Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E9A8171A for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:27:16 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from smtp2.hushmail.com (smtp2.hushmail.com [65.39.178.134]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A56A8E1 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:27:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp2.hushmail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp2.hushmail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5C4D4A029A for ; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:27:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=hush.com; h=date:to:subject:from; s=hush; bh=vg0hd3az/nev5ge88LI6N03o7mVFRQcPoYFeyoGmTg4=; b=ghu4wj4DwmLj3DwaIzMkc9EXPI2lbaped3OzAFcTx0ox5mQLPCM+yQgVpwWLlv8iCdTslurrIDIcYiy0TI5bYV2iVUQnbyqLGz6qatcw45S5sqBzH0nut/RTApD1qGHn+tQW4LA9e3T1Xh4xvfl1+vPRt2k6dQK1nMC3aFPWze6mGnABV1vaB5ET+3es9feL0gPWt5ZZvsKlNe9TbqZaeGhXpqTAx9AU8eUyyxWNxVqfYsLM8bwLxGXccwx8w0ogoY/8NJ6NVNkgMbjQS4IA+eeWU6MokVT3/N1sjkNKkJZDjKsqz9+xTr2bszJ9dCc6wgzjUhubkyYi08b/N+6/tw== Received: from smtp.hushmail.com (w7.hushmail.com [65.39.178.32]) by smtp2.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:27:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.hushmail.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id D3349404B9; Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:27:14 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 10:27:14 +0300 To: "Eric Voskuil" , "Peter Todd" , "Matt Corallo" From: "NxtChg" In-Reply-To: <55FD0737.1080008@voskuil.org> References: <55F9E47D.50507@mattcorallo.com> <55FC6EBF.9090504@mattcorallo.com> <20150919014710.GD22598@muck> <20150919060639.A775A404B9@smtp.hushmail.com> <55FD0737.1080008@voskuil.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: <20150919072714.D3349404B9@smtp.hushmail.com> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list , Libbitcoin Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Bitcoin conference micro-report X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 07:27:16 -0000 >The state is the threat in the Bitcoin threat model. You comments below >acknowledge it. The assumption of hostile state actors is the only >rational starting point. That which is regulated (and regulatable) >in Bitcoin is the attack surface. I think, you just proved my point. If your goal is to shrink the attack surface as much as possible, you are better off being a marginalized alt-coin. >This threat represents the difference between Bitcoin and Fedcoin. _This_ is the false dichotomy. There's a range of coins between DarkCoin and FedCoin. >This is extremely naive. At a minimum, getting popular/successful (and regulated) is the formula for regulatory capture. Let me give you an example. Suppose you are a regular guy, say Peter Todd, and you are faced with 10 policemen in anti-riot gear. You can fight them in two ways: 1. become stronger, so you could provide an adequate response, either by turning into Hulk or by getting another 30-50 Peter Todds. 2. lose some fat, learn a few parkour tricks and move around mostly by night behind dumpsters. The worst you can fare is just being Peter Todd with a backpack and an expensive camera on his neck, wandering around the city in daylight. Your vision of Bitcoin is the most vulnerable to government attacks.