Andrew_Quentin

"Explaining the lack of such attacks in practice requires significant additional modeling assumptions."

Yes, the main assumption being that burning such huge resources would in any way be recouped by a simple double spend.

A double spending attack, as the name implies, simply allows you to spend twice the same amount of bitcoins. Thus, "an attacker [who] can purchase mining power" needs to be able to do so at a lower cost than the value of the bitcoins he will spend for the second time. Obviously, considering the hashrate and the fact that you need around 51% of it, or, 30% of it according to some calculations, I can't envisage any scenario where such a cost would in any way be justified by simply spending your own coins twice.

Moreover, one has to consider that if such hashing power was used to simply do what it is meant to do, then the attacker would be supplied with fresh new bitcoins, probably to the tune of far more than any amount he can double spend.

That is why "the Bitcoin protocol is a stable Nash Equilibrium."

The author states that the bitcoins were stolen over time, however, the graph shows that between June and November 2011 there is a gap due to missing data. It then opens in November 2011 with a huge gap between actual btc and expected btc of some 500k bitcoins. Practically almost all the "missing" bitcoins. Suggesting therefore that either they were "lost" sometime between June-November 2011 or they were hidden at the time somewhere on blockchain or that the authors have made some sort of mistake.

I am not sure how such a huge amount of bitcoins can be "lost" within such a short period of 4 months. Leaving open the option that there may be some mix up with the internal data or that the analysis is incomplete.

No. What he is saying is that there are some common sense good laws he agrees with and there are some outdated laws that no reasonable person would want to continue to uphold and need to be changed but our grandpas in congress have not gotten around to it yet.

So the governance structure you have identified was for two individuals in some position of "power" to voluntarily decide to take a certain action because they see it in their best interest overall?

They could have just as well, seeing as they had the longer chain, decided to continue working on that chain, but they voluntarily decided otherwise. In the process, validating the inbuilt incentives of bitcoin.

The decision therefore wasn't "independent", but reached by consensus and further supported by everyone else. Had there been some disagreement, for example if what the devs were proposing was not seen by the two "powerful individuals" as being in their best interest, then matters could have developed far differently.

So, what exactly requires trust in all of this?

BitPay allows it as does Coinbase

Except for your constant defence of them of course

The space needed however is miniscule. You would be lucky to get any ad dollars whatever for a 1 inch by 1 inch web space.

I'm not sure what you mean exactly. Rome was not built in one day, but with small steps. If you wish change then you take small actions that of course do not build a palace today, but might do in 10 years.

That basically translates to use bitcoins alongside dollars and slowly transition to bitcoins only.

And if you can't punish them for breaching those regulations what worth are they?

They say that the code could "hijack" a computer like some hackers have "hijacked" some computers to mine bitcoins.

Their concerns aren't completely unfounded in that it is granted it is quite possible to use any piece of code for ill. However, their complete failure to understand that this wasn't a case of "hijacking" computers by black hackers, but a potentially innovative business revenue generating project says to me that the cyber unit of the state department has no understanding whatever of programming. If that is the case, these 19 year olds should be awarded damages so that this reckless behaviour can be discouraged.

Yet no website provides you with an add free version first or analytic free version first before asking for your consent. The way EU law is currently implemented by websites assumes consent making the whole exercise completely redundant.

There is evidence that the code was present on websites, but, the code was never functional, that is, it never mined bitcoins. Therefore it never breached any laws.

As such, one has to wonder either whether the cyber fraud unit of the state department has basic understanding of programming or whether the state department is willfully taking this action to send some sort of message.

Those are absolute numbers. From 1 million to 5 million is a 500% increase. I doubt any nation has seen anywhere close to a 500% increase in their population numbers.

Bitcoin wallet creation went from 1 million to 5 million since last year and it keeps increasing.

People don't matter. The vast majority of people are uneducated idiots who never decided one thing or another. The educated masses matter, those with knowledge as you call them, who have decided the trajectory of history at every turning point.

So a knife producer, by that logic, is also guilty, because of the reputation of knife's to, you know, kill people.

or not start it at all

At what point did you answer that simple question of - well why didn't they just say they are not motivated to continue the project any longer, but instead say Truecrypt is not secure.

I don't think he is the only one with the private key

"The FinCEN Subpoena requires Karpeles to appear and provide testimony in Washington, D.C. on April 18, 2014 – the day after the scheduled Bankruptcy Deposition of Karpeles in Dallas. The FinCEN Subpoena did not attach a document request and did not specify topics for discussion."

Why?

else if one year has elapsed since contract started transfer security deposit to tenant end contract

This ignores the reason for a deposit in the first place. What if the carpets were burned in that year? Some of the deposit needs to be kept by the landlord. How does etherium know the carpet was burned? If the landlord says so, then the landlord may be lying.

For simpler operation - if rent not paid - then end contract - that sounds like it adds no benefit. No need for a program to tell you the contract has ended.

This is very useful to prove authenticity of a contract and for very simple contracts as well such as a bet. If there can be any sort of dispute about the contract though I don't see how it can be useful again save for authenticity.

Because they are affected by the decisions that politicians make.

Well, why do you buy anything instead of putting all your money in bitcoin? If your money is bound to increase, then why spend any of it? I mean - why eat?

1984

Turkey

They are not in UK though. They are in a transit zone which arguably is international land. So the UK laws would not apply.

It was a mistake in all the confusion right after 7/7 bombing of London tubes. Tragic, but completely understandable.

There is a political solution. Public opinion holds great sway. So the politicians may go on a uturn to keep their jobs.

There is a legal solution. Courts may yet declare this unconstitutional.

Then there is a voting solution. People voted for Obama because he promised to get rid of all this. As Bush said fool me once, you cant fool twice. So people might in 2016 elect someone who has a record of being against these measures.

Plenty of solutions before a violent revolution. See for example the transition from The McCarthy era.

Of course they care. Everyone I have asked whether techy or otherwise has said the government has no business reading people's e-mails etc.

This has been news for two months now and it continues to be news. It affected US-Russia relations, its big in Brazil, Germany. There was a vote which almost succeeded in defunding the NSA. Ordinary people do care and opinion polls show it.