- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Decrypt: Hackers steal Bitcoin through large-scale exploit on Tor: report
by jim bell 12 Aug '20

12 Aug '20

Decrypt: Hackers steal Bitcoin through large-scale exploit on Tor: report. https://decrypt.co/?p=38359

1 0

Breaking Defense: GPS Anti-Jam M-Code Takes Two Steps Forward
by jim bell 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

Breaking Defense: GPS Anti-Jam M-Code Takes Two Steps Forward. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/08/gps-anti-jam-m-code-takes-two-steps-for…

5 9

Re: Message Channels a Smidge was: Re: Whites going ape for Blacks in America -- Re: Soros' BLM
by Karl 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

Everything is looking right now with the archives and my inbox on my end over here. I was possibly getting a cached archives page somehow around the 4th. Sorry if this potentially-false alarm was taxing. On Thu, Aug 6, 2020, 7:05 PM Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Note: I am not set up with pgp, so this message may be corrupt. > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 2:58 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks(a)tfwno.gf> > wrote: > >> On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 1 hi5:41:34 -0400 >> Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Punk, do you know how often the cypherpunks archive is updated? >> >> usually in real time, or a few minutes. >> >> > I seem to be disconnected from the list; didn't get the last archived >> > email yet, and recent posts aren't showing up. >> >> sometimes the confirmation messages get lost, but your messages >> are posted to the list anyway. >> > > I've been having the opposite. I'm getting confirmation messages, but > many threads haven't been showing up in the archives. The last email I > have from this thread in the archives was > https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2020-August/081663.html : > none of our bitcoin history emails are showing up for me, but I have > acknowledgement emails for them. I emailed Greg a few days ago but no > reply. Maybe it wasn't received or I got his email address wrong. > > Below messages are related to politics and blockchains. Blockchains > provide more reliable message delivery than email. > > > >> > > But NOW he's complaining that his dear 'meritocratic' big businesses >> are siding with BLM. Which in turn tells you that BLM is just controlled >> opposition and which makes James' position even more ridiculous. >> > >> > The businesses are siding with BLM due to the effort of thousands of >> > american activists pressuring people to notice what's up in the flag >> > of violence against blacks, if it matters. It seems something else >> > may have mysteriously helped, too. >> > >> > The position you describe is in line with Trump, who lumps the >> > mainstream with the left. >> >> >> Not sure what position you're referring to. You mean my >> observation that US govcorp is pretending to be 'anti racist'? >> > > Kind of a merging and mutual learning between some fringe and right wing > behaviors that started before trump was elected, and then accelerated with > his election. > > It's meaningful for me because some of the professors who spoke out > against Trump's more oppressive policies experienced targeted bullying by > misled people with some similarity to what I experienced after taking > action against international energy pipelines and large banks. > > > It was a very minority view until he was >> > elected; mostly held by rural demographics near major business >> > enterprises in the areas I'd visited. >> >> >> >> > > > You could also use cryptography to make those things private, and >> mixing >> > > > layers to increase your anonymity, but that's not what I mean to >> worry >> > > > about here. >> > > >> > > But that's the thing. The more public information there is, >> the easier it becomes for censors to decide which transactions to reject. >> > >> > Not with full nodes: the network is invalid if any information at all >> > is missing. But yes, you need a miner to accept it, and you could be >> > identified, posting it >> >> the bare minimum is something like monero where amounts, senders >> and recipients are hidden(at least in theory). A system like monero leaks >> less information than bitcoin so it makes it harder for miners to censor. >> > > Zcash has a messaging app, too. Reference client is written in node, > which can scare some hackers away if it isn't ported to another language > yet. > > > >> > There's a way to push miner acceptance: you can make future >> > transactions require old ones. Like, you can post a special message, >> > and then buy or sell a product in a way that the purchase only goes >> > through if the "special message" is also mined. Once that money is >> > spent for something else, it is required that _all_ preceding >> > transactions go through, for the entire lifetime of the blockchain. >> > Censorship is actually incredibly hard if the protocol is used >> > properly. >> >> >> is that something that works with BTC? do you have a reference? >> > > Yes, that works with most chain protocols including btc. Apparently > because the usual issue is fee related not content related, google says > this technique is called "child pays for parent". Here's an article on its > use at coinbase, but I haven't read the article: > https://blog.coinbase.com/improving-bitcoin-reliability-through-child-pays-… > > > > >> I also know that mining isn't too 'distributed' >> > > > >> > > > What's relevent is that it is still distributed enough to defend >> > > > information in the face of a nation state adversary. >> > > >> > > We'll see... >> > >> > This has already been shown to my satisfaction repeatedly. What would >> > demonstrate it to you? >> >> I mean, we'll see how well cryptocurrencies fare when attacked by >> govcorp. So far they have been tolerated or even encouraged. >> > > In USA they were severely discouraged and attacked for many years. I was > briefly in the development team of the blockchain qora before the dev team > was dispersed after publishing a nonworking client. This happened after I > posted publically that the system made deletion of information impossible. > > > >> > > bitcoin mining is going to be centralized because of economic forces. >> The underlying economic system is pretty centralized and controled by >> govcorp, so only big mining operations can be 'profitable'. >> > >> > This is another thing the devs seemed to realize too late that would >> > be changed if there were focused, productive harmony in their >> > community. They made Jim's error of believing money was held by the >> > people, not the leaders, and better capitalism would provide freedom. >> >> Some developers may have made a mistake, while others are >> actually happy with the current situation... >> > > A lot of overlap there. We are all still learning that billionaires don't > care about money. > > > >> > Instead they produced a mess of cryptoanarchic millionaires which is >> > still quite helpful. >> >> well, I don't think they are too helpful. Even roger ver who has >> somewhat clear ideas is more ultimately more concerned about all his money >> than freedom . >> > > I guess yeah. I'm not sure who finances Steem, but I think it managed to > form a smidge of improved communication between techheads and oppression, > just slightly. Many of these new blockchain businesspeople are against > cover-up and have a technology to prevent it. Doesn't mean they don't get > covered up and stigmatized. > > > Blockchains still show a single programmer can change the whole world, >> > by stepping into the digital cultural spaces that people leave >> > unaddressed, and automating them. >> > >> >> we'll see. Also automation isn't good per se. >> > > Yeah automation is deadly. This list is mostly programmers. I see that > bitcoin already has changed the world, by trending financial distribution > and economic discourse farther from government control. > > > > >> > > My comment was somewhat obscure. What I meant is that >> 'satoshi' wasn't worried about mining being centralized...and wasn't >> worried about 'scaling' either. Here's the pertinent bit >> > > >> > > https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/2/ >> > > >> > > "as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be >> left more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware" >> > > >> > > ...you know, like amazon-NSA. >> > >> > Nice pairing of names. This is just because Satoshi was making the >> > Jim fallacy I mentioned above. >> >> >> Question is, was that a honest mistake, or part of the 'design'? >> > > Both. We're referencing a political issue. People raised in capitalism > believe it to mean freedom. Within it, it can be, which moves capitalist > power around a lot. For people who don't value money and can influence > that, there's a lot of space the people who do value it are not worrying > about at all. > > >> > It takes a very long time for bitcoins to merge with amazon-nsa. They >> > don't like them: the dollar seems more predictable and familiar, and >> > the dollar makes it much easier for them to keep secrets. >> >> The fact that bitcoin's supply can't be manipulated makes it >> unappealing to govcorp. However, other bitcoin features aren't as governmnt >> unfriendly as that one. Bitcoin as a surveillance tool with unerasable >> records is something that govcorp likes. >> > > I like how it surveils everyone equally in that permanent record. Govcorp > has a lot of secrets. > > It is easy for a skilled developer to add privacy to blockchains > comparable to other private systems if needed, see monero, zcash. > > > > > > 1. Bitcoin is hugely valuable and is designed to rise in value >> exponentially >> > > > 2. The design is such that censoring it e.g. by miner collusion >> also lets >> > > > people steal money >> > > > 3. There are more creative thieves than creative censors >> > > > 4. When the protocol is attacked, it becomes obvious on the >> network: the >> > > > whole network is told >> > > >> > > >> > > the protocol doesn't allow double spending, but it certainly >> allows 'discrimination'. >> > >> > I don't know what you mean here. Economic discrimination and miner >> collusion? >> >> yes, miners can even mine empty blocks if they want and sitll be >> paid for it(block reward). >> > > Mmm it doesn't sound like you have a good handle of the protocol. The > design is such that nobody does that. Block rewards shift exponentially > towards being proportional to included transactions as years pass. It > takes a long time to mine a block. > > > > >> > > Look at ethereum. The chain was 'forked' and the majority of >> people went to the chain that had some 'bad' transactions reverted. Same >> thing could happen to bitcoin. >> > >> > This required agreement from the entire dev team and is exactly how >> > blockchains die. Note that ethereum is big enough that the original >> > chain is still easy to acquire in its entirety. Bitcoin is much >> > bigger. >> >> yeah the original chain is likely to survive. My point is that it >> may be possible for govcorp to take an existing system and force a mahority >> of people to accept 'new rules'. >> > > Yeah, they've been pushing that stuff, as could possibly be my references > following. > > >> > Disruptive forking has already happened to bitcoin with bch, bsv, etc. >> > It doesn't mean any information is lost, though: each one of those >> > chains has the entire history prior to the fork. >> >> True. But those forks were not really attacks but rather >> competition. >> > > Aren't these exactly what you describe above, with people deciding on new > rules without agreement as rational collective decisions reduce alongside > negative media etc? > > > All the people who >> > trusted the blockchain to preserve something, in bitcoin and ethereum >> > prior to their unexpected forks, have that trust still honored, >> > without any regard to the content: except for the one person whose >> > permanent impact was hacking the ethereum community itself. >> >> True. >> >> >> >> > >> > > >> > > > It is still impossible enough to erase things on the Bitcoin >> blockchain, >> > > > for now, >> > > >> > > True, for now. On the other hand, look at all the cancer that >> grows around bitcoin like coinbase-mosad-GCHQ-NSA. Bitcoin 'exchanges' are >> worse than banks. >> > >> > Economic war is happening. But bitcoin still has friendly communities >> > who will trade with you in person for cash. Most of the exchanges >> > appear run by millionaire cryptoanarchists, learning business and the >> > intense difficulties the situation entails. >> >> >> I don't think any big exchange is run by anarchists. On the othre >> hand, something like coinbase is run by literal US govt agents. >> > > I believe those two sets to overlap. > > Cryptocurrencyophiles call themselves cryptoanarchists but they are > generally pro-capitalism and pro-blockchain-businesses. Many many > cryptoanarchy business out there, see smart contracts, but often small > yeah. The first exchange, mtgox, was run by a guy from the Bitcoin > community; I wasn't around much after that. > >

2 1

Inverse: Predicted 'information catastrophe' may be caused by fifth state of matter
by jim bell 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

Inverse: Predicted 'information catastrophe' may be caused by fifth state of matter. https://www.inverse.com/innovation/information-could-be-the-missing-fifth-e…

1 0

Filtering Communication was Re: Whites going ape for Blacks in America -- Re: Soros' BLM _finally_ lifting their image, much to Soros' relief -- Re: surprisingly, Soros now pins US color revolution on Trump
by Karl 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

James, I'm checking with you that we can communicate clear, concise information that is to both our benefits, through the harsh sea of the internet. I named to you below 3 open source networks that use varying degrees of cryptography and network organization to resist censorship. I sent these in response to you instructing me to look on uncensored social media. Later, when you replied, the quote I received from you didn't include the list of censorship resistant networks I sent. Is there any chance you can confirm you received them, so we can verify the integrity of the list? If uncensored networks are not discussed to prevent their disruption, which is likely an incredibly good idea, please let me know if that norm has been established, but the three networks I referenced are all public. Did anybody else receive my small open source network list below? I have recently received only a reference to bitmessage from this list, but I do not read all the messages all the time. If a norm has been established to not reference uncensored networks so as to prevent their disruption, which is likely an incredibly good idea, please let me know: but the 3 networks I referenced are all public. James, I still have not received from you any reference to what networks you mean when you say "uncensored social media" to know where to look. On Tue, Aug 4, 2020, 5:38 AM Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: > James, we have a lot of different beliefs here. > > I don't know where to go on uncensored channels to find the videos you > describe. I consider uncensored social media to be scuttlebutt, mastodon, > possibly steem ... What do you consider uncensored social media? > > I know these particular friends well enough to predict their behavior > accurately and am pretty certain they are not lying. So I get emotionally > charged when I read what you write, and it's hard to read much of it. > > My activist friend just wanted to cry and be heard about seeing his > friends murdered around him. It was all he seemed to want. > > You mention a black jogger, but not the george floyd video everybody > struggled to get recognised this year ... what do you know about the george > floyd video? > > K > > - > > There is proof inside many peoples' electronics. Proof that a marketing > group would contract development of a frightening virus. A virus that > responds to peoples' keystrokes and browsing habits, and changes what > people see on their devices. A virus that alters political behavior en > masse, for profit. > > > On Mon, Aug 3, 2020, 9:35 PM <jamesd(a)echeque.com> wrote: > >> On 2020-08-03 21:37, Karl wrote: >> > James it sounds like we've been exposed to significantly different >> media, >> > giving us different beliefs. >> >> Just search uncensored social media. You will find huge numbers of >> videos of black gangs attacking whites. >> >> Search the official organs of the state, such as the New York Times or >> CNN. >> >> What do you find? >> >> What do you find on the official organs of our officially unofficial >> state religion? >> >> You find a black "jogger" who was accosted by three white men after >> committing a minor burglary, and grabbed the gun of one them by the >> wrong end. >> >> > My knowledge of killing of blacks comes partly from hearing from >> individual >> > people exposed to it. >> >> They are lying to you because it makes them holy. It is like Christians >> claiming to have witnessed miracles. >> >> If any of miracles that they had witnessed actually happened, they would >> be in the front page of the New York Times every day for the next twenty >> years. >> >> Everyone remembers Emmett Till, who was not in fact lynched, but >> murdered, like no end of men of all races who made a pass at someone >> else's wife. The problem was not that she was white and he was black, >> but that she had a jealous husband. >> >> If in the entire history of the all of the United States, one black had >> been lynched who was not plausibly accused of some serious crime, that >> black man would be the poster boy for lynchings, not Emmett Till. >> >> If these things are happening, how come we cannot walk down the street >> without being reminded of it by big character posters every ten feet? >> >> > My closest friend's black roommate had to leave due to harassment from >> > whites expressing dislike of blacks who actually broke her door down to >> get >> > to her. >> >> Remember Jussie Smollet. If she was telling you the truth, why is every >> single such story that media hears turn out to be a lie? >> >> Remember the Covington Boys. >> >> The media are so hungry for such incidents, that they invent them. They >> search high and low for such incidents, and have not found one such >> incident in the past several decades. Remember all the drama about a >> garage door opener that someone thought looked vaguely like a noose. >> >> Are you sure they did not express dislike of her because of theft and >> assault? Are you sure she did not just stop turning up to college >> because she got bored, and told a better sounding story? >> >> If white people actually broke down the door of a black college student >> while expressing dislike of blacks, you would not be hearing it from her >> and I not be hearing it from you. I would be hearing it on television >> for days or weeks or months. >> >> There has not been one arbitrary lynching for frivolous cause anywhere >> in the United States ever, nor one such incident as you describe >> anywhere in the United States in the past few decades. >> >> The media has shouted no end of such stories from the rooftops, and not >> one single one has ever held up. >> >> >>

1 1

Re: Killing President Trump
by Karl 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 5:10 AM Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 5:07 AM Se7en <se7en(a)cock.email> wrote: >> On 20-08-05 05:02:47, Karl wrote: >> > Se7en, many of us are not having our emails forwarded by the list, can you >> > verify you received this? >> > >> > Also, we need to be careful around having groups engaged in ways that produce >> > further harm towards them unless they are strong enough.to handle it. I may >> > have brought further psyop targeting to the group, unsure. >> >> I can confirm of having recieved this direct email, non-ml. > > > Thank you. My message hit the list archives for me today, too, first one to do so since yesterday morning. Things seem to be working okay with the mailing list archives again now, not sure. se7en can you confirm that you _also_ received my message to you forwarded by the list, as well as in private? It's at https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2020-August/081717.html .

1 0

Message Channels a Smidge was: Re: Whites going ape for Blacks in America -- Re: Soros' BLM
by Karl 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

Hi, Note: I am not set up with pgp, so this message may be corrupt. On Wed, Aug 5, 2020, 2:58 PM Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks(a)tfwno.gf> wrote: > On Tue, 4 Aug 2020 1 hi5:41:34 -0400 > Karl <gmkarl(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Punk, do you know how often the cypherpunks archive is updated? > > usually in real time, or a few minutes. > > > I seem to be disconnected from the list; didn't get the last archived > > email yet, and recent posts aren't showing up. > > sometimes the confirmation messages get lost, but your messages > are posted to the list anyway. > I've been having the opposite. I'm getting confirmation messages, but many threads haven't been showing up in the archives. The last email I have from this thread in the archives was https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2020-August/081663.html : none of our bitcoin history emails are showing up for me, but I have acknowledgement emails for them. I emailed Greg a few days ago but no reply. Maybe it wasn't received or I got his email address wrong. Below messages are related to politics and blockchains. Blockchains provide more reliable message delivery than email. > > > > But NOW he's complaining that his dear 'meritocratic' big businesses > are siding with BLM. Which in turn tells you that BLM is just controlled > opposition and which makes James' position even more ridiculous. > > > > The businesses are siding with BLM due to the effort of thousands of > > american activists pressuring people to notice what's up in the flag > > of violence against blacks, if it matters. It seems something else > > may have mysteriously helped, too. > > > > The position you describe is in line with Trump, who lumps the > > mainstream with the left. > > > Not sure what position you're referring to. You mean my > observation that US govcorp is pretending to be 'anti racist'? > Kind of a merging and mutual learning between some fringe and right wing behaviors that started before trump was elected, and then accelerated with his election. It's meaningful for me because some of the professors who spoke out against Trump's more oppressive policies experienced targeted bullying by misled people with some similarity to what I experienced after taking action against international energy pipelines and large banks. > It was a very minority view until he was > > elected; mostly held by rural demographics near major business > > enterprises in the areas I'd visited. > > > > > > > You could also use cryptography to make those things private, and > mixing > > > > layers to increase your anonymity, but that's not what I mean to > worry > > > > about here. > > > > > > But that's the thing. The more public information there is, > the easier it becomes for censors to decide which transactions to reject. > > > > Not with full nodes: the network is invalid if any information at all > > is missing. But yes, you need a miner to accept it, and you could be > > identified, posting it > > the bare minimum is something like monero where amounts, senders > and recipients are hidden(at least in theory). A system like monero leaks > less information than bitcoin so it makes it harder for miners to censor. > Zcash has a messaging app, too. Reference client is written in node, which can scare some hackers away if it isn't ported to another language yet. > > > There's a way to push miner acceptance: you can make future > > transactions require old ones. Like, you can post a special message, > > and then buy or sell a product in a way that the purchase only goes > > through if the "special message" is also mined. Once that money is > > spent for something else, it is required that _all_ preceding > > transactions go through, for the entire lifetime of the blockchain. > > Censorship is actually incredibly hard if the protocol is used > > properly. > > > is that something that works with BTC? do you have a reference? > Yes, that works with most chain protocols including btc. Apparently because the usual issue is fee related not content related, google says this technique is called "child pays for parent". Here's an article on its use at coinbase, but I haven't read the article: https://blog.coinbase.com/improving-bitcoin-reliability-through-child-pays-… > > >> I also know that mining isn't too 'distributed' > > > > > > > > What's relevent is that it is still distributed enough to defend > > > > information in the face of a nation state adversary. > > > > > > We'll see... > > > > This has already been shown to my satisfaction repeatedly. What would > > demonstrate it to you? > > I mean, we'll see how well cryptocurrencies fare when attacked by > govcorp. So far they have been tolerated or even encouraged. > In USA they were severely discouraged and attacked for many years. I was briefly in the development team of the blockchain qora before the dev team was dispersed after publishing a nonworking client. This happened after I posted publically that the system made deletion of information impossible. > > > > bitcoin mining is going to be centralized because of economic forces. > The underlying economic system is pretty centralized and controled by > govcorp, so only big mining operations can be 'profitable'. > > > > This is another thing the devs seemed to realize too late that would > > be changed if there were focused, productive harmony in their > > community. They made Jim's error of believing money was held by the > > people, not the leaders, and better capitalism would provide freedom. > > Some developers may have made a mistake, while others are actually > happy with the current situation... > A lot of overlap there. We are all still learning that billionaires don't care about money. > > > Instead they produced a mess of cryptoanarchic millionaires which is > > still quite helpful. > > well, I don't think they are too helpful. Even roger ver who has > somewhat clear ideas is more ultimately more concerned about all his money > than freedom . > I guess yeah. I'm not sure who finances Steem, but I think it managed to form a smidge of improved communication between techheads and oppression, just slightly. Many of these new blockchain businesspeople are against cover-up and have a technology to prevent it. Doesn't mean they don't get covered up and stigmatized. > Blockchains still show a single programmer can change the whole world, > > by stepping into the digital cultural spaces that people leave > > unaddressed, and automating them. > > > > we'll see. Also automation isn't good per se. > Yeah automation is deadly. This list is mostly programmers. I see that bitcoin already has changed the world, by trending financial distribution and economic discourse farther from government control. > > > > > My comment was somewhat obscure. What I meant is that > 'satoshi' wasn't worried about mining being centralized...and wasn't > worried about 'scaling' either. Here's the pertinent bit > > > > > > https://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/emails/cryptography/2/ > > > > > > "as the network grows beyond a certain point, it would be left > more and more to specialists with server farms of specialized hardware" > > > > > > ...you know, like amazon-NSA. > > > > Nice pairing of names. This is just because Satoshi was making the > > Jim fallacy I mentioned above. > > > Question is, was that a honest mistake, or part of the 'design'? > Both. We're referencing a political issue. People raised in capitalism believe it to mean freedom. Within it, it can be, which moves capitalist power around a lot. For people who don't value money and can influence that, there's a lot of space the people who do value it are not worrying about at all. > > It takes a very long time for bitcoins to merge with amazon-nsa. They > > don't like them: the dollar seems more predictable and familiar, and > > the dollar makes it much easier for them to keep secrets. > > The fact that bitcoin's supply can't be manipulated makes it > unappealing to govcorp. However, other bitcoin features aren't as governmnt > unfriendly as that one. Bitcoin as a surveillance tool with unerasable > records is something that govcorp likes. > I like how it surveils everyone equally in that permanent record. Govcorp has a lot of secrets. It is easy for a skilled developer to add privacy to blockchains comparable to other private systems if needed, see monero, zcash. > > > 1. Bitcoin is hugely valuable and is designed to rise in value > exponentially > > > > 2. The design is such that censoring it e.g. by miner collusion also > lets > > > > people steal money > > > > 3. There are more creative thieves than creative censors > > > > 4. When the protocol is attacked, it becomes obvious on the network: > the > > > > whole network is told > > > > > > > > > the protocol doesn't allow double spending, but it certainly > allows 'discrimination'. > > > > I don't know what you mean here. Economic discrimination and miner > collusion? > > yes, miners can even mine empty blocks if they want and sitll be > paid for it(block reward). > Mmm it doesn't sound like you have a good handle of the protocol. The design is such that nobody does that. Block rewards shift exponentially towards being proportional to included transactions as years pass. It takes a long time to mine a block. > > > > > Look at ethereum. The chain was 'forked' and the majority of > people went to the chain that had some 'bad' transactions reverted. Same > thing could happen to bitcoin. > > > > This required agreement from the entire dev team and is exactly how > > blockchains die. Note that ethereum is big enough that the original > > chain is still easy to acquire in its entirety. Bitcoin is much > > bigger. > > yeah the original chain is likely to survive. My point is that it > may be possible for govcorp to take an existing system and force a mahority > of people to accept 'new rules'. > Yeah, they've been pushing that stuff, as could possibly be my references following. > > Disruptive forking has already happened to bitcoin with bch, bsv, etc. > > It doesn't mean any information is lost, though: each one of those > > chains has the entire history prior to the fork. > > True. But those forks were not really attacks but rather > competition. > Aren't these exactly what you describe above, with people deciding on new rules without agreement as rational collective decisions reduce alongside negative media etc? > All the people who > > trusted the blockchain to preserve something, in bitcoin and ethereum > > prior to their unexpected forks, have that trust still honored, > > without any regard to the content: except for the one person whose > > permanent impact was hacking the ethereum community itself. > > True. > > > > > > > > > > > > It is still impossible enough to erase things on the Bitcoin > blockchain, > > > > for now, > > > > > > True, for now. On the other hand, look at all the cancer that > grows around bitcoin like coinbase-mosad-GCHQ-NSA. Bitcoin 'exchanges' are > worse than banks. > > > > Economic war is happening. But bitcoin still has friendly communities > > who will trade with you in person for cash. Most of the exchanges > > appear run by millionaire cryptoanarchists, learning business and the > > intense difficulties the situation entails. > > > I don't think any big exchange is run by anarchists. On the othre > hand, something like coinbase is run by literal US govt agents. > I believe those two sets to overlap. Cryptocurrencyophiles call themselves cryptoanarchists but they are generally pro-capitalism and pro-blockchain-businesses. Many many cryptoanarchy business out there, see smart contracts, but often small yeah. The first exchange, mtgox, was run by a guy from the Bitcoin community; I wasn't around much after that.

3 4

Re: CNBC: SpaceX is manufacturing 120 Starlink internet satellites per month
by Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

"The world is not sliding, but galloping into a new transnational dystopia. This development has not been properly recognized outside of national security circles. It has been hidden by secrecy, complexity and scale. The internet, our greatest tool of emancipation, has been transformed into the most dangerous facilitator of totalitarianism we have ever seen. The internet is a threat to human civilization." quote from assange in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cypherpunks_(book) Now, there are two mistakes on that quote. First, assage in misspelling ARPANET as internet. Second, the arpanet was never a 'tool of emancipation'. It was always a threat to human civilization and the "the most dangerous facilitator of totalitarianism we have ever see" no wonder non-human scum like musk is trying to further expand the reach of the arpanet.

1 0

Re: CNBC: SpaceX is manufacturing 120 Starlink internet satellites per month
by Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 06:47:12 +0000 (UTC) jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Nonsense. > Jim Bell Here's what JB, agent of the US nazis previously vomited : "Elon Musk, by SpaceX, could accomplish a lot of good if he provides the means for anyone to get Internet access in regions where the government wants to restrict this. He might even offer the SpaceX internet service for free in some extreme cases, such as Iran, Cuba, North Korea" Funny how pieces of americunt nazi shit are 'concerned' about 'iran cuba and nk' when in reality the biggest threat to the those countries are the pieces of americunt nazi shit themselves. Oh, and looks like the JB is into 'virtue signalling' eh "Elon Musk, by SpaceX, could accomplish a lot of GOOD" And when JB says 'good' he means 'good' for the US nazi oligarchy. Musk, the pentagon and the rest of govcorp criminals. > > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 11:28 PM, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0<punks(a)tfwno.gf> wrote: On Mon, 10 Aug 2020 21:58:37 +0000 (UTC) > jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > CNBC: SpaceX is manufacturing 120 Starlink internet satellites per month. > > https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/10/spacex-starlink-satellte-production-now-120… > > > " Notice that Jim Bell has explicitly 'supported' the project for its ability to wage electronic war on iran, n. korea and cuba, all targets of the US nazis." > >

1 0

CNBC: SpaceX is manufacturing 120 Starlink internet satellites per month
by jim bell 11 Aug '20

11 Aug '20

CNBC: SpaceX is manufacturing 120 Starlink internet satellites per month. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/10/spacex-starlink-satellte-production-now-120…

2 1