- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Re: [Cryptography] Satoshi's Trump Card
by grarpamp 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Ray Dillinger <bear(a)sonic.net> wrote: > What puzzles me about these discussions is that people assume, with no > evidence and apparently for no reason, that Satoshi would choose to play > his (or her, or their) so-called "Trump Card" in some way that agrees > with their own particular agenda. A general theme is that large holders (or whoever might have stolen or other access to stashes) can influence outcomes. It's *not* meant to insinue or comment on "Satoshi" proper, but to highlight possible X factors present in various coinbases. Founders archives, rich lists, combined with how a coin can be used or influenced, can all be places to look for them. Emergence of DC's themselves is steeped in crypto "anarchism possible" activism. Participants (minimally investors) in any cryptocurrency would be nuts to not consider them if present. 1M BTC plus rich list are a present and non-negligible factor. ex: Corporate SEC prospectus filings routinely cover risks. > The Satoshi I remember would be > evaluating the alternatives pretty much objectively, and relating them > to the current problems rather than the problems faced by the original > design. And might choose either, based on its merits. Or might choose to develop and propose other new technical solutions from time to time. Or play cards, even counter to presumed agenda, for fun. Any rebirth will be interesting. Yes many are quite objective solution finders, evaluators, and choosers. > They are considering the incentives of the users, when in fact the fate > of a block chain is determined by the incentives of the miners. No. Blockchains are multi-variable, all variables and parties affect the others. Users control miners just as much as miners control users, as do relays, as do markets, etc. All must cooperate at least somewhat if any are to survive, and complete loss of any one will kill. > The fact that the interests of miners and users are not necessarily > aligned, I have always regarded as one of Bitcoin's flaws. Comparative designs - that encourage / permit / require / result in, say, competitive exploitation (optimization?) of the other variables... vs - that somehow proffer result in a naturally harmonious / immune to <whatever "evil"> seeking / mutually upwardly beneficial / aligned and happy... Yes would be interesting.

1 0

Re: [Cryptography] LRB article, Satoshi's Trump Card
by grarpamp 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

>>> https://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n13/andrew-ohagan/the-satoshi-affair >> >>"The full text of this essay is only available to subscribers of the >>London Review of Books." >> >>Needs liberated by punks using the schwartz... On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 1:25 PM, John Levine <johnl(a)iecc.com> wrote: > Well, you know, you could subscribe and read it it like civilized > people do so the author gets paid. Perhaps if the author, who appears to have some knowledge of and interest in cryptocurrencies and cypherpunks, would post their own BTC address on their page... https://www.lrb.co.uk/contributors/andrew-ohagan And if their chosen syndication channels would post their own BTC address... https://www.lrb.co.uk/subscribe Then maybe some combination of them could earn some crypto coin. Here's lots of places to spend them... https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade Perhaps if the author and/or their channel had social presence on say distributed / overlay cryptographic networks, some additional interesting "Letters" (as at the end of every article) might be received. Here's a random social net... http://w363zoq3ylux5rf5.onion/groups/all > I happen to subscribe to the LRB and can tell you it's an article from > last year on the rise and fall of Craig Wright as Satoshi. It has > lots of personal interview detail if you care about that sort of > thing, but it doesn't tell you anything about bitcoin you didn't > already know. Not everything must be technical. Here's some further articles of potential interest to those who might have coin or know such nets... https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n05/andrew-ohagan/ghosting On 5 January 2011, at 8.30 p.m., I was messing about at home when the phone buzzed on the sofa. It was a text from Jamie Byng, the publisher of Canongate. ‘Are you about?’ it said. ‘I have a somewhat left-field idea. It’s potentially very exciting. But I need to discuss urgently.’ Canongate had bought, for £600,000, a memoir by the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange. ... https://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n19/andrew-ohagan/watching-me-watching-them-watch… Watching Me Watching Them Watching You: Surveillance https://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n18/andrew-ohagan/text-inspectors On: No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA and the Surveillance State

1 0

Re: [Cryptography] Release of Smoke - Android Crypto Chat App - on Tuesday (#4thofJuly)
by grarpamp 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

Beware, this appears to be produced by the same group that is behind the goldbug, echo, spot-on, dooble, etc line of highly questionable applications. This announcement was bcc'd to me while obviously already here, that's stupid so I'll bash them for that game too. Note also their renewed attempt at EFF alignment, this time by copying the visual recognition of the EFF scorecard model. Hi EFF :) Reviewing their code is highly encouraged, even people creating a bounty for doing that... after all, outing possibly big scam organizations like this is just as credworthy as earning the next CVE for rooting the OpenBSD kernel, etc. Anonymous development is a legitimate thing, however this group is just bizarre. Given their ethical and other issues called out earlier on these lists (search: goldbug)... be *extremely* careful before elevating any of their suite to anything more than nonproduction snakeoil. On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Peter Underwood <amoleddisplay(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Smoke - Open Crypto Chat Client with Open Crypto Chat Server Release on > #4thofJuly: > https://smokeappope.sourceforge.io > > SmokeStack release - the first open mobile crypto-handlling chat-server on > Android > https://smokeappope.sourceforge.io/#Smokestack > > Release of the Mobile ScoreCard for Encrypting Chat Applications on mobile > devices: > https://smokeappope.sourceforge.io/#MobileScoreCard > https://smokeappope.sourceforge.io/mobilescorecard.png > > > Smoke is the mobile crypto chat, which is open source, allows you to use > your own decentral chat server, does not send your phone number to central > servers or friends, and fifth, is able to define your own end-to-end > enctypting passwords manually by your individual choice. > So far no other application might match these five criteria. > > Further SmokeStack seems to be one of the first open source crypto chat > server on mobiles (Android).

1 0

The Internet is HTML
by My 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

> My aryangf at waifu.club > Sun Jul 2 09:18:00 PDT 2017 > > When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an > empty page. "" > > maps.go ogle.com > Pic related.

1 0

[ PFIR ] Idiots on Canadian Supreme Court demand right of GLOBAL Google censorship!
by My 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

> grarpamp grarpamp at gmail.com > Thu Jun 29 14:17:24 PDT 2017 > > DMCA torrent results, limiting advertising, > throwing captchas, etc... > it's a useless space to many already. > You forgot their javascript shilling campaign intended to subvert and replace html: When you have eliminated the JavaScript, whatever remains must be an empty page. "" maps.go ogle.com

1 0

defense against impugning of character?
by Sharky 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

> Cecilia Tanaka cecilia.tanaka at gmail.com > Fri Jun 23 22:38:11 PDT 2017 > > Trump is orange > ugly fake tan > Victim of political comedy, seems. Of fake news. Pic related. twitter.com/realDonaldTrumpstatus/881503147168071680 > I would always be the Red Power Ranger > You want to be (mostly) "white" ? > LGBTQWERTY Supremacy > 'Lesbian' is a category of 'Gay'. 'Gay' is newspeak for same-sex love but has an actual, different definition. 'Transitioning' biological sex is impossible, less you are a frog. As a (((lawyer))) you should be appalled by the inaccuracy of these labels. > I am still pretty white > The Japanese are the "whites" of Asia. Be careful c&c anon.

1 0

[sdmaclean@gmail.com: [antlr-discussion] Recent presentation on using ANTLR in cybersecurity]
by Zenaan Harkness 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

May be of interest to some. ----- Forwarded message from Stuart Maclean <sdmaclean(a)gmail.com> ----- From: Stuart Maclean <sdmaclean(a)gmail.com> To: antlr-discussion <antlr-discussion(a)googlegroups.com> Reply-To: antlr-discussion(a)googlegroups.com Date: Fri, 30 Jun 2017 17:55:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [antlr-discussion] Recent presentation on using ANTLR in cybersecurity I recently presented ANTLR-centric work at my local Java User Group, and the slides are available should anyone be interested.The first three quarters of the material essentially expands on Parr's Antlr Definitive Ref book, i.e. the Expr language and different grammars for it: plain, with embedded actions, producing trees, etc. The last part of the material explains how I was able to auto-generate C source code using ANTLR trees, for work in dynamic program analysis. The main site is seajug.org with my slides available at http://www.nimret.org/seajug/past/2017/jun/slides.pdf Stuart

1 0

Satoshi's Trump Card
by grarpamp 02 Jul '17

02 Jul '17

Satoshi is estimated to have at least 1M BTC to leverage at will, anon, with zfg. Any disagreeable fork can be tranflooded back to self and even whaled around for years to come. With agreeable things endorsed and supported similarly. Satoshi has been moved to arise from silence before. Do not tempt the phoenix guarding the message in the genesis block. https://coingeek.com/risks-segregated-witness-opening-door-mining-cartels-u… https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/6k5ptu/more_from_jonald_fyookball_con… https://coingeek.com/temp-title-matt/ https://coingeek.com/craig-wright-segwit/ https://coingeek.com/author/eliafram/ https://twitter.com/justicemate https://medium.com/@jonaldfyookball/mathematical-proof-that-the-lightning-n… https://medium.com/@johnblocke/bring-on-the-chain-split-8a295a62cee6 https://i.redd.it/hmlxsqj6xd5z.png http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/ https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/25/booming-stock-markets-dist…

5 8

Re: [Cryptography] Satoshi's Trump Card
by grarpamp 01 Jul '17

01 Jul '17

On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Erik Granger <erikgranger(a)gmail.com> wrote: > That seems like a losing battle, if he decides to transflood the chain, > can't the fork simply ignore that chain? No idea what that means. Anyway... Keys (UTXO / addrs) from parent inherit spendably into both forks (cross referencing to forks to determine their spent status before spending is ridiculous overhead and won't be done, other dynamics take over, and no one cares). > Also, the more he does this, the > more money he loses to trx fees, so wouldn't he just be throwing money in > the garbage No. Only a moron would waste their entire nut, so $2.5B - $5M for lifelong living expenses = ... > and exacerbating the blockspace shortage, by doing so? ... = $2.495B = a lot. Which can flood everyone else that can't pay rising tx out, killing the coin and lofting their chosen survivor. = $10/tx * 100tps = 30day fragfest Ironic that blocksize >>> current, is easy way to absorb. > It seems > that if he did that, it would congest blocks massively, and as a result > encourage adoption of any disagreeable fork that provides larger block > sizes. As before, rich activsts will have two chains to play in... one to support, one to kill. Multiple competing actors could cancel each other out yielding a net chaos depression for a while. Decentralized DC blockchain is new money paradigm, users lilypads will change, and are responsible to choose own path to success. Adopters should know this going in. Otherwise stay in their comfy fiat, while it lasts (as some predict). Govt's may own bulk coin too, in addition to cheaper ways. Wasn't there recent a post on how blockchain = NSA = Satoshi = BTC? Lol.

2 3

segwit2x and the end of the known BTC universe
by Troy Benjegerdes 01 Jul '17

01 Jul '17

The way some people are talking about segwit/segwit2x/big blocks is as if there is some sort of existential crisis like the polar ice caps were going to fall off from the excess heat from miners. For example, while this has a couple of good technical points: https://medium.com/@lukedashjr/the-segwit-2x-beta-review-and-thoughts-ca480… There is this little confused bit of reasoning: "Next up is "testnet5". It's a new testnet, for reasons never made clear to me. It would seem if you wanted to test a change to Bitcoin, you'd test it as a change to testnet rather than make a new one. It's not clear to me why a new testnet was created instead." I think, if you want to **test** activation of segwit with some different parameters, you might actually want to test it on a network that doesn't already have it activated. That means either: a) 51% attacking the existing testnet and rolling back to before the activation point b) start a new test network Did I make this clear, or am I just being sold some evil propaganda from $EVIL_EMPIRE Personally, the worst part about this whole disaster is we now have something that looks like assembly code looking for magic numbers in the coinbase field for segregated witness, instead of something straightforward, like, you know, incrememeting the transaction version in a way that clearly tells clients they need to upgrade. At least so far there has been no nation-state with guns telling people which code they need to run. (yet) Can some government just get it over with and issue Fedcoin already?

1 0