3 ms·
Betterunix has been in this discussion many, many times. I don't think there is any way to get him to stop saying that bitcoin isn't an achievement and that it
by javert 13y ago
Betterunix has been in this discussion many, many times.
I don't think there is any way to get him to stop saying that bitcoin isn't an achievement and that it is a priori invalid because it doens't have a "formal security model."
- nullc 13y agoWell he stopped saying there was no formal security analysis once someone linked him to one, I think. :)
- betterunix 13y agoI believe that I responded to that paper at least once. By my memory, the formalization of Bitcoin's security left room for a polynomial time attack on the system. That is a fine restatement of what we already know about Bitcoin, but: 1. It is irrelevant to this thread, because I was only talking about Satoshi's paper. 2. It is not the sort of security people demand out of other cryptosystems. There is a reason nobody uses this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle%27s_Puzzles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkle%27s_Puzzles
- javert 13y agoIf someone could link me to the paper in question, I would really appreciate it.
- nullymcnull 13y agoA little late, but I believe this is the paper mentioned: https://socrates1024.s3.amazonaws.com/consensus.pdf https://socrates1024.s3.amazonaws.com/consensus.pdf