4 ms·

>math and code were nearly perfect with zero peer review Bitcoin had to be forked in the early years due to critical errors in the original code. There was not

>math and code were nearly perfect with zero peer review Bitcoin had to be forked in the early years due to critical errors in the original code. There was nothing perfect about it.

bitxbitxbitcoin 4y ago
It’s also pretty well established that there was some peer review.
- Phlarp 4y ago
  Peer review before the white paper was published? I'd be fascinated to learn more about any such conversations.
  - bitxbitxbitcoin 4y ago
    Here you go! https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/11/26/previously-unpublished-emails-of-satoshi-nakamoto-present-a-new-puzzle/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/11/26/previously-unpub...
celticninja 4y ago
Yup, there was a bug that allowed the attacker to create an unlimited number of Bitcoin, it was fixed, but there seems to be this myth that SN provided complete bug free working code from the outset.
- im3w1l 4y ago
  Where can I read more about this? Super interesting.
  - celticninja 4y ago
    These should give you some background https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/09/21/the-latest-bitcoin-bug-was-so-bad-developers-kept-its-full-details-a-secret/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/09/21/the-latest-bitco... https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-billion-btc-bug/ https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-bil...
Phlarp 4y ago
Yes, but implementation errors-- not fundamental flaws in the theory or underlying mathematics. It's not a statement about such things being impossible, just unlikely to come from a single individual working in complete isolation up until the bitcion whitepaper release. Additionally this alone would be merely peculiar on it's own, coupled with the lack of retrospective investigations uncovering -anything at all- significant about the person moves it to suspicious. Adding in the subject matter of cryptography + pseudo anonymous money and it strains credulity not to consider
- 300bps 4y ago
  Yes, but implementation errors-- not fundamental flaws in the theory or underlying mathematics. Respectfully, I believe you are looking at Bitcoin through rose colored glasses. There is nothing special about Bitcoin's theory or underlying mathematics.
- optimalsolver 4y ago
  There's good evidence that Satoshi is Adam Back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfcvX0P1b5g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfcvX0P1b5g
- woodruffw 4y ago
  You're placing way more value on this than makes sense: Bitcoin makes use of good primitives, but no better than any expected familiar with the SoTA in the late 2000s would have selected for a greenfield project. Maybe the most unusual primitive selection in Bitcoin is secp256k1 for ECDSA, instead of one of the more common NIST curves. But even that is understandable, given that Nakamoto was active in the cypherpunk community and concern around the constants used in the NIST curves was a common discussion item at the time.
  - Phlarp 4y ago
    The primitive selection looks rather informed with the hindsight of NSA compromising the security of NIST curves

>math and code were nearly perfect with zero peer review Bitcoin had to be forked in the early years due to critical errors in the original code. There was nothing perfect about it.

bitxbitxbitcoin 4y ago

It’s also pretty well established that there was some peer review.

Phlarp 4y ago
Peer review before the white paper was published? I'd be fascinated to learn more about any such conversations.
- bitxbitxbitcoin 4y ago
  Here you go! https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/11/26/previously-unpublished-emails-of-satoshi-nakamoto-present-a-new-puzzle/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2020/11/26/previously-unpub...

celticninja 4y ago

Yup, there was a bug that allowed the attacker to create an unlimited number of Bitcoin, it was fixed, but there seems to be this myth that SN provided complete bug free working code from the outset.

im3w1l 4y ago
Where can I read more about this? Super interesting.
- celticninja 4y ago
  These should give you some background https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/09/21/the-latest-bitcoin-bug-was-so-bad-developers-kept-its-full-details-a-secret/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2018/09/21/the-latest-bitco... https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-billion-btc-bug/ https://news.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-history-part-10-the-184-bil...

Phlarp 4y ago

Yes, but implementation errors-- not fundamental flaws in the theory or underlying mathematics. It's not a statement about such things being impossible, just unlikely to come from a single individual working in complete isolation up until the bitcion whitepaper release. Additionally this alone would be merely peculiar on it's own, coupled with the lack of retrospective investigations uncovering -anything at all- significant about the person moves it to suspicious. Adding in the subject matter of cryptography + pseudo anonymous money and it strains credulity not to consider

300bps 4y ago
Yes, but implementation errors-- not fundamental flaws in the theory or underlying mathematics. Respectfully, I believe you are looking at Bitcoin through rose colored glasses. There is nothing special about Bitcoin's theory or underlying mathematics.
optimalsolver 4y ago
There's good evidence that Satoshi is Adam Back: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfcvX0P1b5g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfcvX0P1b5g
woodruffw 4y ago
You're placing way more value on this than makes sense: Bitcoin makes use of good primitives, but no better than any expected familiar with the SoTA in the late 2000s would have selected for a greenfield project. Maybe the most unusual primitive selection in Bitcoin is secp256k1 for ECDSA, instead of one of the more common NIST curves. But even that is understandable, given that Nakamoto was active in the cypherpunk community and concern around the constants used in the NIST curves was a common discussion item at the time.
- Phlarp 4y ago
  The primitive selection looks rather informed with the hindsight of NSA compromising the security of NIST curves