Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WfVXk-0005sJ-MG for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:31:28 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.213.176 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.176; envelope-from=gacrux@gmail.com; helo=mail-ig0-f176.google.com; Received: from mail-ig0-f176.google.com ([209.85.213.176]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WfVXi-0003BF-Ul for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:31:28 +0000 Received: by mail-ig0-f176.google.com with SMTP id r10so1711689igi.9 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 07:31:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.42.39.138 with SMTP id h10mr1685543ice.92.1398868278040; Wed, 30 Apr 2014 07:31:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.150] (60-240-212-53.tpgi.com.au. [60.240.212.53]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s8sm6376481ige.4.2014.04.30.07.31.15 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 30 Apr 2014 07:31:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5361092C.4080205@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 01 May 2014 00:31:08 +1000 From: Gareth Williams User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bitcoin Dev References: <5359E509.4080907@gmail.com> <535A60FE.10209@gmail.com> <535BA357.6050607@gmail.com> <535CFDB4.1000200@gmail.com> <20140428214102.GA8347@netbook.cypherspace.org> <5360F6BE.5000703@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 OpenPGP: id=378E4544 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pBb3vutF0rv9I2x32QEbWrKlOx1waNdpV" X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gacrux[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WfVXi-0003BF-Ul Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Coinbase reallocation to discourage Finney attacks X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:31:28 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --pBb3vutF0rv9I2x32QEbWrKlOx1waNdpV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 30/04/14 23:55, Mike Hearn wrote: > If Bitcoin works correctly nobody should have to care if they consi= der > themselves attackers, defenders, or little green men from Mars. >=20 >=20 > One last time, I request that people read the white paper from 2008 > before making statements like this. If the notion of attacker was > irrelevant to Bitcoin, it would not be mentioned in the abstract, would= it?=20 I've read it :) The notion of an attacker is obviously relevant to someone designing the system. It should not be relevant to someone running a node. I'll retire from posting on this too, I've posted way too much. Our fundamental disagreement is simply that you think Bitcoin is, or should be, a /democratic/ system. I think Bitcoin is, and should be, a /trustless/ system. If we're going to resort to appeal to authority, I'll point to the words "Electronic Cash System" in the title of Satoshi's whitepaper :-P He intended to create ecash; that's widely understood to mean trustless. If there was this magic computer up in the sky somewhere, free from human influence, that would run Satoshi's code for him in perpetuity (let's overlook the initial upload please, bear with me), then I believe Satoshi would've built his perfectly trustless ecash to run on that. For lack of such a magic masterless computer he had to approximate one, ingeniously using distributed consensus to achieve it. That's his real invention - the "magic masterless computer" simulator, and the incentive scheme to get the world to run it for him. (We'll see more of what it can do if Ethereum ever gets off the ground.) But for Pete's sake, Bitcoin is trustless. Just because the infrastructure it sits atop is "democratic" (because there was no other way to implement it,) doesn't mean you suddenly have to start voting on everything. --pBb3vutF0rv9I2x32QEbWrKlOx1waNdpV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTYQksAAoJEEY5w2E3jkVEbaoH+wSgm+iY6YfMP1ArY0xIinjH A+ADfhD6pcDH1RFzkojgFv8fngDgSri3eHqqIL+uukiDyfMtn5QhFlaiOpS30iy8 fDpd/GTJaixAxufeWFnivzOoCmIMNzTAaep4jYfavTQRbtqBZLkUwlN0efItafgp EozRfWRD7sKpNFtA7vYfQrKXKY1EI90iBhXyxwkXfw+/A8CHNX6sUnYxG5cqDDLb L6ymxOU3shZv9dNUlgo7D/1LzZsWR9WLbUv/5E+r1bZ2lc3OuQMaCPbDOj+Q5ZiX YhC4qR0VYq6WQ+rG/uiFbSpj4A1LyetC9qPhqLeqZp6czcHZyyz2BTTptjammok= =+af8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pBb3vutF0rv9I2x32QEbWrKlOx1waNdpV--