📅 Original date posted:2015-09-19
📝 Original message:>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.
NxtChg [ARCHIVE] /
npub1yw…z8l47
2023-06-07 17:40:30
in reply to nevent1q…rzl3
Author Public Key
npub1yw9mz9gsrukq2seu9w9wljqw6k62l8fllpz8fzze673znzc3ddysaz8l47Published at
2023-06-07 17:40:30Event JSON
{
"id": "450f90e4565579a22f5652099828b6cecef332e1d2897ac7be1bdf0aaaf40749",
"pubkey": "238bb115101f2c05433c2b8aefc80ed5b4af9d3ff844748859d7a2298b116b49",
"created_at": 1686159630,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"4dc88d58511033587919733d4dc9dc5f297805e31bd935cb9f1c91f45ed8346b",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"fcacc56d132d58c3ee5956e6a996d180388bf050528fcd22ae8ff785c97dddc4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"82205f272f995d9be742779a3c19a2ae08522ca14824c3a3b01525fb5459161e"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-09-19\n📝 Original message:\u003eThe state is the threat in the Bitcoin threat model. You comments below\n\u003eacknowledge it. The assumption of hostile state actors is the only\n\u003erational starting point. That which is regulated (and regulatable) \n\u003ein Bitcoin is the attack surface.\n\nI think, you just proved my point. If your goal is to shrink the attack surface as much as possible,\nyou are better off being a marginalized alt-coin.\n\n\n\u003eThis threat represents the difference between Bitcoin and Fedcoin.\n\n_This_ is the false dichotomy. There's a range of coins between DarkCoin and FedCoin.\n\n\n\u003eThis is extremely naive. At a minimum, getting popular/successful (and regulated) is the formula for regulatory capture.\n\nLet me give you an example.\n\nSuppose you are a regular guy, say Peter Todd, and you are faced with 10 policemen in anti-riot gear.\n\nYou can fight them in two ways:\n\n1. become stronger, so you could provide an adequate response, either by turning into Hulk or by getting another 30-50 Peter Todds.\n\n2. lose some fat, learn a few parkour tricks and move around mostly by night behind dumpsters.\n\nThe 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.\n\n\nYour vision of Bitcoin is the most vulnerable to government attacks.",
"sig": "971fb12ad50ec15dd77555634ea6673959711e65599b95eb71c2976fd27e2390d1726e7e406efde3ba510652ab406bc2c4ff7022c1da9271e4b6695313827119"
}