That wallet would be some sort of software? Or an online/web wallet? In latter case, you don't really control the coins, yet. In the first case, your wallet can be a target since it is connected to the internet.

Perhaps he just wished to showcase the remarkable degree of prescience and understanding exhibited by some of the more capable persons associated with the project, and from a relatively early date

Brilliant discussion. Thanks for illuminating me on how dynamic the blockchain can get

Total bullshit.  Mike has been crystal clear all along if anyone was paying attention and could understand the concepts and constructs he's described many of which are technically challenging.  This thread is one of many of the reasons I make this statement.  I personally disagree with some (maybe almost all) of his apparent philosophical constructs and goals, and he himself has said that these have been evolving, but he has been one of the most forthright people around in my opinion.  I do hope this persists.

Mike has also been one of the most prolific and effective in dev-land.  There is a pretty fair chance that Bitcoin would have withered on the vine a year ago but for his spearheading the database re-implementation.  I'm quite confident that we would not be where we are today without this work, and not sure that anyone else would have gotten around to it or pulled it off (even considering the rather embarrassing bdb issue which point up how questionable Bitcoin QA was (is?).  That's my read on things.

As for the 'secrecy' about the blacklisting conversation, I consider it mostly an artifact of the structure of the Bitcoin Foundation.  That's just one in a long list of lamentable features the BF displays.

In order to make it almost impossible to even attempt to implement coin lists everyone should use coinjoin.

https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/279249.0

How much money would you take from the dutch police to help them arrest a buyer of DMT from Silk Road, and so help clear up Bitcoin's image?

I will explain Bitcoin and how it works to anyone, regardless of whether they're the police or not.

After all, I'm the one who taught you about Merkle trees back when you didn't understand the difference between a branch and a tree, remember? I gave the most popular talk at the conference you organised. Now you attack me for being willing to talk about Bitcoin to people who don't have the same opinions as you. Where's your commitment to spreading knowledge gone?

Amir, these sorts of random personal attacks are getting really old, but I've met you and I don't doubt your good intentions. The war on drugs is terrible and divisive. I would like to see it end. I think the way to end it is through democracy. The moment the majority of Americans started supporting legalisation, the laws started changing. But even if you think the right way is to support online black markets, you have to make a decision - given that lots of people don't agree with you on that, are you going to focus on the 80% of things where agreement can be found and working together is possible? Or are you just going to continue starting fights for no reason with people who would otherwise be happy to write code and get things done with you?


If your idea of dark is people writing about what ideas they're exploring in public forum posts over a period of many years, then I hate to know what your idea of light would be. Mind-reading machines?

Are you trolling me? Lets work together says the guy that promoted the angle that I'm not a developer to the community and tried to have my participation censored.

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-09/13/digital-economy-task-force
"Bitcoin, Tor and Gates Foundation join task force to prevent child exploitation"

Don't tell me it's just about talking to the police. I'm sure you can rationalise it however you want. It sure starts that way. That's what people who run education seminars for the NSA or DoD tell themselves when you ask them. But they get paid for something.

Would you accept? And why?

I work with all sorts of people. Doesn't mean I need the consent or participation of police, legislators, corporations or other adversaries. That's simply common sense. And you didn't just talk to police, you support their actions. People working against your own users.

Would I accept what? Money for ..... ? Explaining how Bitcoin works to a police or a court? Yes I would, as would many other people. Especially if there's going to be a jury that judges some events, I think it's pretty important for them to have accurate explanations of things.

I'd also accept money for explaining it to bankers, the freemasons and anarchists. I don't need the money but there are an endless number of people who would like personalised tutorials about Bitcoin, so charging the going rate is one way to keep the time commitments under control.

Here's a reality check for you: just because someone downloads an application that incorporates some source code, doesn't automatically make them friends of the developers. If the allegations are true, DPR was ordering people to be tortured and killed, which would make him no friend of mine even though he was a "user".

Now I answered your question, you answer mine. If the NSA downloaded and ran 1000 obelisk servers, what would you do?