Selbsternannter Bitcoin-Erfinder Craig Wright vorerst aus ...

Bitcoin Civil War (the bright sides)

It will be interesting to see how the next couple of months play out. Whatever happens, there are a couple of positive sides to the situation.
For one, we will see if it is possible to change the rules of the Bitcoin network even against considerable resistance.
The Japanese Constitution has never been amended. But it is very clear what is necessary to amend it. Article 96 of the Constitution states the requirements.
The Bitcoin network has never been challenged by an internal faction in the way it is now. In contrast to the Japanese Constitution, it is not very clear what is needed to push through the block size extension the Bitcoin Unlimited camp wants.
So if they succeed in their attempt, we will have a reference case what is needed to change the protocol against substantial resistance. If they fail, we will have a reference case as well, showing that the failed level of support was not enough.
This civil war will also be an interesting case to study when preparing for war with outside attackers. There has been speculation about "51%-attacks" before. But as far as I know, no one has ever actually pulled off a 51%-attack against the Bitcoin network.
In the course of this civil war, that may change. I hear that Peter Rizun, one of the supporters of Bitcoin Unlimited, is advocating for using hash power to shut down the original Bitcoin chain after a fork, mining empty blocks on that chain.
If that happens, that would be an excellent test case. A highly motivated, well-funded adversary trying to shut down the Bitcoin blockchain has not happened yet in real life.
If such an attack happens, and the Bitcoin blockchain survives it one way or another, that would be real-life proof of its resiliency.
Since all of the value of the Bitcoin blockchain comes from this resiliency against attack and the trust created, surviving such a test would be proof of its value. An eight year track record of unbroken service is valuable, but extending it defeating serious attacks shows even more value.
All cryptography has value only as far as people actually try to break it and fail (Schneier's law). It follows that attacks on the Bitcoin network like the one Rizun wants to happen are a good thing.
We also may get a short-term increase in block space (if the Bitcoin Unlimited faction wins the civil war).
Again, interesting times for the Bitcoin network.
submitted by Karl-Friedrich_Lenz to btc [link] [comments]

Cryptographic reviews of bitcoin?

I'm searching for informed bitcoin reviews, infact I haven't the knowledge to complitely understand and value its security, the only cryptographer that I read that write on this is Bruce Schneier, that wrote this:
"I'm often asked what I think about bitcoins. I haven't analyzed the security, but what I have seen looks good. The real issues are economic and political, and I don't have the expertise to have an opinion on that."
source
experienced people reviews of bitcoin
1 - Bruce Schneier
2 - Dan Kaminsky
submitted by pietrod21 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Quantum Conspiracy

This is not reality changing quantum computing meta-science / Mandela Effect / parallel universes bull.
The following is at least trying to be factual
I some information for you of which you may not be aware, as well as speculation related to such events.
Here is the gist...
TIMELINE
May 11th: WannaCry ransomware was released into the public.
May 15th: A small flurry of news articles on websites about quantum computation not effecting RSA encryption showed up.
June 13th: IOTA is added to the bitfinex exchange.
June 14th: Quantum market value passes 5 billion. Through D-Wave and IBM-Q
June 25th: The Petya ransomware released.
June 27th: A second test revision of the Petya ransomware released as NotPetya.
July 3rd or 4th: We will see. (This is only speculation.)
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW
The WannaCry ransomware is a private sector project disguised as a ransomware. The Petya ransomware is a revision of this project with some fixes re-released for testing. NotPeta was released shortly after, so that it was not as noticeable over the current threat.
IOTA is a cryptocurrency that you should probably put some money into, it will be important later. It is not generated via mining. It is does not have a blockchain. It is quantum computationally proof by design. It is currently worth more than 1 billion USD, becoming the 8th largest traded cryptocurrency in 14 days.
The major project is a programming project with the following goals.
@ This might be an attempt by combined forces to create a viral remote administration tool.
@ The active function of this secret tool would be primarily benign malicious. With goal to install this on as many internet of things devices, cellphones, and computers as possible in order to steal an unnoticeable amount of CPU and GPU resources (1%), from computers that stay idle for more than 6 hours. Effectively a world wide zombie botnet.
@ Here is the list of currently involved entities: TPTB, Google, D-Wave Systems, Microsoft, Intel, IBM, CERN, Cisco, CERT, a counter-collective group of approximately 2,200 people with backgrounds in information security, cryptography, mathematics, and quantum physics.
REVELATIONS
This is very important so listen.
@ I feel this is to use this computing power, piping it into the Google network in order to mask the internet traffic as legitimate.
@ These computing resources are being used to assist Google Deepmind in order to finish a computation project that when successful will result in artificially generated design for a cold operating quantum computer, possibly through carbon computation.
@ IOTA may have known about this project in advance. Developing a quantum proof cryptocurrency in order to capitalize from the downfall of other cryptomarkets. IOTA also is working in a very short timescale, implementing smart contracts to automate transactions over internet of things devices, presumably to prevent them from becoming idle.
@ After the project is complete, I assume TPTB will be able to effectively break nearly all encryption, and then all hell will break lose.
CAVEATS
@ I am not saying you should not drop all your bitcoin, because the timescale for this will be a few years. However, just keep in mind I feel this coming. If it is, there is nothing we can do.
submitted by SoaringMoon to conspiracy [link] [comments]

Writing a book on Bitcoin and blockchain technology, and I'm looking for particularly illuminating arguments for why it's taken as a given that a hostile attacker can't mass enough computing power to perform a 51% attack. Any help appreciated!

Hey all! As the title says, I'm working on a book about Bitcoin, blockchain tech, and cryptocurrencies. The section I'm working on now is about how the blockchain provides such robust security.
Bitcoin takes as a given that honest nodes will always control a majority of the computing power. To a reader who is unfamiliar with the space, though, this seems like an unsubstantiated claim. I have a vague understanding of why this is true, but I can't find a way to express it in a way that would be convincing to a layperson. Is anyone aware of any particularly illustrative examples of why this assumption is taken for granted among the Bitcoin community?
As an example of what I'm looking for, here is an illustration I'm using to demonstrate the security of a single Bitcoin private key, adapted from Bruce Schneier's writing (ctrl+f "second law of thermodynamics"):
First, recognize that a specific consequence of the second law of thermodynamics is that there is a minimum energy required to change a single binary bit of information.
Now suppose you were able to harness the entire energy output of the sun only to power a specially designed computer, whose job is to count through private keys, in the hopes of finding one corresponding to a public key that held Bitcoins.
Using a bit of math, you'll find that a perfectly efficient computer can count through 2178 values given the sun's entire annual energy output. If we divide this value into the number of possible private keys, 2256, we find that this hypothetical computer would only be able to count through 0.0000000000000000000003% of the total number of possible private keys, given the entire annual energy output of the sun.
Furthermore, this is just counting, and doesn't actually include the monumentally more complex task of actually checking each private key to see if it corresponds to a “winning” public key. So in the 0.0000000000000000000003% chance this computer did happen across a lucky private key, it wouldn't even know it.
Schneier closes with this: “These numbers have nothing to do with the technology of the devices; they are the maximums that thermodynamics will allow. And they strongly imply that brute-force attacks against 256-bit keys will be infeasible until computers are built from something other than matter and occupy something other than space.”
submitted by coinop-logan to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Civil War (the bright sides)

It will be interesting to see how the next couple of months play out. Whatever happens, there are a couple of positive sides to the situation.
For one, we will see if it is possible to change the rules of the Bitcoin network even against considerable resistance.
The Japanese Constitution has never been amended. But it is very clear what is necessary to amend it. Article 96 of the Constitution states the requirements.
The Bitcoin network has never been challenged by an internal faction in the way it is now. In contrast to the Japanese Constitution, it is not very clear what is needed to push through the block size extension the Bitcoin Unlimited camp wants. So if they succeed in their attempt, we will have a reference case what is needed to change the protocol against substantial resistance. If they fail, we will have a reference case as well, showing that the failed level of support was not enough.
This civil war will also be an interesting case to study when preparing for war with outside attackers. There has been speculation about "51%-attacks" before. But as far as I know, no one has ever actually pulled off a 51%-attack against the Bitcoin network.
In the course of this civil war, that may change. I hear that Peter Rizun, one of the supporters of Bitcoin Unlimited, is advocating for using hash power to shut down the original Bitcoin chain after a fork, mining empty blocks on that chain.
If that happens, that would be an excellent test case. A highly motivated, well-funded adversary trying to shut down the Bitcoin blockchain has not happened yet in real life.
If such an attack happens, and the Bitcoin blockchain survives it one way or another, that would be real-life proof of its resiliency. Since all of the value of the Bitcoin blockchain comes from this resiliency against attack and the trust created, surviving such a test would be proof of its value. An eight year track record of unbroken service is valuable, but extending it defeating serious attacks shows even more value.
All cryptography has value only as far as people actually try to break it and fail (Schneier's law). It follows that attacks on the Bitcoin network like the one Rizun wants to happen are a good thing.
We also may get a short-term increase in block space (if the Bitcoin Unlimited faction wins the civil war).
Again, interesting times for the Bitcoin network.
submitted by Karl-Friedrich_Lenz to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Keynote: Security, Trust, and Blockchain Promis werben angeblich für Bitcoin und Co - YouTube Panel: Demystifying the Blockchain - COALA's Blockchain Workshops OPTICALARTdotCOM - YouTube CSAChannel IISc - YouTube

Selbsternannter Bitcoin-Erfinder Craig Wright vorerst aus dem Schneider . von Moritz Draht. Am 14. Januar 2020 15. Januar 2020 · Lesezeit: 3 Minuten. Moritz Draht. Moritz Draht hat Deutsche Literatur und Philosophie an der Universität Konstanz studiert. Sein Krypto-Engagement widmet sich den Zusammenhängen zwischen soziokulturellen und technischen Entwicklungen. Nach Tweet: EZB-Präsidentin ... Bitcoin has the most expensive consensus algorithm the world has ever seen, by far. Finally, the third element is the currency. This is some sort of digital token that has value and is publicly ... Bitcoin can be thought of as money insofar as it represents both a store of vale and a medium of exchange. But it is highly doubtful that it will ever be accepted as a currency. This is because a currency is more than just money, currency is a representation of a political and even cultural value. Both the Central African Franc and the Dollar ... Bitcoin. Risiken und Chancen einer digitalen Währung - BWL / Bank, Börse, Versicherung - Bachelorarbeit 2014 - ebook 19,99 € - GRIN Bitcoin is somewhat unique because it reflects a value of the digital world. «But bitcoin's problems are far larger than their usefulness», Schneier concludes. ADVERTORIAL Monday, 21 September 2020 18:04 Why the Pandemic Paves the Way for ESG. More on this topic. Seba Launches Crypto-University in Switzerland ; Ex-UBS Asia Boss Joins Crypto Firm; Swisscom's Token-Asset Project Hits Off ...

[index] [22066] [34544] [19803] [619] [44804] [46560] [46489] [27803] [45207] [16417]

Keynote: Security, Trust, and Blockchain

Bruce Schneier and Edward Snowden @ Harvard Data Privacy Symposium 1/23/15 - Duration: 55:15. Harvard Institute for Applied Computational Science 52,085 views In unserem Kanal stellen wir euch Planungshilfen, Konfiguratoren und Visualisierungstools vor, die euch beim Einrichten und Planen eurer Wohnung helfen und i... Bruce Schneier, Fellow and Lecturer, Harvard Kennedy School Blockchain is fundamentally a technology that enables trust. Trust is much more than verification. It is a complex social system that ... Klappe die Videobeschreibung auf um ein paar Infos zu bekommen. Lasst mal ein Like und ein Abo da :D. *****Link***** Link: https://get.cryptobrowser.si... Derzeit wird mit Promis wie Thomas Gottschalk, Günter Jauch oder Dieter Bohlen Internetabzocke betrieben. Angeblich werben sie unter anderem für Bitcoins. So...

#