4 ms·

BitCoin is a public ledger

51 points by llambda 13y ago

Lerc 13y ago
I have seen so many times in news stories that bitcoin mining reveals a series of new bit that make up a bitcoin, or that a bitcoin is just a series of bits. Bitcoin is a ledger, that ledger is public. The columns are labelled with things like 17Zsi2TiKrZoAoaQ7bzt3wPB5NZV1T4KeE, That column _is_ the bitcoin in your wallet. You need to have a password to move something out of your column and into another. That's the private key to your wallet. Most people understand ledgers. Most of the misunderstandings about bitcoin (especially regarding anonymity) indicate that people don't realise that bitcoin is a ledger.
- drivebyacct2 13y ago
  Haha, even here, misinformed (often angry) comments are directed at Bitcoin supporters that align precisely with what you're saying. Some of the accussations are simply flat out incompatible with an open/public ledger, let alone getting into anything Bitcoin specific. And that's despite stuff like this being posted repeatedly. In fact, this is a repost from like ~~2~~ 10 days ago, isn't it? ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 )
8ig8 13y ago
This sounds like a modern version of the Poor Man's Copyright[1] where you mail yourself some document for _protection_. [1] http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp
jlgaddis 13y ago
$ echo foo > bar $ gpg --sign bar $ gpg --verify bar.gpg
- walrus 13y ago
  It looks like the method described in the article also provides a verified timestamp without the need for a (centralized) timestamp authority. I'd say that's a pretty important difference.
platz 13y ago
Doesn't this actually destroy bitcoins (of which there will only ever be a finite amount)
- sneak 13y ago
  Sure, in the sense that they are now permanently unusable by being transferred to keys for which the private key is not known. By sending a single satoshi (0.000000001 BTC), the monetary effect is insignificant. There will eventually be 2,100,000,000,000,000 of such units.
mpyne 13y ago
Looks like everyone's tuckered out. A full day of WWDC and PRISM and the Bitcoin story only has 4 comments after 2 hours. Get some rest, guys! ;)
- DuskStar 13y ago
  Don't forget E3, some of us play games too!
- bluetooth 13y ago
  It might also be because this link has been posted at least two times recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5807149 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5807149
nutate 13y ago
Bitstampoer on github already does a Verizon of this. https://github.com/newell-purdue/bitstamper https://github.com/newell-purdue/bitstamper
Pitarou 13y ago
Y'all know that there's already a protocol designed exactly for doing this without hacking BitCoin, don't you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping

51 points by llambda 13y ago

Lerc 13y ago

I have seen so many times in news stories that bitcoin mining reveals a series of new bit that make up a bitcoin, or that a bitcoin is just a series of bits. Bitcoin is a ledger, that ledger is public. The columns are labelled with things like 17Zsi2TiKrZoAoaQ7bzt3wPB5NZV1T4KeE, That column _is_ the bitcoin in your wallet. You need to have a password to move something out of your column and into another. That's the private key to your wallet. Most people understand ledgers. Most of the misunderstandings about bitcoin (especially regarding anonymity) indicate that people don't realise that bitcoin is a ledger.

drivebyacct2 13y ago
Haha, even here, misinformed (often angry) comments are directed at Bitcoin supporters that align precisely with what you're saying. Some of the accussations are simply flat out incompatible with an open/public ledger, let alone getting into anything Bitcoin specific. And that's despite stuff like this being posted repeatedly. In fact, this is a repost from like ~~2~~ 10 days ago, isn't it? ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 )

8ig8 13y ago

This sounds like a modern version of the Poor Man's Copyright[1] where you mail yourself some document for _protection_. [1] http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp http://www.snopes.com/legal/postmark.asp

jlgaddis 13y ago

$ echo foo > bar $ gpg --sign bar $ gpg --verify bar.gpg

walrus 13y ago
It looks like the method described in the article also provides a verified timestamp without the need for a (centralized) timestamp authority. I'd say that's a pretty important difference.

platz 13y ago

Doesn't this actually destroy bitcoins (of which there will only ever be a finite amount)

sneak 13y ago
Sure, in the sense that they are now permanently unusable by being transferred to keys for which the private key is not known. By sending a single satoshi (0.000000001 BTC), the monetary effect is insignificant. There will eventually be 2,100,000,000,000,000 of such units.

mpyne 13y ago

Looks like everyone's tuckered out. A full day of WWDC and PRISM and the Bitcoin story only has 4 comments after 2 hours. Get some rest, guys! ;)

DuskStar 13y ago
Don't forget E3, some of us play games too!
bluetooth 13y ago
It might also be because this link has been posted at least two times recently: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5796935 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5807149 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5807149

nutate 13y ago

Bitstampoer on github already does a Verizon of this. https://github.com/newell-purdue/bitstamper https://github.com/newell-purdue/bitstamper

Pitarou 13y ago

Y'all know that there's already a protocol designed exactly for doing this without hacking BitCoin, don't you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_timestamping