1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
|
Return-Path: <david.vorick@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 718EB949
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 29 Jan 2017 19:39:50 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com (mail-wm0-f41.google.com [74.125.82.41])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B98BFA4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 29 Jan 2017 19:39:49 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 196so1109736wmm.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:39:49 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=QHvwPFoUuxKETXnU/2CDo90ek1iiFFXmvkPnltBuqag=;
b=Yc0lz1ogzVtAeGyFtogAbA7QwMm/PC6DQSroPBaOdoW3MKWESzRA787nyRefp+1BfV
5jI7NHYB0iR+4i4+XtK2wpaVqCIK2PIZuAKWGAmLaGIB9gVfFfQRDuveCVhtk3BoTxXJ
4f4DJZABKLv+EJRNJMLwZMzDRZv8h+m/NL7EmC1pPYbO0xbIfNy+F8eK9/tybI5+amC8
ZiYuOYBdOWp27Waag1evxRIbUEbPthnwAJouzm8I9zjUgiwRiVGDxjkAjFE1ZU113DKv
lxZzXj50uRxSBwBhtPNahOkf+GgTcOudEYrYNdGvHhin52BSpjtWZbnzxr7aDHdJlGiX
D44w==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=QHvwPFoUuxKETXnU/2CDo90ek1iiFFXmvkPnltBuqag=;
b=tAJAymlhj14QguytslZp5y1SiObFtj7Jp3S+asrXumdSP6CYiSwcVoyNG3dIBF4E8+
/9gFIVJKYrdXTaG/HOIAOuK8IG0oQF2ciMkIul5xTy6bY4Sp90Lvn6JDV1QLnurl+N0L
3sC43VfblbodIsL9JEm9IdZ1tLW+4/t639/wvMyhQgmnwAiz4wh0qcCulx6eIex/ncPk
uhI3BeN69LKNFHkPHK2ezBE43VeqHx5/UwLlqLx0PxDs8cVM3SJRdcf6fg1o9+5Qylm8
y1p7TveW/GEm3Ymzo1BN45teDDUwGiOfj7etNUnmZrIzljJZcg9Yz7PaibEmV6C+B1uy
oYww==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKuMkCdAXD7ysYCGhWPPFyOrsIzpCJNXAuyJO2lKIfFJVZgjiJr7RDggGZXbaziRyeJYttYwnWr1qswiw==
X-Received: by 10.223.161.194 with SMTP id v2mr15027431wrv.144.1485718788027;
Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:39:48 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.28.172.198 with HTTP; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:39:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.28.172.198 with HTTP; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 11:39:46 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <583ef2d2-8315-da9f-7815-768cb4ccb515@thinlink.com>
References: <201701270107.01092.luke@dashjr.org> <20170127212810.GA5856@nex>
<CAAy62_KUSNTjivwJT87K9f1c=k-6gdaLXEBJjcy2KK+uLSTWDA@mail.gmail.com>
<201701280403.05558.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAAt2M183=L=9N3HKVgGbsFbug4LWkGfMQzzcDQu9xxMJL+L1oA@mail.gmail.com>
<A6A9E83E-6A5A-4583-A4E3-A52DF33DCF4F@petertodd.org>
<583ef2d2-8315-da9f-7815-768cb4ccb515@thinlink.com>
From: David Vorick <david.vorick@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 14:39:46 -0500
Message-ID: <CAFVRnypBTCty8xgmqiGpp9cFb1pDahEhsgYSxbQzMzsDsfTnrw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f403045f2ed698ef17054740dc89
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Three hardfork-related BIPs
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jan 2017 19:39:50 -0000
--f403045f2ed698ef17054740dc89
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Jan 29, 2017 2:28 PM, "Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev" <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
If that's true, why haven't we already seen AML/KYC required of mining
pools? That would be comparatively trivial.
Some regulators are already looking into it. Even at this point you'd
either need multinational cooperation or you'd need China to decide that
51% attacking a budding technology is a good thing to do, something that
would be sure to increase tensions across the world.
But there are two bigger reasons. The first is that regulators are used to
doing regulation at exchange points, regulating mining is new and
unfamiliar and requires a decent understanding of blockchains. And the
second is that Bitcoin is tiny potatoes at this point. To the best of my
knowledge, organized crime outside of DNMs doesn't use Bitcoin. There's
minimal reason to target it while it's so small.
Regulated mining I believe is going to be a genuine risk as Bitcoin grows.
--f403045f2ed698ef17054740dc89
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"auto"><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_q=
uote">On Jan 29, 2017 2:28 PM, "Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev" <=
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<blockquote class=3D"quote" style=3D"marg=
in:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">If that's tr=
ue, why haven't we already seen AML/KYC required of mining<br>
pools?=C2=A0 That would be comparatively trivial.</blockquote></div></div><=
/div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"au=
to">Some regulators are already looking into it. Even at this point you'=
;d either need multinational cooperation or you'd need China to decide =
that 51% attacking a budding technology is a good thing to do, something th=
at would be sure to increase tensions across the world.</div><div dir=3D"au=
to"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">But there are two bigger reasons. The first=
is that regulators are used to doing regulation at exchange points, regula=
ting mining is new and unfamiliar and requires a decent understanding of bl=
ockchains. And the second is that Bitcoin is tiny potatoes at this point. T=
o the best of my knowledge, organized crime outside of DNMs doesn't use=
Bitcoin. There's minimal reason to target it while it's so small.<=
/div><div dir=3D"auto"><br></div><div dir=3D"auto">Regulated mining I belie=
ve is going to be a genuine risk as Bitcoin grows.</div><div dir=3D"auto"><=
div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br></div></div></div>
--f403045f2ed698ef17054740dc89--
|
