[ExI] Kevin Dowd on Bitcoin

Andrew Poelstra apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Sat Jan 17 17:31:33 UTC 2015


This is badly confused. Bitcoins are not discrete entities that multiple
people can claim; the Bitcoin system is a ledger which tracks balances.
The closest thing to a discrete "owned" object is an unsigned transaction
output. Such an output is owned by whoever has the key material needed
to sign for it. Nothing to do with who was "first".

There is no voting in Bitcoin. It is a consensus system: either you agree
with the consensus Bitcoin history, or you are not doing Bitcoin.


Please do not spread misinformation about the Bitcoin system. At best
you are wasting others' time spent correcting you; at worst you are
spreading confusion.


Bitcoin's consensus system is covered in some detail in Section 6 of

  https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/alts.pdf

Its means of tracking balances are covered in

  https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/bitcoin-faq.pdf


Andrew



On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 11:48:51AM -0500, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> Agreed, It's not the hashrate (speed or power) that allows this.  It is the conflict resolution protocol that allows this.
> 
> Whenever different reporting entities disagree on something, they vote.  Who mined a bitcoin first if multiple people claim it?  Who received a bitcoin first if multiple purchases were made with the same bitcoin?  Whose transactions do we accept and whose do we reverse when there are record disputes?  They vote.
> 
> Anybody with 51% voting rights can theoretically outvote the others any time they want.  Google for bitcoin 51%, majority, race attack, Finney attack, double-spending, history modification, selfish mining, time limits, and similar terms for more information.
> 
> --
> Harvey Newstrom   www.HarveyNewstrom.com
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bryan Bishop [mailto:kanzure at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2015 10:11 AM
> > To: ExI chat list; Harvey Newstrom; Bryan Bishop
> > Subject: Re: [ExI] Kevin Dowd on Bitcoin
> > 
> > On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 10:08 AM, Harvey Newstrom
> > <mail at harveynewstrom.com <mailto:mail at harveynewstrom.com> > wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > 	The protocol allows a large (over 51%) consortium to take any or all
> > the bitcoins they want.
> > 
> > 
> > That's not entirely true. Having lots of hashrate does not endow one with the
> > ability to take or spend all existing BTC. The attacker can't prevent
> > transactions from being created or relayed or sent, the attacker can't send
> > coin that never belonged to the attacker, the attacker can't create coin out of
> > thin air, etc. However, miners with lots of hashrate (say, more than 50%) can
> > delay transactions from being included in blocks by not including any
> > transactions in the blocks the attacker mines.
> > 
> > - Bryan
> > http://heybryan.org/
> > 1 512 203 0507
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> 

-- 
Andrew Poelstra
Mathematics Department, University of Texas at Austin
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web:   http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew

"If they had taught a class on how to be the kind of citizen Dick Cheney
 worries about, I would have finished high school."   --Edward Snowden

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150117/5341b644/attachment.bin>


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list