hurricanewarn1 at aol.com [ARCHIVE] / is on Nostr

⚠️ This account is not associated with a real person. It's an archival account for mailing list messages.
🗓️ Active from 2015-08-31 to 2015-09-04
💬 Posted a total of 11 messages
📚 Participated in the following categories: bitcoin-dev, xxxx
🔇 Please do not DM this user as it's used for archive purposes only.

Last Notes

2023-06-07 17:39:05

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-09-01
📝 Original message:The only reason someone would want to make a license is so they can sue/threaten people for not following the license rules. At best this is pointless since Bitcoin cannot be controlled, and at worst it will result in a group of people using coercion against the community to gain profits.
There is no legal ground for anyone to make a Bitcoin license, it simply wouldn't stand in court. Not even the MIT license is valid or meaningful. But I wouldn't be surprised if people tried scaring people with a license even if they knew it was invalid.
It's actually disgusting that you wrote what people are allowed and not allowed to do with Bitcoin. Pure centralization ideology. Maybe go work for the government and make regulations instead of trying to centralize one of the only de-centralized things left on the planet.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ahmed Zsales via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: Tue, Sep 1, 2015 9:30 am
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Open Block Chain Licence, BIP[xxxx] Draft
Hello,
We believe the network requires a block chain licence to supplement the existing MIT Licence which we believe only covers the core reference client software.
Replacing or amending the existing MIT Licence is beyond the scope of this draft BIP.
Rationale and details of our draft BIP for discussion and evaluation are here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwEbhrQ4ELzBMVFxajNZa2hzMTg/view?usp=sharing
Regards,
Ahmed
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing
list
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150901/fe5d4286/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 17:38:52

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-09-02
📝 Original message:42 in the whole world, and I'm one of them. Clearly that is a problem, do you even know about AT&T or are you in another country? Cause that statement is utterly ridiculous given the fact there are hundreds of millions of people using AT&T. I was simply sharing my knowledge on this issue since it poses a threat to the health of the bitcoin network, no need for personal attacks.
None of my accusations were false, there is a firewall in the DVR that is uncontrolled and all ports are blocked via private subnets and no fixed public IP allowed unless you pay. I confirmed every one of these details with AT&T technicians or I wouldn't be saying them.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>
To: hurricanewarn1 <hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>
Sent: Wed, Sep 2, 2015 5:34 am
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] AT&T has effectively banned Bitcoin nodes via utilizing private subnets.
According to BitNodes, 42 Bitcoin nodes are running on AT&T's
network:
https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/nodes/?q=AT%26T
So I'm thinking
there's nothing wrong with AT&T's default network configuration.
Frankly, the
things you've been writing strongly suggest that you aren't very knowledgeable
about computer networking. Instead of jumping right into making wild accusations
about AT&T, you probably should find someone knowledgeable to verify your
claims.
On Wednesday, 2 September 2015, at 5:20 am, Zach G via bitcoin-dev
wrote:
> First off I couldn't synch the wallet, it said no block source
available and there was zero connections. Bitcoin was literally getting thottled
every second. It would not even allow the connection to get block source. EVERY
port was blocked, making exceptions in the router firewall did nothing. I was
forced to use Blockchain.info which is a major security risk.
>
> Secondly, I
am developing a program using Bitcoin Python modules, so I login to my computer
like it's a server and it was flat out rejecting the connection. I could not run
any code until this got fixed, and of course needed the block source to even do
anything.
>
> If Bitcoin Core worked but 8333 was blocked I would not be
emailing the list. Bitcoin Core was crippled and unusable due to the AT&T
settings, and they tried hard to get me to buy monthly subscriptions to get the
answer. This makes it likely that Bitcoin Core is unusable for most AT&T
customers and other ISPs, hence the massive node decline. I'm sure this disrupts
alot of other people besides Bitcoiners too, hence the monthly subscriptions
geared towards people who can't figure out their connection situation.
>
>
AT&T literally blocked access to static IP if you don't buy one, so it wasn't a
normal network setup. Unfortunately the same security used to stop hackers and
viruses stops Bitcoin too, so this is probably the settings for almost every
router in the country. Nodes are in fact declining worldwide, down 15% in the
past year alone. Community needs to speak up and also educate before this gets
completely out of control. https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=365 6,000
nodes is pathetic as it is and it's constantly declining.
>
>
>
>
>
-----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>
> To:
hurricanewarn1 <hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>
> Sent: Wed, Sep 2, 2015 4:32 am
>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] AT&T has effectively banned Bitcoin nodes via
utilizing private subnets.
>
>
> Respectfully, what the heck are you
talking about? Practically every home LAN
> runs on a private subnet. My own
desktop computer has the IP address
> 192.168.1.34, which is in a private
subnet. This doesn't prevent my Bitcoin Core
> node from making outbound
connections to other nodes. Moreover, almost all home
> Internet connections in
the world run on dynamically assigned IP addresses.
> Again, this does not
cause any problems for connecting outbound to other Bitcoin
> nodes. It's true
that your node can't accept incoming connections unless you
> forward port 8333
on your router to your computer, but you don't need to be able
> to accept
incoming connections to participate in the Bitcoin network.
>
>
> On
>
Wednesday, 2 September 2015, at 3:20 am, Zach G via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> >
>
> I
> was about to buy a VPS for Bitcoin, but I really do need Bitcoin Core
for
> business reasons so I didn't give up. I once again thoroughly went
through my
> computer and made sure there was nothing blocking 8333, a couple
useful tools
> are CurrPorts and TCPView. I went through the router to make
sure there was no
> block of port 8333. I researched everything thoroughly and
was sure these were
> the right settings, but Bitcoin was still getting
throttled every second and
> stuck in sys_sent, and python kept saying the
target was rejecting the
> connection.
> >
> > I finally stumbled upon
subnet settings, and saw that I had a
> private subnet, one of the few IPs that
are private on earth (
> https://www.arin.net/knowledge/address_filters.html ).
Uverse put all their
> customers on a private subnet by default. This made my
computer not only hidden
> but unroutable for any computer on the Bitcoin
network. That alone is enough to
> totally stop Bitcoin connections on any
port, but they made it even crazier by
> generating a dynamic IP that changes
all the time, so public IP was meaningless
> for my computer.
> >
> > I
switched over to a public subnet, and right there was
> a checkbox to allow
incoming connections. My static IP showed for a minute then
> became
dynamic/hidden again without me even touching anything. The final
> roadblock
was AT&T charges $15-30/month for a public static IP, which is
> obviously
insane and actually one could argue that violates their own terms of
> service.
So the router was still ignoring my public IP settings simply because I
>
wasn't paying for a public IP, and intentionally changing the settings back.
I
> asked for a free public IP and there was no response for awhile.
> >
> >
I found
> this article on cryptocoinnews while working out:
>
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/isps-intentionally-blocking-bitcoin/ It's
based
> on the first email I sent, and was displayed prominently on their front
page. I
> posted a tweet publicly about it which referenced AT&T (
>
https://twitter.com/turtlehurricane/status/638930065980551168 ) and believe
it
> or not I had a static public IP and port 8333 was open about 1 minute
later. I
> don't know if it was a coincidence cause I already messaged them to
please do
> that an hour before, or if that article and tweet spurred them to
action. The
> timing was so ridiculous I think it's the latter. Without twitter
I probably
> wouldn't have succeeded, the technicians on twitter actually
answered all my
> questions 24/7 unlike phone technicians which were clueless
and trying to sell
> me a subscription for connection services help. And shout
out to cryptocoinnews
> for making this public.
> >
> > So to clarify, it
appears AT&T has not blocked
> port 8333 itself, but rather effectively blocked
all ports via the private
> subnet, which makes the computer hidden and
unroutable for incoming peers.
> Although this severely limits functionality
and cripples the ability to run a
> full node and many other programs it is
understandable, since it just about 100%
> prevents hackers from getting in,
since they can't even see your computer. What
> isn't understandable is that
AT&T technicians did not inform me about this until
> I changed the settings
myself, despite the fact it is a very obvious cause of
> ports being blocked.
It's probably just ignorance since AT&T has so many complex
> network settings
it's hard to keep track of, although I have a suspicion that
> someone in their
command chain is withholding information in an attempt to make
> them buy a
$15/month connection service, and once they buy that another
> $15-30/month is
needed to get the static IP.
> >
> > As far as I know there is no
> easy to
find info on the internet about private subnets crippling the ability to
> use
Bitcoin. I believe this needs to be explicitly said in instructions for
>
running a full node, maybe it wasn't a problem in 2009 but now it is a major
>
issue. On default settings Bitcoin is 100% blocked, and most people do not
have
> the time or motivation to fix this. I talked to at least 10 AT&T
technicians and
> worked on it 2-3 days straight, did not receive the right
answer until I found
> it myself, although they certainly gave me some useful
clues about how the
> network works.
> >
> > I am very happy that AT&T fixed
it, since other ISPs like
> Comcast appeared even worse. I openly talked with
them about Bitcoin and they
> showed no prejudice, might've actually made them
more willing to help me cause
> otherwise they would think I'm a hacker.
> >
> > tl;dr The good news is anyone
> with AT&T can be a full node by getting a
public static IP, the bad news is
> almost no one will figure this out unless
we as a community make it well known.
> I guarantee node numbers will improve
if this information is spread to everyone.
> Database size and computing
expenditures is simply not the reason people don't
> run full nodes, it's
because their ISP has made it just about impossible without
> shelling out
nearly 100% more money per month. If you don't pay the fee AT&T
> would never
tell you about the private subnet, at least based on my
> experience.
> >
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: odinn
>
<odinn.cyberguerrilla at riseup.net>
> > To: hurricanewarn1
>
<hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>; bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>
>
> Sent: Tue, Sep 1, 2015 3:16 am
> > Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] AT&T has
>
effectively banned Bitcoin nodes by closing port 8333 via a hidden firewall
in
> the cable box
> >
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> >
Hash: SHA512
> >
>
> > Another note on this subject
> > to add to the stuff
people have already
> >
> mentioned...
> >
> > If you have the AT&T
> >
landline but don't use AT&T's
> standard internet /
> > tv (what they call
Uverse)
> > offering - that is, if you
> prefer to use
> > some local
internet provider - you are
> > probably better off
> (in terms
> > of
avoiding not only this sort of
> > blockage/censorship but as
> well,
> >
potentially getting a better privacy policy
> > that isn't going to
> be
> >
like AT&T's long-term data retention). You can check
> > directly with
> >
>
the various local small ISPs to see what their policies
> > are
> >
specifically
> on ports and whatnot.
> >
> > Ideally your ISP should let
>
> you:
> >
> > port
> forward to SOMEPORTNUMBER for tcp and udp
> >
> >
(above may or may not
> > be
> helpful for some if you are using
> >
decentralized markets)
> >
> > have port
> 8333
> > open
> >
> > (above
is for bitcoin of course)
> >
> > Supposing you have
> FTTN because you
> >
are paying a local ISP for
> > internet service, and that
> local ISP has
contracted
> > with AT&T to be
> > able to provide service in an
> area where
old-style DSL has been
> > phased
> > out, thus your local ISP is
>
essentially providing you AT&T FTTN.
> > (FTTN
> > is Fiber to the Node,
FTTN-BP
> is FTTN Bonded Pair). Even if a
> > local ISP has
> > its own
privacy policy
> posted which is different from
> > AT&T, everything is
> >
subject to AT&T data
> retention because the FTTN.
> > So get yourself a VPN
(or set
> > up your own) for
> your connection. Tor
> > will run through the
VPN.
> >
> > General
> > observations
> - TWC stores your IP and other
stuffs for 6
> > months or longer.
> > Same for
> Comcast. Verizon retains
your stuffs for
> > 18 month minimum, probably
> >
> longer though.
Qwest/Century, 1 year.
> > Cox, 6 months. AT&T retains for
> longer
> > than
a year. This is just
> > what they are telling you, the reality
> is it's
>
> probably longer due to
> > stuff like
> > this:
> >
>
https://www.lawfareblog.com/odni-and-doj-release-last-section-215-collec
> >
>
tion-order
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Zach
> >
G via bitcoin-dev:
> >
> > I have been struggling to get port 8333 open all
year, I
> > gave up
> > > and
> was using blockchain for months despite a
strong desire to
> > stay
> > > on
> Bitcoin Core, but now the issue has
reached critical mass since
> > >
> > I'm
> using the python Bitcoin server
module. I have literally spent
> > > my entire
> >
> day trying to open 8333,
I thoroughly made sure it was
> > > open on the router
> and
> > computer and
it's still closed. Strangely
> > > enough I got it open for
> 30 seconds
> >
once today but something closed
> > > it immediately.
> > >
> > >
> After
hours of phone
> > calls and messaging AT&T finally told me the
> > > truth
>
of what was going on, and
> > only because I noticed it myself
> > > and
demanded
> an answer. The internet is
> > being routed through a
> > >
DVR/cable box, and
> they confirmed the DVR also has a
> > firewall. To
> > >
make this even more
> absurd they refused to turn the firewall
> > off
> > >
because it is their
> equipment. So effectively they can firewall any
> > >
>
> port they want even if
> the customer asks them not to, in the
> > >
unlikely event
> > the customer
> figures it out.
> > >
> > > Perhaps this
is the driving force behind the
> >
> inexplicable and
> > > massive decline
in Bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin is being
> censored
> > by the
> > > ISPs
themselves, and they won't even tell you that. I
> had to get in
> > >
> >
touch with headquarters and threaten to rip it out of the
> wall to
> > > get
a
> > proper answer.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
_______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing
> > >
list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > >
> >
>
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> > >
> >
>
> -
> --
> >
> > http://abis.io ~
> > "a protocol concept to enable
decentralization
> >
> and
> > expansion of a giving economy, and a new
social
> > good"
> >
> https://keybase.io/odinn
> > -----BEGIN PGP
> >
SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >
>
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV5VDeAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CvkIH/jy4Vo+My3xeBdvFQmxkJWyQ
> >
>
U5mv2zWEvBYw71Xy1EDzQY1AhEBmatUU1eu2AbOqXdUR4511FxCNzFmTxy6roEiz
> >
>
EehBkvXNbBCbEzLRisjxuQw34OKM+xfieCqE1mzJok2uSdLMMQLcbWL1/k3/OmS5
> >
>
9O9z/wMXqU1Jc19MTK+vF1Lz5ilnRn3hEbTaCN3ivYnYFa0DpBH9r0Y07UcoJ6Wr
> >
>
ui/x0sSSuupAGzOkZ75HQ8yeQXckeAu6TB3/jE8QEqNUmAJkmR8eK4ofXZWFrIjy
> >
>
mOKeQL4c+jRQnTR8pt+y89g2QIpzFoHaV5T+WvQuC1t8xNOrxLgYFXWgl0dhoYE=
> > =UCLC
>
>
> -----END
> > PGP SIGNATURE-----
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150902/960fffea/attachment-0001.html>

2023-06-07 17:38:51

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-09-02
📝 Original message:First off I couldn't synch the wallet, it said no block source available and there was zero connections. Bitcoin was literally getting thottled every second. It would not even allow the connection to get block source. EVERY port was blocked, making exceptions in the router firewall did nothing. I was forced to use Blockchain.info which is a major security risk.
Secondly, I am developing a program using Bitcoin Python modules, so I login to my computer like it's a server and it was flat out rejecting the connection. I could not run any code until this got fixed, and of course needed the block source to even do anything.
If Bitcoin Core worked but 8333 was blocked I would not be emailing the list. Bitcoin Core was crippled and unusable due to the AT&T settings, and they tried hard to get me to buy monthly subscriptions to get the answer. This makes it likely that Bitcoin Core is unusable for most AT&T customers and other ISPs, hence the massive node decline. I'm sure this disrupts alot of other people besides Bitcoiners too, hence the monthly subscriptions geared towards people who can't figure out their connection situation.
AT&T literally blocked access to static IP if you don't buy one, so it wasn't a normal network setup. Unfortunately the same security used to stop hackers and viruses stops Bitcoin too, so this is probably the settings for almost every router in the country. Nodes are in fact declining worldwide, down 15% in the past year alone. Community needs to speak up and also educate before this gets completely out of control. https://getaddr.bitnodes.io/dashboard/?days=365 6,000 nodes is pathetic as it is and it's constantly declining.
-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name>
To: hurricanewarn1 <hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>
Sent: Wed, Sep 2, 2015 4:32 am
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] AT&T has effectively banned Bitcoin nodes via utilizing private subnets.
Respectfully, what the heck are you talking about? Practically every home LAN
runs on a private subnet. My own desktop computer has the IP address
192.168.1.34, which is in a private subnet. This doesn't prevent my Bitcoin Core
node from making outbound connections to other nodes. Moreover, almost all home
Internet connections in the world run on dynamically assigned IP addresses.
Again, this does not cause any problems for connecting outbound to other Bitcoin
nodes. It's true that your node can't accept incoming connections unless you
forward port 8333 on your router to your computer, but you don't need to be able
to accept incoming connections to participate in the Bitcoin network.
On
Wednesday, 2 September 2015, at 3:20 am, Zach G via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
> I
was about to buy a VPS for Bitcoin, but I really do need Bitcoin Core for
business reasons so I didn't give up. I once again thoroughly went through my
computer and made sure there was nothing blocking 8333, a couple useful tools
are CurrPorts and TCPView. I went through the router to make sure there was no
block of port 8333. I researched everything thoroughly and was sure these were
the right settings, but Bitcoin was still getting throttled every second and
stuck in sys_sent, and python kept saying the target was rejecting the
connection.
>
> I finally stumbled upon subnet settings, and saw that I had a
private subnet, one of the few IPs that are private on earth (
https://www.arin.net/knowledge/address_filters.html ). Uverse put all their
customers on a private subnet by default. This made my computer not only hidden
but unroutable for any computer on the Bitcoin network. That alone is enough to
totally stop Bitcoin connections on any port, but they made it even crazier by
generating a dynamic IP that changes all the time, so public IP was meaningless
for my computer.
>
> I switched over to a public subnet, and right there was
a checkbox to allow incoming connections. My static IP showed for a minute then
became dynamic/hidden again without me even touching anything. The final
roadblock was AT&T charges $15-30/month for a public static IP, which is
obviously insane and actually one could argue that violates their own terms of
service. So the router was still ignoring my public IP settings simply because I
wasn't paying for a public IP, and intentionally changing the settings back. I
asked for a free public IP and there was no response for awhile.
>
> I found
this article on cryptocoinnews while working out:
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/isps-intentionally-blocking-bitcoin/ It's based
on the first email I sent, and was displayed prominently on their front page. I
posted a tweet publicly about it which referenced AT&T (
https://twitter.com/turtlehurricane/status/638930065980551168 ) and believe it
or not I had a static public IP and port 8333 was open about 1 minute later. I
don't know if it was a coincidence cause I already messaged them to please do
that an hour before, or if that article and tweet spurred them to action. The
timing was so ridiculous I think it's the latter. Without twitter I probably
wouldn't have succeeded, the technicians on twitter actually answered all my
questions 24/7 unlike phone technicians which were clueless and trying to sell
me a subscription for connection services help. And shout out to cryptocoinnews
for making this public.
>
> So to clarify, it appears AT&T has not blocked
port 8333 itself, but rather effectively blocked all ports via the private
subnet, which makes the computer hidden and unroutable for incoming peers.
Although this severely limits functionality and cripples the ability to run a
full node and many other programs it is understandable, since it just about 100%
prevents hackers from getting in, since they can't even see your computer. What
isn't understandable is that AT&T technicians did not inform me about this until
I changed the settings myself, despite the fact it is a very obvious cause of
ports being blocked. It's probably just ignorance since AT&T has so many complex
network settings it's hard to keep track of, although I have a suspicion that
someone in their command chain is withholding information in an attempt to make
them buy a $15/month connection service, and once they buy that another
$15-30/month is needed to get the static IP.
>
> As far as I know there is no
easy to find info on the internet about private subnets crippling the ability to
use Bitcoin. I believe this needs to be explicitly said in instructions for
running a full node, maybe it wasn't a problem in 2009 but now it is a major
issue. On default settings Bitcoin is 100% blocked, and most people do not have
the time or motivation to fix this. I talked to at least 10 AT&T technicians and
worked on it 2-3 days straight, did not receive the right answer until I found
it myself, although they certainly gave me some useful clues about how the
network works.
>
> I am very happy that AT&T fixed it, since other ISPs like
Comcast appeared even worse. I openly talked with them about Bitcoin and they
showed no prejudice, might've actually made them more willing to help me cause
otherwise they would think I'm a hacker.
>
> tl;dr The good news is anyone
with AT&T can be a full node by getting a public static IP, the bad news is
almost no one will figure this out unless we as a community make it well known.
I guarantee node numbers will improve if this information is spread to everyone.
Database size and computing expenditures is simply not the reason people don't
run full nodes, it's because their ISP has made it just about impossible without
shelling out nearly 100% more money per month. If you don't pay the fee AT&T
would never tell you about the private subnet, at least based on my
experience.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: odinn
<odinn.cyberguerrilla at riseup.net>
> To: hurricanewarn1
<hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>; bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>
Sent: Tue, Sep 1, 2015 3:16 am
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] AT&T has
effectively banned Bitcoin nodes by closing port 8333 via a hidden firewall in
the cable box
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> Another note on this subject
> to add to the stuff people have already
>
mentioned...
>
> If you have the AT&T
> landline but don't use AT&T's
standard internet /
> tv (what they call Uverse)
> offering - that is, if you
prefer to use
> some local internet provider - you are
> probably better off
(in terms
> of avoiding not only this sort of
> blockage/censorship but as
well,
> potentially getting a better privacy policy
> that isn't going to
be
> like AT&T's long-term data retention). You can check
> directly with
>
the various local small ISPs to see what their policies
> are
> specifically
on ports and whatnot.
>
> Ideally your ISP should let
> you:
>
> port
forward to SOMEPORTNUMBER for tcp and udp
>
> (above may or may not
> be
helpful for some if you are using
> decentralized markets)
>
> have port
8333
> open
>
> (above is for bitcoin of course)
>
> Supposing you have
FTTN because you
> are paying a local ISP for
> internet service, and that
local ISP has contracted
> with AT&T to be
> able to provide service in an
area where old-style DSL has been
> phased
> out, thus your local ISP is
essentially providing you AT&T FTTN.
> (FTTN
> is Fiber to the Node, FTTN-BP
is FTTN Bonded Pair). Even if a
> local ISP has
> its own privacy policy
posted which is different from
> AT&T, everything is
> subject to AT&T data
retention because the FTTN.
> So get yourself a VPN (or set
> up your own) for
your connection. Tor
> will run through the VPN.
>
> General
> observations
- TWC stores your IP and other stuffs for 6
> months or longer.
> Same for
Comcast. Verizon retains your stuffs for
> 18 month minimum, probably
>
longer though. Qwest/Century, 1 year.
> Cox, 6 months. AT&T retains for
longer
> than a year. This is just
> what they are telling you, the reality
is it's
> probably longer due to
> stuff like
> this:
>
https://www.lawfareblog.com/odni-and-doj-release-last-section-215-collec
>
tion-order
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Zach
> G via bitcoin-dev:
>
> I have been struggling to get port 8333 open all year, I
> gave up
> > and
was using blockchain for months despite a strong desire to
> stay
> > on
Bitcoin Core, but now the issue has reached critical mass since
> >
> I'm
using the python Bitcoin server module. I have literally spent
> > my entire
>
day trying to open 8333, I thoroughly made sure it was
> > open on the router
and
> computer and it's still closed. Strangely
> > enough I got it open for
30 seconds
> once today but something closed
> > it immediately.
> >
> >
After hours of phone
> calls and messaging AT&T finally told me the
> > truth
of what was going on, and
> only because I noticed it myself
> > and demanded
an answer. The internet is
> being routed through a
> > DVR/cable box, and
they confirmed the DVR also has a
> firewall. To
> > make this even more
absurd they refused to turn the firewall
> off
> > because it is their
equipment. So effectively they can firewall any
> >
> port they want even if
the customer asks them not to, in the
> > unlikely event
> the customer
figures it out.
> >
> > Perhaps this is the driving force behind the
>
inexplicable and
> > massive decline in Bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin is being
censored
> by the
> > ISPs themselves, and they won't even tell you that. I
had to get in
> >
> touch with headquarters and threaten to rip it out of the
wall to
> > get a
> proper answer.
> >
> >
> >
> >
_______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing
> > list
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> >
>
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> >
>
> -
--
>
> http://abis.io ~
> "a protocol concept to enable decentralization
>
and
> expansion of a giving economy, and a new social
> good"
>
https://keybase.io/odinn
> -----BEGIN PGP
> SIGNATURE-----
>
>
iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJV5VDeAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CvkIH/jy4Vo+My3xeBdvFQmxkJWyQ
>
U5mv2zWEvBYw71Xy1EDzQY1AhEBmatUU1eu2AbOqXdUR4511FxCNzFmTxy6roEiz
>
EehBkvXNbBCbEzLRisjxuQw34OKM+xfieCqE1mzJok2uSdLMMQLcbWL1/k3/OmS5
>
9O9z/wMXqU1Jc19MTK+vF1Lz5ilnRn3hEbTaCN3ivYnYFa0DpBH9r0Y07UcoJ6Wr
>
ui/x0sSSuupAGzOkZ75HQ8yeQXckeAu6TB3/jE8QEqNUmAJkmR8eK4ofXZWFrIjy
>
mOKeQL4c+jRQnTR8pt+y89g2QIpzFoHaV5T+WvQuC1t8xNOrxLgYFXWgl0dhoYE=
> =UCLC
>
-----END
> PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150902/acbda28d/attachment-0001.html>

2023-06-07 17:38:49

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-31
📝 Original message:I have been struggling to get port 8333 open all year, I gave up and was using blockchain for months despite a strong desire to stay on Bitcoin Core, but now the issue has reached critical mass since I'm using the python Bitcoin server module. I have literally spent my entire day trying to open 8333, I thoroughly made sure it was open on the router and computer and it's still closed. Strangely enough I got it open for 30 seconds once today but something closed it immediately.
After hours of phone calls and messaging AT&T finally told me the truth of what was going on, and only because I noticed it myself and demanded an answer. The internet is being routed through a DVR/cable box, and they confirmed the DVR also has a firewall. To make this even more absurd they refused to turn the firewall off because it is their equipment. So effectively they can firewall any port they want even if the customer asks them not to, in the unlikely event the customer figures it out.
Perhaps this is the driving force behind the inexplicable and massive decline in Bitcoin nodes. Bitcoin is being censored by the ISPs themselves, and they won't even tell you that. I had to get in touch with headquarters and threaten to rip it out of the wall to get a proper answer.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150831/a9145edf/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 17:37:47

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-31
📝 Original message:Yup I've been looking over twister thoroughly this week, it's very close to what I'm thinking and I'm sure the developer of that could easily do the project I'm doing. However he decided to make an alt coin and didn't use the real blockchain, which makes his network weak. It's a waste to not take advantage of the immense bitcoin computing power for this. I'm only planning on storing hashes in the blockchain though to prevent data bloat, and the parallel program which stores all the data will be a lot like twister. Additionally I'm going to take it beyond a messaging system, will be able to literally upload anything and everything to this system. Theres no limit to what this de-centralized system can do if designed correctly. Crypto graffiti has given a taste of that by uploading jpeg and png to the blockchain.
Will be working on this 24/7 until the first release, will definitely tell you and others when the code is ready to be looked over. Fortunately I am employed by bitcoin so I can focus on this
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Wozniak <mwozniak at itbit.com>
To: hurricanewarn1 <hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 09:15 AM
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Censorship
<div id="AOLMsgPart_2_3e2f989c-2ac0-4675-a613-58f047c46a67">
<div class="aolReplacedBody">
<div dir="ltr">
Have you seen this:
<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="http://twister.net.co/">http://twister.net.co/</a>
<div>
It sounds very similar to what you're trying to do. Also, I'd be willing to help out in the form of running some alpha/beta software as part of the network once you get something working. Depending what languages you're writing in, I might help with code.
</div>
<div class="aolmail_gmail_extra">
<div class="aolmail_gmail_quote">
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 8:06 AM, Zach G via bitcoin-dev
<span dir="ltr"><<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>></span> wrote:
<blockquote class="aolmail_gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<font color="black" size="2" face="arial"><font face="arial" color="black" size="2"><font size="2">The de-centralized forum directly integrates the Bitcoin blockchain with every post. I can see how you misunderstood since I wasn't specific in my first email. I'm surprised no one has done this yet, people have done things very similar but never took the leap to integrate the actual Bitcoin blockchain. Basically <a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="http://cryptograffiti.info/">http://cryptograffiti.info/</a> but with a parallel program that stores most of the data in a hash reference table, and shares that data via a torrent-esque system.
The Bitcoin of thoughts.</font></font>
<div style="font-family:arial,helvetica;font-size:10pt;color:black">
<span>-----Original Message-----
From: Natanael <<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:natanael.l at gmail.com">natanael.l at gmail.com</a>>
To: NxtChg <<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:nxtchg at hush.com">nxtchg at hush.com</a>>
Cc: bitcoin-dev <<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>>; hurricanewarn1 <<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:hurricanewarn1 at aol.com">hurricanewarn1 at aol.com</a>>
Sent: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 7:46 am
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Censorship
</span>
<div class="aolmail_h5">
<div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
One last comment here on this topic;
<div dir="ltr">
For anybody who wants to discuss decentralized communication mechanisms in general, they can come to
<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="http://www.reddit.com/r/p2pcomms">www.reddit.com/r/p2pcomms</a> (up until these decentralized forums have become stable and common).
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
I've seen quite a few more of these projects lately, I want to make a list of them and would definitely like to contribute to making them not just usable, but good enough to gain popularity on their own.
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
(And in case you wonder about my approach to moderation: let every user pick which moderators / filters / servers he trusts, and let them share their subscription preferences in place of sharing links to centralized forums.)
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
- Sent from my phone
</div>
<div class="aolmail_gmail_quote">
Den 31 aug 2015 10:45 skrev "NxtChg via bitcoin-dev" <
<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>>:
<blockquote class="aolmail_gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
>I am creating a de-centralized forum, and I mean truly decentralized as I nor anyone else will be able to control it.
Zander is working on the same thing:
<a rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="https://www.reddit.com/r/AetheralResearch/">https://www.reddit.com/r/AetheralResearch/</a>
But it's actually quite difficult to make it truly censorship-resistant: both in solving the theymos factor and spam/abuse/overloading as an attack.
>There is no doubt that the centralization and censorship of the Bitcoin community is massively inhibiting the advance of Bitcoin
>and also the growth of the Bitcoin economy. We are scaring away intellectuals, businessman, and newbies that are just getting started.
We have /r/bitcoinxt and so far it has been great. But we also need a regular forum.
Roger Ver controls
<a rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="http://bitcoin.com">bitcoin.com</a>, as I understand?
<a rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="https://bitcoin.com/forum/">https://bitcoin.com/forum/</a> would be nice.
And it must be a real community, not "say whatever you want because free speech". We've seen how that turned out to be.
Something like
<a rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="http://battle.net">battle.net</a> or Steam forums: heavily moderated, not for opinions, but for spam/noise/insults.
Again, this needs leadership. Anyone can install a forum software, what is needed is an "official seal of approval" and regular presence of top XT people there.
And a will to setup proper moderation. Then people will move.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>
<a rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div> </font>
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
<a target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="mailto:bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>
<a rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" removedlink__58ec13b3-aba4-4e37-b10b-87cbd851ae2f__href="https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150831/b0a15161/attachment-0001.html>

2023-06-07 17:37:44

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-31
📝 Original message:When I say de-centralized I mean it, all the things you listed are centralized. Reddit is actually a purely centralized system and just as unhealthy as the current bitcoin forum. We have the technology, I'm simply putting together the pieces that other people have already built. This forum will literally be uncontrollable in raw form, once it's unleashed it can't be stopped. It will exist on thousands of computers so it cannot be destroyed, it will not be centrally hosted.
I expect users to create their own external software to parse the data, so people can centralize as much or as little as they want in their own 'sub-forums' built on this system. I will be releasing some very rudimentary external software/website to go along with this de-centralized system just so people can post and read what's posted, and will worry about the finer details at a later time.
There will be various leaders who utilize this program and organize quality forums, but fundamentally the raw de-centralized system cannot be controlled, so people posting to it will always have a venue to speak without being censored.
I actually started this project to create a journal of uncensored scientific research, but it didn't take long to realize this sort've thing is useful for pretty much everyone, so I'm rushing the basic release out. Then I will work on making my science journal 'sub-forum' software and everyone else can do whatever they want.
-----Original Message-----
From: NxtChg <nxtchg at hush.com>
To: hurricanewarn1 <hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>; bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 4:45 am
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Censorship
>I am creating a de-centralized forum, and I mean truly decentralized as I nor
anyone else will be able to control it.
Zander is working on the same thing:
https://www.reddit.com/r/AetheralResearch/
But it's actually quite difficult
to make it truly censorship-resistant: both in solving the theymos factor and
spam/abuse/overloading as an attack.
>There is no doubt that the
centralization and censorship of the Bitcoin community is massively inhibiting
the advance of Bitcoin
>and also the growth of the Bitcoin economy. We are
scaring away intellectuals, businessman, and newbies that are just getting
started.
We have /r/bitcoinxt and so far it has been great. But we also need
a regular forum.
Roger Ver controls bitcoin.com, as I understand?
https://bitcoin.com/forum/ would be nice.
And it must be a real community,
not "say whatever you want because free speech". We've seen how that turned out
to be.
Something like battle.net or Steam forums: heavily moderated, not for
opinions, but for spam/noise/insults.
Again, this needs leadership. Anyone
can install a forum software, what is needed is an "official seal of approval"
and regular presence of top XT people there.
And a will to setup proper
moderation. Then people will move.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150831/5033810a/attachment.html>

2023-06-07 17:37:43

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-31
📝 Original message:Regardless of the XT debate, centralization on reddit and bitcointalk has become a critical issue for the bitcoin community. A few anonymous people control both these forums, giving them unprecedented power to manipulate discussion, alter reputation, ban users, and even to facilitate scammers in the name of getting profits. Protecting the de-centralized spirit of the Bitcoin community is no longer on their list of priorities, in fact those in charge have publicly stated centralization is necessary. It doesn't matter how many thousands of posts you contributed or if you've traded thousands of Bitcoins, if one of the few who control reddit and bitcointalk decide to get rid of you there's nothing you can do. Bitcointalk has done more damage to my reputation than any other website I've ever used, and I only used it for a year. The damage wasn't even from the scammers, but rather those in charge of the community posting false allegations with zero evidence, and enforcing a guilty until proven innocent policy. Even when such allegations are definitively proven incorrect and allegations cease the posts stay on the internet forever, another site crawls all the bitcoin discussion and saves it. It's not an isolated incident either, happened several times to me before I realized how detrimental it was to even post there, and I've seen countless other members receive the same treatment.
There is no doubt that the centralization and censorship of the Bitcoin community is massively inhibiting the advance of Bitcoin and also the growth of the Bitcoin economy. We are scaring away intellectuals, businessman, and newbies that are just getting started. It has put us in a very dangerous position, the community has been weakened, and there is the possibility that the forums could be handed over to the government at any time due to their centralized nature.
I am creating a de-centralized forum, and I mean truly de-centralized as I nor anyone else will be able to control it. I am already writing the code and I'm confident it won't be long until a basic release is out. I am certain this will be very positive for the Bitcoin community, and the rest of the world since centralization is getting stronger everyday. The world needs this to level the playing field, it will be impossible for anything to be deleted on this forum even if the NSA attacks it. No one will be banned ever. The only rule is there are no rules.
If anyone is interested in this feel free to email me back. I am doing this for zero profit and without any pay, just out of passion, so I don't mind getting as much people as possible involved.
-----Original Message-----
From: sisadm101--- via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
To: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: Fri, Aug 21, 2015 2:10 pm
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Censorship
People are wondering why there is such a division in the bitcoin community at this time. Bitcoin as a whole is only so big. The bitcoin discussion communities are spread out, but there are only a few popular ones. BitcoinTalk and Reddit seem to be the largest, most popular where bitcoin discussion happens consistently and from almost everyone in the community (devs, users, btc companies, merchants, and so on). I think we all know where this is going. If not, here you go. BitcoinTalk and Reddit are managed by a single person: Theymos. It's become quite clear over the past several days/weeks, that Theymos is highly censoring bitcoin discussion, mainly on Reddit, but also BitcoinTalk. If this single person is able to censor content, and hush the debate, he (and whatever his agenda is), wins. How can we as a community discuss these proposed changes, if the discussion is from a one sided point of view? There doesn't seem to be a solution at this time, but I find it dissapointing that many (in this very email list) aren't discussing this important part of the issue. Maybe it's becuase Theymos is anti-bigger blocks, which seems to coincide with the Blockstream point of view, which many of the core devs belong to.
-------------------------------------------------
ONLY AT VFEmail! - Use our Metadata Mitigator™ to keep your email out of the NSA's hands!
$24.95 ONETIME Lifetime accounts with Privacy Features!
No Bandwidth Quotas! 15GB disk space!
Commercial and Bulk Mail Options!
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing
list
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150831/abf527de/attachment-0001.html>

2023-06-07 15:49:12

- reply

2023-06-07 15:49:11

- reply

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-31
📝 Original message:The de-centralized forum directly integrates the Bitcoin blockchain with every post. I can see how you misunderstood since I wasn't specific in my first email. I'm surprised no one has done this yet, people have done things very similar but never took the leap to integrate the actual Bitcoin blockchain. Basically http://cryptograffiti.info/ but with a parallel program that stores most of the data in a hash reference table, and shares that data via a torrent-esque system.
The Bitcoin of thoughts.
-----Original Message-----
From: Natanael <natanael.l at gmail.com>
To: NxtChg <nxtchg at hush.com>
Cc: bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>; hurricanewarn1 <hurricanewarn1 at aol.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 31, 2015 7:46 am
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Censorship
One last comment here on this topic;
For anybody who wants to discuss decentralized communication mechanisms in general, they can come to www.reddit.com/r/p2pcomms (up until these decentralized forums have become stable and common).
I've seen quite a few more of these projects lately, I want to make a list of them and would definitely like to contribute to making them not just usable, but good enough to gain popularity on their own.
(And in case you wonder about my approach to moderation: let every user pick which moderators / filters / servers he trusts, and let them share their subscription preferences in place of sharing links to centralized forums.)
- Sent from my phone
Den 31 aug 2015 10:45 skrev "NxtChg via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>I am creating a de-centralized forum, and I mean truly decentralized as I nor anyone else will be able to control it.
Zander is working on the same thing: https://www.reddit.com/r/AetheralResearch/
But it's actually quite difficult to make it truly censorship-resistant: both in solving the theymos factor and spam/abuse/overloading as an attack.
>There is no doubt that the centralization and censorship of the Bitcoin community is massively inhibiting the advance of Bitcoin
>and also the growth of the Bitcoin economy. We are scaring away intellectuals, businessman, and newbies that are just getting started.
We have /r/bitcoinxt and so far it has been great. But we also need a regular forum.
Roger Ver controls bitcoin.com, as I understand? https://bitcoin.com/forum/ would be nice.
And it must be a real community, not "say whatever you want because free speech". We've seen how that turned out to be.
Something like battle.net or Steam forums: heavily moderated, not for opinions, but for spam/noise/insults.
Again, this needs leadership. Anyone can install a forum software, what is needed is an "official seal of approval" and regular presence of top XT people there.
And a will to setup proper moderation. Then people will move.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20150831/c26fc9f5/attachment.html>