Grey Mirror #4, Joi Ito: Applying a Systems Paradigm to ...

Which type of curren(t) do you want to see(cy)? A analysis of the intention behind bitcoin(s). [Part 2]

Part 1
It's been a bit of time since the first post during which I believe things have crystallised further as to the intentions of the three primary bitcoin variants. I was going to go on a long winded journey to try to weave together the various bits and pieces to let the reader discern from themselves but there's simply too much material that needs to be covered and the effort that it would require is not something that I can invest right now.
Firstly we must define what bitcoin actually is. Many people think of bitcoin as a unit of a digital currency like a dollar in your bank but without a physical substrate. That's kind of correct as a way to explain its likeness to something many people are familiar with but instead it's a bit more nuanced than that. If we look at a wallet from 2011 that has never moved any coins, we can find that there are now multiple "bitcoins" on multiple different blockchains. This post will discuss the main three variants which are Bitcoin Core, Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV. In this respect many people are still hotly debating which is the REAL bitcoin variant and which bitcoins you want to be "investing" in.
The genius of bitcoin was not in defining a class of non physical objects to send around. Why bitcoin was so revolutionary is that it combined cryptography, economics, law, computer science, networking, mathematics, etc. and created a protocol which was basically a rule set to be followed which creates a game of incentives that provides security to a p2p network to prevent double spends. The game theory is extremely important to understand. When a transaction is made on the bitcoin network your wallet essentially generates a string of characters which includes your public cryptographic key, a signature which is derived from the private key:pub key pair, the hash of the previous block and an address derived from a public key of the person you want to send the coins to. Because each transaction includes the hash of the previous block (a hash is something that will always generate the same 64 character string result from EXACTLY the same data inputs) the blocks are literally chained together. Bitcoin and the blockchain are thus defined in the technical white paper which accompanied the release client as a chain of digital signatures.
The miners validate transactions on the network and compete with one another to detect double spends on the network. If a miner finds the correct solution to the current block (and in doing so is the one who writes all the transactions that have elapsed since the last block was found, in to the next block) says that a transaction is confirmed but then the rest of the network disagree that the transactions occurred in the order that this miner says (for double spends), then the network will reject the version of the blockchain that that miner is working on. In that respect the miners are incentivised to check each other's work and ensure the majority are working on the correct version of the chain. The miners are thus bound by the game theoretical design of NAKAMOTO CONSENSUS and the ENFORCES of the rule set. It is important to note the term ENFORCER rather than RULE CREATOR as this is defined in the white paper which is a document copyrighted by Satoshi Nakamoto in 2009.

Now if we look at the three primary variants of bitcoin understanding these important defining characteristics of what the bitcoin protocol actually is we can make an argument that the variants that changed some of these defining attributes as no longer being bitcoin rather than trying to argue based off market appraisal which is essentially defining bitcoin as a social media consensus rather than a set in stone rule set.
BITCOIN CORE: On first examination Bitcoin Core appears to be the incumbent bitcoin that many are being lead to believe is the "true" bitcoin and the others are knock off scams. The outward stated rationale behind the bitcoin core variant is that computational resources, bandwidth, storage are scarce and that before increasing the size of each block to allow for more transactions we should be increasing the efficiency with which the data being fed in to a block is stored. In order to achieve this one of the first suggested implementations was a process known as SegWit (segregating the witness data). This means that when you construct a bitcoin transaction, in the header of the tx, instead of the inputs being public key and a signature + Hash + address(to), the signature data is moved outside of header as this can save space within the header and allow more transactions to fill the block. More of the history of the proposal can be read about here (bearing in mind that article is published by the bitcoinmagazine which is founded by ethereum devs Vitalik and Mihai and can't necessarily be trusted to give an unbiased record of events). The idea of a segwit like solution was proposed as early as 2012 by the likes of Greg Maxwell and Luke Dash Jnr and Peter Todd in an apparent effort to "FIX" transaction malleability and enable side chains. Those familiar with the motto "problem reaction solution" may understand here that the problem being presented may not always be an authentic problem and it may actually just be necessary preparation for implementing a desired solution.
The real technical arguments as to whether moving signature data outside of the transaction in the header actually invalidates the definition of bitcoin as being a chain of digital signatures is outside my realm of expertise but instead we can examine the character of the individuals and groups involved in endorsing such a solution. Greg Maxwell is a hard to know individual that has been involved with bitcoin since its very early days but in some articles he portrays himself as portrays himself as one of bitcoins harshest earliest critics. Before that he worked with Mozilla and Wikipedia and a few mentions of him can be found on some old linux sites or such. He has no entry on wikipedia other than a non hyperlinked listing as the CTO of Blockstream. Blockstream was a company founded by Greg Maxwell and Adam Back, but in business registration documents only Adam Back is listed as the business contact but registered by James Murdock as the agent. They received funding from a number of VC firms but also Joi Ito and Reid Hoffman and there are suggestions that MIT media labs and the Digital Currency Initiative. For those paying attention Joi Ito and Reid Hoffman have links to Jeffrey Epstein and his offsider Ghislaine Maxwell.

Ghislaine is the daughter of publishing tycoon and fraudster Robert Maxwell (Ján Ludvík Hyman Binyamin Hoch, a yiddish orthodox czech). It is emerging that the Maxwells are implicated with Mossad and involved in many different psyops throughout the last decades. Greg Maxwell is verified as nullc but a few months ago was outed using sock puppets as another reddit user contrarian__ who also admits to being Jewish in one of his comments as the former. Greg has had a colourful history with his roll as a bitcoin core developer successfully ousting two of the developers put there by Satoshi (Gavin Andreson and Mike Hearn) and being referred to by Andreson as a toxic troll with counterpart Samon Mow. At this point rather than crafting the narrative around Greg, I will provide a few links for the reader to assess on their own time:

Now I could just go on dumping more and more articles but that doesn't really weave it all together. Essentially it is very well possible that the 'FIX' of bitcoin proposed with SegWit was done by those who are moral reprobates who have been rubbing shoulders money launderers and human traffickers. Gregory Maxwell was removed from wikipedia, worked with Mozilla who donated a quarter of a million to MIT media labs and had relationship with Joi Ito, the company he founded received funding from people associated with Epstein who have demonstrated their poor character and dishonesty and attempted to wage toxic wars against those early bitcoin developers who wished to scale bitcoin as per the white paper and without changing consensus rules or signature structures.
The argument that BTC is bitcoin because the exchanges and the market have chosen is not necessarily a logical supposition when the vast majority of the money that has flown in to inflate the price of BTC comes from a cryptographic USD token that was created by Brock Pierce (Might Ducks child stahollywood pedo scandal Digital Entertainment Network) who attended Jeffrey Epstein's Island for conferences. The group Tether who issues the USDT has been getting nailed by the New York Attorney General office with claims of $1.4 trillion in damages from their dodgey practices. Brock Pierce has since distanced himself from Tether but Blockstream still works closely with them and they are now exploring issuing tether on the ethereum network. Tether lost it's US banking partner in early 2017 before the monstrous run up for bitcoin prices. Afterwards they alleged they had full reserves of USD however, they were never audited and were printing hundreds of millions of dollars of tether each week during peak mania which was used to buy bitcoin (which was then used as collateral to issue more tether against the bitcoin they bought at a value they inflated). Around $30m in USDT is crossing between China to Russia daily and when some of the groups also related to USDT/Tether were raided they found them in possession of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of counterfeit physical US bills.
Because of all this it then becomes important to reassess the arguments that were made for the implementation of pegged sidechains, segregated witnesses and other second layer solutions. If preventing the bitcoin blockchain from bloating was the main argument for second layer solutions, what was the plan for scaling the data related to the records of transactions that occur on the second layer. You will then need to rely on less robust ways of securing the second layer than Proof Of Work but still have the same amount of data to contend with, unless there was plans all along for second layer solutions to enable records to be deleted /pruned to facilitate money laundering and violation of laws put in place to prevent banking secrecy etc.
There's much more to it as well and I encourage anyone interested to go digging on their own in to this murky cesspit. Although I know very well what sort of stuff Epstein has been up to I have been out of the loop and haven't familiarised myself with everyone involved in his network that is coming to light.
Stay tuned for part 3 which will be an analysis of the shit show that is the Bitcoin Cash variant...
submitted by whipnil to C_S_T [link] [comments]

History Lesson: Failed MIT ChainAnchor scheme to KYC every BTC transaction (2016)

I've been reading up on Peter Todd's archives, I found this gem:
TL;DR Bribe miners to only mine transactions which contain a backdoored cryptographic signature linking it to a real identity.
It's amazing to think about how much money and resources are being poured into sabotaging cryptocurrency every day. The ChainAnchor scheme never worked out, but the concepts really aren't that far-out. I wonder how much money Epstein funneled into the project?
EDIT: Greg Maxwell showed up here and helpfully linked an AMA thread from the ChainWanker guys: Greg also accidentally replied to his nullc account with his Contrarian__ alt again. Note also the Joi Ito "KYC is inevitable, so we might as well spread our cheeks" post.
Disgusting stuff.
submitted by wtfCraigwtf to btc [link] [comments]

[Index] Scaling Conference Overview: Day 2

Day 2
Conference Topic \ Speaker \ Time Link
Layer 2
Fees and Radio
submitted by KarmaNote to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Highlight: Joi Ito on ICOs at Scaling Bitcoin - YouTube Mining City and Bitcoin Vault Review - YouTube How Much Money I Made Mining Bitcoin SO FAR!!!!!!! - YouTube EXPLOSIVE BITCOIN MOVE COMING!!!! BITCOIN TO $14,000 WHEN WE BREAK THIS SPECIFIC PRICE!! LEGIT BTC mining site (COINS.PH)

Joi Ito, director of the MIT Media Lab, said that Bitcoin or another cryptocurrency might not only provide poorer people with access to banking but make all sorts of financial institutions more ... This is the 4th episode of MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative’s podcast on technology, society, and ethics called Grey Mirror (Soundcloud, Youtube, iTunes). Unlike Black Mirror, which ... The Bitcoin Core developers who signed the agreement include Fields, but not the other two developers — Andresen and van der Laan — supported by the MIT Media Lab. The official position of Ito and the Digital Currency Initiative on the Bitcoin Roundtable solution hasn’t been disclosed at the moment. Photo Joi Ito / Flickr(CC) Joichi Ito, head of the Media Lab at the Massachusetts Institute of Technological innovation (MIT), has resigned right after it was exposed that he and other Media Lab team had tried to conceal monetary contributions from convicted sexual intercourse offender Jeffrey Epstein. The New Yorker reported final Friday that Ito and MIT Media lab – which […] Joi Ito, director of the prestigious Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Media Lab, is about to unveil a plan for the Institute to become what he calls an independent, neutral home to help with Bitcoin standards development, Xconomy reports.. Ito has been prominently involved in the development of the Internet from the very beginning, from helping start the first commercial Internet ...

[index] [4402] [2963] [11742] [19886] [249] [22799] [9442] [25759] [21731] [20244]

Highlight: Joi Ito on ICOs at Scaling Bitcoin - YouTube

Follow mOE at: ☻ ☻ ☻ ☻ Intro By PubFX http... Mining City and Bitcoin Vault Review Join Mining City Here: #MiningCity #BitcoinVault #BTCV Bitcoin Vault Discovered Our researche... "Everyone who is issuing an ICO needs to sit down and meditate and say 'Why am I doing this?'. If it's really for making society better, then you should try ... T4D #84 - Pt 2 Bitcoin Mining, BFL ASIC vs FPGA vs GPU vs CPU - Duration: 28:50. mjlorton 63,596 views. 28:50. 🟪 DueDex Deposit Free Bonus: 🟣 0.1 BTC Get $50 Free 🟣 0.2BTC Get $120 Free 🟣 0.5 BTC Ger $200 Free 🟩 BITCOIN ...