Slashdot Mirror
Beyond Bitcoin: How Business Can Capitalize On Blockchains
snydeq writes: Bitcoin's widely trusted ledger offers intriguing possibilities for business use beyond cryptocurrency, writes InfoWorld's Peter Wayner. "From the beginning, bitcoin has assumed a shadowy, almost outlaw mystique," Wayner writes. "Even the mathematics of the technology are inscrutable enough to believe the worst. The irony is that the mathematical foundations of bitcoin create a solid record of legitimate ownership that may be more ironclad against fraud than many of the systems employed by businesses today. Plus, the open, collaborative way in which bitcoin processes transactions ensures the kind of network of trust that is essential to any business agreement."
MTGOX failure has nothing to do with bitcoin but basic security common sense. Each user should have their own wallet and retain control of it. Putting all bitcoin into a single wallet that you along control clearly show the intent to fraud. The blame lie with the humans, not the technology.
Yes but the technology doesn't protest and it doesn't stand up and defend itself. So the tendency is to blame tech for not being "human-proof" against bad actors, rather than to tackle the much harder problems of how to deal with the reality that in this world there have been and will be bad actors. Perfectly secure tech that can always guard against all bad actors simply doesn't exist - in this case, a simple social engineering attack (convincing people to surrender control that they should never have given up) was all it took. To blame the Bitcoin design for the results of MTGOX is to attempt, yet again, to apply a technical solution to a social problem.
People generally don't blame the bank teller for handing over the money during a stick-up, but banks and bank tellers are something average people understand. What we have is a problem of technical education.
We are talking about interesting new uses for blockchain technology. It's related to bitcoin but not enough to make your little rant relevant.
I was under the impression that a bitcoin bank would secure its funds by rolling its bitcoins by performing transactions often (even if the transactions are simple payments to self). That way once someone gains access to the private key data, transactions would have been performed that make the stolen data obsolete.
But, I'm probably mistaken... I'd love to hear why this doesn't happen, or why it didn't work if it was in place at MtGox.
In any case, deposit insurance is a minimum requirement for any funds I supply to a bank.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
yup
furthermore:
there isn't a technology made by man that cannot also be broken by another man. meaning the technology is never, can never be, a "fix" for human nature. the only real fix to a bad intentioned human is a well-intentioned one. there is no technology that can safeguard against bad intent for you
but wild-eyed technophilia imagines that all the bad and failures of human nature can be overcome with a technological fix. so Mt Gox happens
there is nothing about bitcoin that magically fixes all of the problems with traditional money, even though those problems drive the gullible and naive to bitcoin. every evil you hate about traditional money, is true about bitcoin too. Mt. Gox teaches the most basic failure: simple theft. all of the other, more twisted schemes that have befallen traditional money in the past are still possible too with bitcoin. give it time and see!
the most hilarious part were all those demanding from the japanese government some accountability and protection from the events of Mt. Gox's demise
http://www.scmp.com/news/asia/...
"i hate government and regulation, let's use bitcoin!"
(the inevitable happens)
"waaaaaah, please government, help us invesitgate and enforce laws on bitcoin!"
fucking pathetic
they want to escape regulation, government. and then they want regulation, government after they find out what no accountability really means
morons: if people can do bad things to you, they will. only a system of regulation backed by a government can protect you from that. there is no technological fix for that. now: welcome to reality
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
It's not the same at all. When you use a cloud provider, you give up physical ownership (and therefore full control) in exchange for the benefits of commodity computing. Large providers have a level of security and resilience that most organizations could never afford on their own, just like they couldn't afford the level of services provided by their DWP for the price they pay.
Just look at AWS RDS. For $15/month you get a small instance of SQL Server that you don't have to patch, monitor or backup - it's all done by AWS, and you can access your backup files 24x7. I guarantee you that the level of security you get with that instance is orders of magnitude better than what you could achieve on your own with $15 per month.
lucm, indeed.
If you embed a document into the blockchain, once it's in there there is no way to delete it. This could be a great tool against censure, to certify a public document or to publish a proof of your work. Another use is to build a decentralized name system. Blockchain can be turned into a tool for doing business without banks and state, and it could also empower voting and democracy. It takes the power of certifying what is real and what is not from the state and its monopolies and places it back in the public hands.
Sorry, you lost me at "InfoWorld". The title's premise was bad enough, but then you got to InfoWorld ...
mathematics can prove the measures & relations of a mirage... this does not prove that the railroad tracks do meet there, however.
Of course you can make a technology which completely makes bad humans irrelevant. The problem is it makes all humans less free. The more strict you, the less freedom.
If murder is legal you'll have a lot less people to lock up in jail/sentence to death/whatever. So lot's of freedom, but bad actors also have a lot of freedom.
New things are always on the horizon
I have some US dollars. Let's say $100,000.
If I wanted to hold that much in Bitcoins, what is the recommended way? Not in a central bank, because I need to control my wallet.
But on my computer? How do I prove that a virus in a flash add on a website doesn't break in and start reading local data looking for a bitcoin wallet?
Offline, burnt on a CD/DVD? Do I need to worry about bitrot? How do I prevent that?
Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
No. Its called an audit trail that's realistically verifiable.
Perhaps you giggled because you don't understand it? There hasn't been any flaws with bitcoin itself and the block chain that caused coins to be spent by someone who didn't know the ECC private key... Loss-of-currency has occurred with poor third party implementations, e.g. using ECDSA and selecting the same value of k for multiple signatures (similiar to the mistake made by sony and the ps3) or Mt Gox which was either just outright fraud by the company or a severe implementation error.
The block chain is fairly effective at deciding "what came first" and after several confirmations becomes fairly infeasible for a bad actor to change - I don't know of any weaknesses provided your computing pool is large enough that no person controlls 50%. Well, or a quantum computer solving the discrete logarithm...
You want to track digital media? Attach it to a blockchain. Crazy strong DRM, but managed correctly could also allow for gifting and resale.
Silence is a state of mime.
The irony is that the mathematical foundations of bitcoin create a solid record of legitimate ownership that may be more ironclad against fraud than many of the systems employed by businesses today.
Tell that to the members of the Mt. Gox exchange.
Mt Gox had nothing to do with the blockchain... The reason that Mt Gox couldn't "go get the money back" *is* that the blockchain says its not their money any more. Which it isn't because someone went and spent it!
I've been tossing the idea around lately that something like a blockchain could be used as part of a larg-scale PKI - once you announce your public key and it gets several confirmations, then it would be hard for someone to announce that your key is something else after the fact and your not necessarily trusting a company or the government to do so.
But how do you prevent someone else from announcing foo.com before you.. or what incentive would their be for miners to mine... still plenty of issues not solved - but it could fix part of the problem.
This thread is not about Bitcoin, but about the blockchain concept. From the beginning of commerce until comparatively recently, people have traded in cash. A blockchain makes a string of cash transactions traceable, no matter what currency is being used.
Claiming that MTGOX is proof that bitcoin has poor security is like saying bank robberies are proof that money has poor security.
Shit, the holes in my pocket are enough to prove that. As is my coin-gobbling couch.
you're right, my answer isn't a real answer
the real answer to the problem, how to get around any encryption in the world, now and forever, is this:
https://xkcd.com/538/
same with mt gox: all the fancy blockchain technology doesn't mean shit when you hand the keys to a thief
so, like i said: technology is no protection from bad intent, and never will be. you can only fight bad human nature with good human nature
the facts of life. now shoot the messenger or admit the reality you live in
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
That is the classic problem we have had since the early 1990s and PGP.
PGP 2.x and its descendants solved a lot of issues. It is transport independent [1], supported a good web of trust, did well for backing up keys, had a decent provision for revoking keys that were lost (assuming you made a revocation cert), and many other things. However, it took some active knowledge to use, and that is what made it unpopular.
Bitcoin is similar. MtGox presented a point and drool user interface to a protocol, pretending to be a bank. Of course, because the coins were in MtGox's wallet, they were really not belonging to accountholders, so when they went out of business, possession is normally 9/10 of the law, but in this case, possession is the law.
A lot of the exchanges just capitalized on people new to the protocol, and were expecting the currency to behave like dollars with a PayPal account.
Like the above -- this is an education issue, not a BitCoin issue. However people seem to rather deal with a lack of security than have to pack their own parachute. S/MIME versus PGP comes to mind for E-mail.
[1]: E-mail, SMS, MMS, NNTP, I've even used Paperbak (now spelled PaperBack) by Michael Mohr to pull larger from printed codes.
also, the system itself will go bad. the system is composed of intrinsically weak human beings. only in the low iq fantasy life of conspiracy theorists with mental illness are human systems perfectly infallible. in reality they are full of holes and bad actors and weak points and fail many times on a daily basis, the larger the organization. that's why airtight conspiracies of more than a handful of people are impossible and why most conspiracy theories are jokes to anyone without mental disease and with a sufficient social intelligence
so under your alternate legal system, the system itself will commit the worst atrocities
but that's completely off topic. your comment has nothing to do with *technology*, only legal systems, society, and human organizations
this is technology being no protection from bad intent:
https://xkcd.com/538/
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
welcome to reality kid:
https://xkcd.com/538/
keep shooting the messenger!
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
the weaknesses of bitcoin inform us about the weaknesses of blockchains in general
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
You could print out the secret keys as Q codes and then secure delete the files from your HDD. At that point it's essentially as safe as cash (ignoring exchange volatility). Unlike cash, you can even make backup copies.
There are a variety of options. I keep a double encrypted backup copy of my bitcoin wallet on a second hard drive and another one on cloud storage. What I mean by double encrpted is that the wallet, itself, is encrypted by the Bitcoin software (older versions didn't have that feature but current ones do.) Then I encrypt again with GPG from the command line, using a second, different password. I think this is secure enough, even for $100,000, though I don't keep that much in bitcoin myself. Another thing you can do, if you're really worried about bitrot and such, is that you can print out bitcoin as QR codes on paper. The real problem with this, as I see it, is that you don't make any interest on such storage. What we need, at some point, is to have some good investments denominated in bitcoin. The idea is already out there but I wouldn't trust any of the existing options yet.
this is called shooting the messenger
here is the basics of life kid:
regulations, government, often screws up. and yet it is still far far better than no regulations and no government at all
when regulators are corrupt, malfeasance or ineptitude occur, etc.: you get rid of the bad apples. you cure the sick government
but what you never ever do, unless you are a complete moron, is get rid of regulations and government. because then whatever you complained about the government doing to you, is still going to happen to you. and now you have no recourse or way to fix the injustice at all
so, moron: technological progress is frozen in time to 2015?
I've lived in a country with barely any regulation and in a country with huge amounts of regulation.
For all its wild west atmosphere, I'd take the environment where I don't need a license to fart while walking down the street.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
what?
is it you and these other morons believe govt likes to regulate finance in stupid ways just because it is a evil goon from a bad cartoon? "we like to abuse rights only because we have to fulfill the cartoon villain role in the minds of morons"
finance is regulated for many reasons. all of them in ways you want finance regulated! nobody regulates finance just because it's a simple minded villain in a bad hollywood movie. what is the *reason* for the existence of a regulation you dislike. then maybe you fucking need to adjust your dislike, because you clearly don't understand the reason
show me one form of financial regulation which is wrong, somehow. not an example of a regulator fucking up or committing crimes themselves that needs to be punished. "oh, the simple fact they can fuck means the regulation shouldn't exist"... yeah, like because there's bad cops we need to abolish all police. no downside there. how about we actually punish the bad cops and bad regulators? too complicated a concept for you?
give me an example of an actual regulation that is without good reason. at least to give me something to laugh at
i'll put some stock into these magic early adopters you refer to when you show me they understand actual fucking finance, which by your own words you obviously sorely lack an understanding of
you're a gullible airhead fool who doesn't even understand the fucking subject matter
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
This thread is not about Bitcoin, but about the blockchain concept. From the beginning of commerce until comparatively recently, people have traded in cash. A blockchain makes a string of cash transactions traceable, no matter what currency is being used.
the weaknesses of bitcoin inform us about the weaknesses of blockchains in general
The monetary nature of bitcoin and the rewards for mining drive the fundamental operation that makes the blockchain work.Without an incentive to confirm the new blockchain, you're back to a digital signature.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
At least in of my experience, most of the early bitcoin adopters want the government to prosecute fraud and theft but not regulate finance beyond that.
I can't speak for any of the others, but as an early adopter of bitcoin I got involved because it was an interesting concept with some unique ideas. It had nothing to do with politics. It didn't hurt that you could mine with a CPU then either.
'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
what makes you think that there would be no incentive to confirm a blockchain in a system besides bitcoin?
the reward can be almost anything, of which plenty of people would partake, depending upon this alternative blockchain application
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
unconfirmed anecdote by random asshole with questionable opinion is worth exactly what you think it is worth
anyways, i'm glad you enjoyed somalia
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
and yet here you are, arguing with me
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
only a system of regulation backed by a government can protect you from that.
OH NO! The government is made up of people! PEOPLE!
Wake up, boy! You're having one of your dreams again...
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Good to see that the bitcoin shills are still around to downmod anyone daring to criticise their Ponzi scheme.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
So you're saying "regulations backed by a government" can protect us from people from doing bad things to us? What are you smoking? Last I checked, murder, theft, insider trading, and graft are all regulated (illegal) in most countries but that hasn't stopped them from happening.
So if we legalised murder, it would have no effect on the number of murders?
You are a complete and utter libertarian.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
traveling the world free from laws
Until they're caught, tried and imprisoned following the process of law which all reasonable human beings think is better than dog-eat-dog libertarianism.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Most early adopters were interested in the same way that the people at the beginning of any pyramid scheme are. Easy money at the expense of late-coming mug punters.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
Claiming that MTGOX is proof that bitcoin has poor security is like saying bank robberies are proof that money has poor security.
MTGOX is proof that bitcoin users are not exempt from reality.
To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
If I wanted to hold [$100,000] in Bitcoins, what is the recommended way? ... How do I prove that a virus in a flash add on a website doesn't break in and start reading local data looking for a bitcoin wallet?
Get a TREZOR hardware wallet. During setup be sure to write the seed down on the included paper and store it in a secure place (a safe or deposit box). For extra peace-of-mind, combine this with a multi-signature address.
"The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
Autism detected.
Convert it to real currency or a real asset before a fluctuation, an exploit or a government looking to seize unexplained wealth endangers the current listed value.
What about mortgage fraud?
The most insecure thing about banks is bankers and politicians.