Eric Voskuil [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2017-01-29 📝 Original message:> On Jan 29, 2017, at ...
📅 Original date posted:2017-01-29
📝 Original message:> On Jan 29, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/28/2017 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> a world of nodes in large datacenters is a world where it's very easy
>> to force the few Bitcoin nodes remaining to follow AML/KYC rules
>
> If that's true, why haven't we already seen AML/KYC required of mining
> pools? That would be comparatively trivial.
It is true, there is no question. The fact that an attack does not appear to have occurred does not mean that the vulnerability exists. It is as you say a trivial exploit, which means it will happen when the economic incentive is great enough. Analogous attacks on other points of centralization are already well underway.
e
📝 Original message:> On Jan 29, 2017, at 11:15 AM, Tom Harding via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> On 1/28/2017 10:29 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> a world of nodes in large datacenters is a world where it's very easy
>> to force the few Bitcoin nodes remaining to follow AML/KYC rules
>
> If that's true, why haven't we already seen AML/KYC required of mining
> pools? That would be comparatively trivial.
It is true, there is no question. The fact that an attack does not appear to have occurred does not mean that the vulnerability exists. It is as you say a trivial exploit, which means it will happen when the economic incentive is great enough. Analogous attacks on other points of centralization are already well underway.
e