improving database efficiency and has been around for many years. It is only recently that it began garnering attention in crypto circles as a method to improve the scalability of decentralized networks.
The sheer scale of development of sharding applied to distributed networks is nothing short of impressive so far.
The convergence of technologies like sharding with new consensus designs, like PoS, is sure to usher in a new generation of blockchains, supplemented by better privacy and scalability. It is not surprising that such developments have flown under the radar, as they are highly esoteric, but their downstream advantages for mainstream consumers and app users are promising.
Bitcoin may have birthed a spectacular invention of money, but its collateral effects in the form of distributed computing and cryptography may come to have a more dynamic impact on society than a P2P digital currency.
Andrew L. Rossow is a millennial attorney, law professor, entrepreneur, writer, and speaker on privacy, cybersecurity, A.I., AVR, blockchain, and digital monies. He has written for many outlets, most notably Forbes and HuffPost
Connect with Andrew on LinkedIn
submitted by bolyus21 to CryptoCurrencies [link] [comments]

Encryption is No Longer an Option - Ways to Restore Your Natural Right to Privacy

Encryption is No Longer an Option
“If the State’s going to move against you, it’s going to move against you. Now, that doesn’t mean you need to be reckless of course. I’m awful careful you guys, and even my degree of care and control ultimately won’t be enough if they get mad enough. There will always be something…I’ve done what I hope is the best any man can do. So…I hope when they finally do get me, it’s obvious that they just made it up. I don’t go out of my way to make it easy.” – Cody Wilson
For all Anarchists our love for freedom unites us and guides us. I recently had a conversation with a mutual friend that Cody and I have in common and he stated something very insightful:
CryptoAnarchy is like the Lord of the Rings. You have to cooperate with people that you don’t know where they are or what they’re up to. That is, you just know that we are all figuring out at the same time on how to take down Sauron.
Anarchy is guided by the natural instinct for self-preservation. You can trust that others are also actively working in keeping us all free.
For us all to move into more synergistic cooperation we need more motivation. Nothing is more motivating than our movement away from an impending harmful evil. The persecution that Cody Wilson has gone through since he started his activism is testament to the evil that awaits the entire world if we do not fight against the impending digital global prison. Just note how easy it was to find Cody. Government indoctrinated brownshirts and surveillance are everywhere.
As Jeff recently said in London, “CryptoAnarchy is about the cryptography.” Cryptocurrency is only possible due to the privacy offered by cryptography. A true cryptocurrency is completely fungible, anonymous, and private. Blockchains without on-chain privacy set by default, are dangerous and offer nothing other than accurate surveillance.
That is, the moment you destroy a coin’s fungibility you corrupt its incentive structure. This is because you would then have two classes of the same coin within a transparent blockchain; these are coins that are “tainted” or “untainted” according to government. This differentiation created by blockchain surveillance leads “tainted” coins to be priced differently from “untainted” coins. Once this happens you destroy the functionality of a currency as a medium of exchange.
Imagine the headache of retailers in having to tell clients that they only accept “untainted” bitcoins. The result of not having a fungible medium of exchange is that you destroy the incentive structure of the network effect of a coin. You simply end up with a useless and unwanted network where value is supposed to be exchanged. If the units within the medium of exchange do not themselves contain the same value in the market, the utility of the network effect is destroyed.
The economic ramifications of non-fungible SurveillanceCoins are so bad that they make fiat currencies of central banks look good. In spite of their centralized proof of government violence, fiat currencies are more fungible and private than a coin based on a transparent blockchain.
For much time within crypto we would call the majority of blockchains as “pseudo-anonymous” because we knew the importance of fungibility. At that time blockchain analysis had not caught up to our technology. Now companies like Elliptic and Chainalysis have made the vast majority of blockchains in the market transparent.
Sadly, most blockchain communities have not upgraded their privacy to be on chain by default- making them transparent. However, some more intelligent communities- like Monero- are at the same time growing because they understand the importance of fungibility.
Please understand that we at TDV are ahead of the pack in understanding where all of this is going. The vast majority of people won’t tell you these harsh truths about the Blockchain space, but it is our moral imperative to inform you as best as possible.
As time goes on, we will continue to champion actual fungible CryptoCurrencies and we will continue to make clear distinctions between a SurveillanceCoin and an actual CryptoCurrency.
It is important that we take a step back from CryptoCurrencies and focus on just cryptography. You can never be too careful. Throughout our groups we have had various requests as to how to better use different wallets.
Yes, we will cover all of that in our upcoming surprise for our community, but what is most important is that you protect yourself at the network layer, your identity, and your communication.
CryptoAnarchy began way before Bitcoin. If you want to know what will be happening to CryptoCurrencies and CryptoAnarchy in the near future, you need to read Timothy C. May’s 1992 prophetic Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.
On reading this, you cannot afford to be idle regarding your privacy. This is not the time for you to easily give up what is most personal about you; your thoughts and identity. Your privacy is sacred. You need to protect your privacy as much as possible at all times. Don’t give into the defeatist notions of future technology being capable of deanonymizing any cryptography you currently use. Your goal is to be private right now in the present moment.
You are up against a global digital tyranny- that is already here!
...Cazes was not a US citizen and the Alphabay servers and Cazes were not caught on US soil. Just because crimes involving narcotic deals took place in America, weirdly enough, the US seemingly has the right above anyone to seize Cazes’ property, and charge him and his accomplices in US trials...
Use Secure Hardware That Protects You
Be paranoid. Stay paranoid. The more paranoid you are the better. Currently the five eyes are moving to strip away all of your privacy. They are on the direct path to force all companies to hand over back doors to software and hardware encryption.
This is a new breach on individual rights. The backdoors in hardware have existed since the 90’s via Trusted Computing and Digital Rights Management (DRM). The difference is that now companies will be fined and forced by governments (all governments) to open up backdoors for the surveillance of all- in both software and hardware. Australia is leading the charge since they are the only ones within the five eyes without a Bill of Rights.
If you really want to be secure, then you need to start with your hardware. Almost all laptops and hardware chips are engineered with unsafe software. These chips can transmit voice, your networking, pictures, and even video signals. Many of these chips are used to install spyware, malware and viruses.
The market has provided us with two easy plug-and-play hardware solutions.
Purism is a CryptoAnarchist company dedicated in offering us the safest computers in the market. Purism’s line of Librem Laptops is manufactured with software and hardware built from the ground up, where you can be at ease knowing there are no back doors built within it. They work with hardware component suppliers and the Free software community in making hardware that respects and protects your security. Every chip is individually selected with emphasis on respecting freedom. (Purism Librem laptops have built in Kill-Switches for your microphone/camera and wireless/Bluetooth)
All of the necessary components that you would have to bundle up together- by yourself- from a community vetted place like Prism-Break are already installed and ready to go within Librem laptops. Even if you were to install all of the necessary open-source encrypted alternatives, you still would not be able to 100% trust your current computer’s hardware.
Purism Librem laptops come with their own PureOS (operating system). Purism also offers compatibility with Qubes OS in a flash-drive (similar to Tails) to give you even another layer of protection on top of PureOS. Qubes OS is what Edward Snowden uses. PureOs is a derivative of Debian GNU/Linux. Qubes is free and open-source software (FOSS).
Purism is currently having a pre-sale for their first phone the Librem 5.
Another popular safe hardware computer market alternative is ORWL. ORWL is a desktop PC. ORWL comes with a physical encryption key that looks like a keychain. If anyone ever tries to physically tamper with the ORWL computer, sensors will automatically detect the intrusion and erase everything. ORWL comes with the operating system options of Qubes OS, Ubuntu, or Windows.
ORWL does not receive payment for their products in Crypto. Purism on the other hand accepts payment in BitcoinCore, BitcoinCash, Litecoin, Ethereum, Decred, Dogecoin, and Monero.
ORWL is a good alternative for more computer savvy people. If you are not the most competent person with computers, Purism is the way to go. With Purism everything is ready to go.
Once you get good hardware don’t use this new computer for anything other than crypto stuff. That is, don’t use it with anything that requires your slave identity. Don’t access social media with your name, don’t access bank accounts, don’t access crypto exchanges, don’t access old email accounts, definitely don’t access anything that requires KYC and AML, and don’t access any identifying log-in that is related to any of your previous internet identities. Create new identities from scratch for this new computer.
Watch this video and learn about the basics on operational security (OPSEC). Take everything written here, and spoken at the conference in the video above, as barely the preliminary basic requirements of OPSEC. You should definitely continue your own research upon getting your new secure hardware computer.
(It would be best if you purchased this computer using crypto- Monero preferably- and have it mailed to a mailing address not associated with any of your addresses; think along the lines of JJ Luna).
Encrypt Your Communication
“This generation being born now... is the last free generation.You are born and either immediately or within say a year you are known globally. Your identity in one form or another –coming as a result of your idiotic parents plastering your name and photos all over Facebook or as a result of insurance applications or passport applications– is known to all major world powers.” – Julian Assange
The vast majority of our community uses Facebook. Unfortunately its network effect is something we all rely on to some degree. Fortunately for us a friend of our community created FaceMask. Through FaceMask we can still use Facebook in complete privacy- away from Zuckerberg's prying eyes. In the near future we will implement FaceMask into our TDV groups as optional privacy for our posts. We will provide our subscribers with the keys necessary to encrypt and decrypt the messages and posts. Again, this is optional. For now please go to the link above and familiarize yourself with Facemask and its technology.
Don’t use Google. If you are using Google start transitioning out of it. If you are using Gmail, start moving towards encrypted services like ProtonMail or TutaNota. They both offer a free option, try them both out and choose your favorite. Use two factor authentication on everything that requires you to log-in that allows for the use of two factor authentication. Most people use Google Authenticator and Authy. I personally prefer the open source options of FreeOTP & andOTP. Use the one that you find best suited for you. Using one is paramount for security nowadays.
If you are one that uses Google Docs with your team, move instead to CryptPad. The more you use CryptPad the more addicting it becomes; your collaborated work is encrypted and private. You no longer will have to worry about knowing that Google is capturing all of your collaborated work. You can also start using CryptPad for free.
If you are using Skype for conference calls, switch to Jitsi. Jitsi is even easier to use than Skype. If you use their MeetJitsi feature you can just access the encrypted conferencing via any browser by agreeing with your other party on the same predetermined passphrase.
Don’t use regular text messaging. Rather, use Signal, Wickr, Keybase, or Telegram.
Use a VPN
A VPN (virtual private network) encrypts all of your traffic via a private network of servers scattered throughout the world. This process anonymizes your IP address. Make sure you don’t use your identity when using a VPN- that would just give away your identity as being connected with the VPN servers you are using.
Many VPN providers register your activity and can hand it over to government if they so demand it. They break their promises to their clients all the time. Let’s minimize risk by staying away from the most draconian of jurisdictions.
To lessen this issue, do not ever use a VPN that is based out of any of the 5 eyes:
-United Kingdom
-United States
-Australia
-Canada
-New Zealand
Furthermore, avoid VPNs based out of the following nine countries, that combined with the first 5 make up the 14 eyes:
-Denmark
-France
-The Netherlands
-Norway
-Germany
-Belgium
-Italy
-Spain
-Sweden
No VPN is a complete safeguard. In spite of this, it is still best to use one. We recommend you ONLY use it (turn it on) when doing crypto-related things and only crypto-related things on your regular computer. For your new encrypted hardware computer have it on at all times. If you use it to access an actual bank account, or another personal account (including crypto accounts that require your personal information; read coinbase, or any other exchange) — then, again, the use of the VPN use becomes trite.
Here are six VPN options outside of the 14 eyes that we recommend you research further and use at your own discretion:
NordVPN (Panama)
CyberGhost (Romania)
HideMe (Malaysia)
Astrill (Seychelles)
TrustZone (Seychelles)
iVPN (Gibralter)
Like all things in the market now, some VPNs take Crypto as payment—others do not. It is best if you bought your VPN with crypto not not your credit card, debit card, or paypal.
TOR (The Onion Router)
The Onion Router is software that you use as a browser. It protects you by bouncing your communications around a distributed network- throughout the world- of relays runned by volunteers. This prevents evesdroppers from learning your IP address, spying on you, and disclosing your physical location. TOR also allows you to access sites that are blocked.
You can use TOR and a VPN simultaneously. If you are new to all of this, it is best that you just learn how to use the features of your new computer coupled with your preferred VPN. The use of TOR is a little more complicated and you will have to configure it according the specifications of your preferred VPN. As you begin this process, as long as you are using your VPN correctly you should be fine.
Fincen and crypto-exchanges
ShapeShift is now stuck having to require its users to deanonymize their transactions in order to meet KYC and AML requirements; it pretty clear that they got ShapeShift under the Bank Secrecy Act. Stay away from Shapeshift (sorry @erikvorhees).
“Very disappointed that @ShapeShift_io is implementing KYC. Just goes to show that any centralized entity will be pushed in that direction, which is why LN, atomic swaps and Decentralized Exchanges are the only way to resist a surveillance economics.” - Andreas Antonopoulos
As the news of ShapeShift broke out, the market was quick to answer with alternatives. Among the private centric alternatives to ShapeShift we find Godex, ChangeHero, XMR.TO, and Bisq.
ChangeHero and Godex are pretty much the same business concept as ShapeShift. The only difference is that they do not require you to become transparent. XMR.TO allows you to make BTC payments by using Monero.
That is, by using Monero together with XMR.TO you can pay any BTC address in the world while protecting your privacy.
Bisq is the Best Option
The most important to focus on is Bisq. Bisq is a complete decentralized exchange. Bisq is instantly accessible- there is no need for registration or approval from a central authority. The system is decentralized peer-to-peer and trading cannot be stopped or censored.
Bisq is safe. Unlike MtGox and the rest of centralized exchanges, Bisq never holds your funds. Bisq provides a system of decentralized arbitration with security deposits that protect traders. The privacy is set where no one except trading partners exchange personal identifying information. All personal data is stored locally.
All communication on Bisq is end-to-end encrypted routed over Tor. Upon downloading and running Bisq TOR runs on Bisq automatically. Every aspect of the development of Bisq is open source.
Bisq is easy to use. If you are accustomed to centralized exchanges, you might find Bisq a little different. If you want anonymity and privacy, this is the best crypto exchange we have. Tell your friends about Bisq. Just download Bisq and take it for a test drive, you will feel fresh freedom of entering into peaceful voluntary exchange with your fellow man. Do it, it’s good for the soul.
On Cody
I would like to personally thank all of our subscribers for generously donating to Defense Distributed on our last issue. At the moment of us putting out our last newsletter, DefDist had raised less than 100k USD. After our Newsletter got out, his donations went past 300k USD.
Thank you very much for helping out our friends in their continual fight for freedom!
Please pray for Cody, his friends, and his family.
I once asked Cody what his background was- because idk his mannerisms have always been interesting to me. He answered; “I am Romani- I am a Gypsy.”
Thank you for helping out our Gypsy friend and his band of rebels! They will very much be using your generous donations now that things got much more serious.
If you haven’t donated, please consider donating. Blessings!
By Rafael LaVerde
Excerpt taken from The Dollar Vigilante September 2018 Issue
https://dollarvigilante.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/TDV-September-2018-Issue.pdf
submitted by 2012ronpaul2012 to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Bitcoin History: From the Cypherpunk Movement to JPMorgan Chase A Cypherpunk's Manifesto 1993 [Eric Hughes]. In Pursuit of Building Anonymous Systems Hablemos de Bitcoin - Los Cypherpunks, con Alfre Mancera Beginner’s Guide #3: Bitcoin's Pre-History and the Cypherpunks with Aaron van Wi 8. Historia de Bitcoin y Cypherpunks - Crypto Webinar Series

Cypherpunk und Bitcoin . In Neal Stephensons Roman Cryptonomicon stehen viele Charaktere auf der "Secret Admirers" Mailingliste. Dies ist ziemlich offensichtlich auf der Liste der Cypherpunks basiert, und einige bekannte Cypherpunks werden in den Bestätigungen erwähnt. Ein Großteil der Handlung dreht sich um Cypherpunk-Ideen. The Cypherpunk mailing list gradually evolved into different forms – for example anonymous and Cryptoparty, but the same underlying libertarian beliefs of rights to privacy and anonymity remained in various forms. Beginning In the early nineties, a group of cryptography experts called ‘cypherpunks’ gave life to ideas like digital currency and promoting freedom through the use of Cypherpunk is a person or community who protects the opportunity to use cryptography and privacy-enhancing technologies. The development of Bitcoin and blockchain technologies can be related to the cypherpunk's movements. In terms of how “cypherpunks” would define themselves, we can actually look to founding cypherpunk Eric Hughes’s words for a much more succinct definition: Cypherpunks write code. This comes from “ A Cypherpunk’s Manifesto ” which was posted by Hughes to the Cypherpunks Mailing List on 9th March 1993. Return to cryptoanarchy.wiki Main Site Cypherpunks Mailing List Archive Browse Archive by Year: 1992; 1993; 1994; 1995; 1996; 1997; 1998; 1999. Browse Archive by Author:

[index] [20077] [27408] [17780] [18960] [14023] [10004] [5899] [17727] [2366] [10168]

Bitcoin History: From the Cypherpunk Movement to JPMorgan Chase

In this interview, I talk with computer scientist, cryptographer, cypherpunk and Bit Gold designer, Nick Szabo. We discuss the cypherpunk movement and its ac... Speaker: Jay Campuzano, Fundador y CEO de Lex Cryptographica (@das_grasshopper) ¡Suscríbete ahora para seguir todas las transmisiones de CRYPTO WEBINAR SERIES! EPISODIO ANTERIOR: https://www ... Beginners Guide Part 3 - Aaron van Wirdum on Bitcoin's Pre-History and the Cypherpunks Founded by Eric Hughes, Tim May and John Gilmore the cypherpunks were a group of hackers, privacy enthusiasts ... Bitcoin's Origins and the Genesis Blockade - Duration: 33:50. aantonop 29,856 views. ... Tezos Kathleen Breitman on cypherpunks & crypto-anarchy & world-changing potential of cryptocurrency ... Presentation at the Chicago Bitcoin and Open Blockchain Meetup February 18, 2017 Paul Rosenberg discusses the early history of the cypherpunks and their interest in digital cash leading up to the ...

Flag Counter