yes, this was in one of the other threads and yes it ignores everything I set about bitcoin
Basically, there were two versions of b-money and the concept of CryptoCredits
CryptoCredits was the internal currency of the proposed blacknet system.
people like Tim and Wei wanted the first version
http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt
if you read this, you will see that there is a first and the second protocol
these are not compatible
The first protocol was designed for untraceable money. The second was discarded and never followed up because it allows for traceability, this is what was added into bitcoin to make it bitcoin.
Bitcoin was never designed to be the first protocol
I never intended it to be the first
others including Bear want to system for crypto anarchy, I do not.
and, the thing they don't seem to get is there is a dialectic between bitcoin and they are complete opposites. You cannot modify bitcoin, it only works in the format of the second protocol and this is all that I worked on to make work
the bit that was always missing was the economics of the system
the reality was they were not interested
I don't need to punish people as Wei and others believed, I simply have them as commercial entities.
they want crypto anarchy
I just created a system that uses competing companies
if you read the second protocol you'll see that it's bitcoin minus the economic incentives
https://ia600208.us.archive.org/10/items/cyphernomicon/cyphernomicon.txt
Both Hal and Bear.
And, As usual I missed this
Both of them wanted b-money protocol 1.
Both wanted, not-Bitcoin.
But, I thought Hal knew what he was doing and telling me and I listened, and was foolish enough not to trust myself.
I believed people when they told me Bitcoin was flawed
The truth, it was fine. The flaw was my willingness to listen and not to dogmatically hold onto my original concept tighter.
CSW
Dic 29, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609266408180200
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2412
Basically, there were two versions of b-money and the concept of CryptoCredits
CryptoCredits was the internal currency of the proposed blacknet system.
people like Tim and Wei wanted the first version
http://www.weidai.com/bmoney.txt
if you read this, you will see that there is a first and the second protocol
these are not compatible
The first protocol was designed for untraceable money. The second was discarded and never followed up because it allows for traceability, this is what was added into bitcoin to make it bitcoin.
Bitcoin was never designed to be the first protocol
I never intended it to be the first
others including Bear want to system for crypto anarchy, I do not.
and, the thing they don't seem to get is there is a dialectic between bitcoin and they are complete opposites. You cannot modify bitcoin, it only works in the format of the second protocol and this is all that I worked on to make work
the bit that was always missing was the economics of the system
the reality was they were not interested
I don't need to punish people as Wei and others believed, I simply have them as commercial entities.
they want crypto anarchy
I just created a system that uses competing companies
if you read the second protocol you'll see that it's bitcoin minus the economic incentives
https://ia600208.us.archive.org/10/items/cyphernomicon/cyphernomicon.txt
Both Hal and Bear.
And, As usual I missed this
Both of them wanted b-money protocol 1.
Both wanted, not-Bitcoin.
But, I thought Hal knew what he was doing and telling me and I listened, and was foolish enough not to trust myself.
I believed people when they told me Bitcoin was flawed
The truth, it was fine. The flaw was my willingness to listen and not to dogmatically hold onto my original concept tighter.
CSW
Dic 29, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609266408180200
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2412
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Dic 29, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609266408180200
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2412
Dic 29, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609266408180200
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2412
Recent Accomplishments:
We introduce the first electronic cash system that incorporates trustee-based tracing, while provably protecting user anonymity. This effort expands on provably anonymous electronic cash systems. Our system maintains completely provable user anonymity with the exception that, only with the cooperation of several publicly appointed trustees (e.g. key-escrow agents), the government can trace a user's spending with certainty, determining to whom the user gave his/her money and how much s/he gave. The trustees can answer the question of whether a particular payment was made by a particular user, without revealing any additional information. This allows for authorized forward and backward tracing that does not impinge on the privacy of anyone other than the parties of the one transaction in question. Some of our trustee-based tracing require no tamper-resistant hardware, and all can be implemented as either on-line or off-line systems.
Impact:
Electronic cash is a subject of great economic, political, and research importance. With advances in computer networks, in processor speed, and in databases, and with advances in note counterfeiting technology and with both individuals' and businesses' desire for remote and more convenient financial transactions, some forms of electronic cash are likely to become widespread within 5 to 10 years. Although unconditionally anonymous electronic cash systems have been proposed in the literature, governmental and financial institutions are unwilling to back a completely anonymous system. Their reasons for opposing complete untraceability have to do with the containment of user fraud and the desire to restrict the new kinds of crime that unrestricted, remotely withdrawable, and spendable electronic cash could facilitate. Because of the necessary concern over crime control, they have previously proposed systems with little or no protection for the users' privacy. Our system provides the capability required by government for crime control while maintaining privacy for all other users.
Last Updated: January 18, 1995
WWW Administration (www-admin@www.cs.sandia.gov) Peter S. Gemmell (psgemme@cs.sandia.gov)
https://web.archive.org/web/20030813212058/http://www.cs.sandia.gov/HPCCIT/el_cash.html
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2419
We introduce the first electronic cash system that incorporates trustee-based tracing, while provably protecting user anonymity. This effort expands on provably anonymous electronic cash systems. Our system maintains completely provable user anonymity with the exception that, only with the cooperation of several publicly appointed trustees (e.g. key-escrow agents), the government can trace a user's spending with certainty, determining to whom the user gave his/her money and how much s/he gave. The trustees can answer the question of whether a particular payment was made by a particular user, without revealing any additional information. This allows for authorized forward and backward tracing that does not impinge on the privacy of anyone other than the parties of the one transaction in question. Some of our trustee-based tracing require no tamper-resistant hardware, and all can be implemented as either on-line or off-line systems.
Impact:
Electronic cash is a subject of great economic, political, and research importance. With advances in computer networks, in processor speed, and in databases, and with advances in note counterfeiting technology and with both individuals' and businesses' desire for remote and more convenient financial transactions, some forms of electronic cash are likely to become widespread within 5 to 10 years. Although unconditionally anonymous electronic cash systems have been proposed in the literature, governmental and financial institutions are unwilling to back a completely anonymous system. Their reasons for opposing complete untraceability have to do with the containment of user fraud and the desire to restrict the new kinds of crime that unrestricted, remotely withdrawable, and spendable electronic cash could facilitate. Because of the necessary concern over crime control, they have previously proposed systems with little or no protection for the users' privacy. Our system provides the capability required by government for crime control while maintaining privacy for all other users.
Last Updated: January 18, 1995
WWW Administration (www-admin@www.cs.sandia.gov) Peter S. Gemmell (psgemme@cs.sandia.gov)
https://web.archive.org/web/20030813212058/http://www.cs.sandia.gov/HPCCIT/el_cash.html
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2419
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Dic 29, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609268772189000
https://web.archive.org/web/20030813212058/http://www.cs.sandia.gov/HPCCIT/el_cash.html
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2419
Dic 29, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609268772189000
https://web.archive.org/web/20030813212058/http://www.cs.sandia.gov/HPCCIT/el_cash.html
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2419
Quite interesting that I'm called a fraud for wanting a system that stops corruption.
It is not that I want to create a system that allows Ponzi schemes. It is not that I have a system that allows unfounded promises that break the law. It is not that I'm promoting making money by simply buying a coin or some other security. It's that I'm working and doing things. This must be incredibly frightening to a lot of people out there. Imagine an auditable system that allows every drug transaction and sale that is illegal to be tracked while simultaneously allowing every opiate that is legally issued to be monitored.
Imagine a system that in the future kills off every illegal use of cash. People will find other ways to transact but these will be more expensive. This will make crime more expensive. Imagine a way to prove ownership on every security, be it bond or stock. This will mitigate any illegal ownership or anyone who bypasses legal controls. To some people, this world must be incredibly frightening. Corruption is one of the biggest industries with the world economic Forum estimating that 5% of the global gross domestic product or US$2.6 trillion is attributable directly to corruption.
Of this, US$1 trillion is spent on bribes every year.
in a system that requires reporting of all money transfers and does not allow for anonymous Shell companies, bribes don't exist
you can't win with computers, AutoCorrect kills you
CSW
Dic 30, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609354916251200?thread_ts=1609354916.251200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
It is not that I want to create a system that allows Ponzi schemes. It is not that I have a system that allows unfounded promises that break the law. It is not that I'm promoting making money by simply buying a coin or some other security. It's that I'm working and doing things. This must be incredibly frightening to a lot of people out there. Imagine an auditable system that allows every drug transaction and sale that is illegal to be tracked while simultaneously allowing every opiate that is legally issued to be monitored.
Imagine a system that in the future kills off every illegal use of cash. People will find other ways to transact but these will be more expensive. This will make crime more expensive. Imagine a way to prove ownership on every security, be it bond or stock. This will mitigate any illegal ownership or anyone who bypasses legal controls. To some people, this world must be incredibly frightening. Corruption is one of the biggest industries with the world economic Forum estimating that 5% of the global gross domestic product or US$2.6 trillion is attributable directly to corruption.
Of this, US$1 trillion is spent on bribes every year.
in a system that requires reporting of all money transfers and does not allow for anonymous Shell companies, bribes don't exist
you can't win with computers, AutoCorrect kills you
CSW
Dic 30, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609354916251200?thread_ts=1609354916.251200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Dic 30, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609354916251200?thread_ts=1609354916.251200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
Dic 30, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609354916251200?thread_ts=1609354916.251200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
"£1.4 trillion (US$1.75 trillion) changes hands globally in bribes every year – the equivalent of Canada’s entire GDP."
https://www.transparency.org.uk/corruption-statistics
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
https://www.transparency.org.uk/corruption-statistics
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
Telegram
CSW - Slack Channel
CSW
Dic 30, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609354916251200?thread_ts=1609354916.251200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
Dic 30, 2020
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609354916251200?thread_ts=1609354916.251200&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2424
CSW
Jan 1, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609495219386300?thread_ts=1609495219.386300&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2427
Real cash is traceable
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2020/12/21/netflixs-the-ripper-how-a-five-pound-note-nearly-caught-peter-sutcliffe-out-13784583/amp/
Jan 1, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609495219386300?thread_ts=1609495219.386300&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2427
Real cash is traceable
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/metro.co.uk/2020/12/21/netflixs-the-ripper-how-a-five-pound-note-nearly-caught-peter-sutcliffe-out-13784583/amp/
Traceability - publicly auditable trail.
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAFXz0d3uM0XhcNiJPA
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAFXz0d3uM0XhcNiJPA
Telegram
CSW 100 Traceability - publicly auditable trail
Traceability - publicly auditable trail.
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAFXz0d3uM0XhcNiJPA
CSW Cash vs Money
https://t.me/joinchat/LpIenSbS7iQxOTA0
CSW Cash System
https://t.me/joinchat/TjwmId7s_WxhNDRk
digital asset
https://t.me/joinchat/X96IkRwRj48wM2E0
https://t.me/joinchat/AAAAAFXz0d3uM0XhcNiJPA
CSW Cash vs Money
https://t.me/joinchat/LpIenSbS7iQxOTA0
CSW Cash System
https://t.me/joinchat/TjwmId7s_WxhNDRk
digital asset
https://t.me/joinchat/X96IkRwRj48wM2E0
CSW Cash vs Money
https://t.me/joinchat/LpIenSbS7iQxOTA0
CSW Cash System
https://t.me/joinchat/TjwmId7s_WxhNDRk
Activo digital - asset - commodity
https://t.me/joinchat/X96IkRwRj48wM2E0
CSW Banks
https://t.me/joinchat/yar-DjlSSIswZDM0
https://t.me/joinchat/LpIenSbS7iQxOTA0
CSW Cash System
https://t.me/joinchat/TjwmId7s_WxhNDRk
Activo digital - asset - commodity
https://t.me/joinchat/X96IkRwRj48wM2E0
CSW Banks
https://t.me/joinchat/yar-DjlSSIswZDM0
The license of the database is not applied under MIT.
under an MIT license each file needs to individually have the license applied. The database was not created with a license and it was put up for download without license.
The agents of the network other nodes.
Nodes are paid to provide a contract service. They are not instantly paid, there is a maturity level of 100 blocks that means that they cannot quickly act and take a block that is orphaned
Blocks do not act to issue or create bitcoin.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090131115053/https://bitcoin.org/
The original site states this very clearly.
Coins are distributed to the nodes.. They are not created by the nodes
Nodes "generate blocks".
They do not create bitcoin
nodes are agents of the network and are paid
Nodes create entries in the database as an outsourced agency. They are an agent.
Without an explicit agreement stating that they maintain intellectual property rights, agents don't gain rights.
The creation of blocks is a distributed process because of the hundred block maturity level.
Nodes do not merely find a block solution, they have to propagate it to other nodes and have it valid for 100 blocks. The validation process involves other nodes ensuring that its correct
Note, the way that you validate a block is by creating another block on top of it, so only miners are nodes
The ordering of transactions is contained as a database right. That will include the Merkle tree and hash structure
the block headers will be included as a database right
Think about the contents of the database table.
You can own a database or public emails - the structure matters
And, in Bitcoin, it cannot have the structure changed
https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/database-rights-the-basics
The creator of a database can allow use any way he wants.
Bitcoin requires that people can append and view the database. It does not allow them to take it and use it in other means outside of the use in bitcoin.
The nodes provide a service in creating the database. The database can be protected if there is a substantial investment. So far around 20 million bitcoin (and BTC on the copy) have been put into the payment of obtaining and verifying and presenting this information.
I think given the current value of the complete system that this is a substantial investment.
An infringement occurs when an individual or company extracts already utilises all or a substantial part of the contents of a protected database. This has to be done without the consent of the owner.
The rights to the bitcoin database a limited for the verification, exchange and validation of bitcoin transactions. When used for bitcoin, the databases validly deployed. That is bitcoin the electronic cash system.
The mere consultation of a database, using the database to send transactions or to act as a node is not an infringement under the provisions.
77m Limited v Ordnance Survey Limited [2019]
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5dcb8f992c94e07f88e8ddb2
The TX to Finney was not until days later and after Bk 70
No, Each block contains at least 1 TX
A database is not covered under MIT licenses unless it is explicitly and independently licensed.
The database rights provisions of Europe do not cover software. These are two separate issues.
When individuals started using the original version of code, they downloaded the first version of the database from my nodes.
CSW
Jan 4,. 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609783515120700?thread_ts=1609775039.107700&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2430
under an MIT license each file needs to individually have the license applied. The database was not created with a license and it was put up for download without license.
The agents of the network other nodes.
Nodes are paid to provide a contract service. They are not instantly paid, there is a maturity level of 100 blocks that means that they cannot quickly act and take a block that is orphaned
Blocks do not act to issue or create bitcoin.
https://web.archive.org/web/20090131115053/https://bitcoin.org/
The original site states this very clearly.
Coins are distributed to the nodes.. They are not created by the nodes
Nodes "generate blocks".
They do not create bitcoin
nodes are agents of the network and are paid
Nodes create entries in the database as an outsourced agency. They are an agent.
Without an explicit agreement stating that they maintain intellectual property rights, agents don't gain rights.
The creation of blocks is a distributed process because of the hundred block maturity level.
Nodes do not merely find a block solution, they have to propagate it to other nodes and have it valid for 100 blocks. The validation process involves other nodes ensuring that its correct
Note, the way that you validate a block is by creating another block on top of it, so only miners are nodes
The ordering of transactions is contained as a database right. That will include the Merkle tree and hash structure
the block headers will be included as a database right
Think about the contents of the database table.
You can own a database or public emails - the structure matters
And, in Bitcoin, it cannot have the structure changed
https://www.pinsentmasons.com/out-law/guides/database-rights-the-basics
The creator of a database can allow use any way he wants.
Bitcoin requires that people can append and view the database. It does not allow them to take it and use it in other means outside of the use in bitcoin.
The nodes provide a service in creating the database. The database can be protected if there is a substantial investment. So far around 20 million bitcoin (and BTC on the copy) have been put into the payment of obtaining and verifying and presenting this information.
I think given the current value of the complete system that this is a substantial investment.
An infringement occurs when an individual or company extracts already utilises all or a substantial part of the contents of a protected database. This has to be done without the consent of the owner.
The rights to the bitcoin database a limited for the verification, exchange and validation of bitcoin transactions. When used for bitcoin, the databases validly deployed. That is bitcoin the electronic cash system.
The mere consultation of a database, using the database to send transactions or to act as a node is not an infringement under the provisions.
77m Limited v Ordnance Survey Limited [2019]
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5dcb8f992c94e07f88e8ddb2
The TX to Finney was not until days later and after Bk 70
No, Each block contains at least 1 TX
A database is not covered under MIT licenses unless it is explicitly and independently licensed.
The database rights provisions of Europe do not cover software. These are two separate issues.
When individuals started using the original version of code, they downloaded the first version of the database from my nodes.
CSW
Jan 4,. 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1609783515120700?thread_ts=1609775039.107700&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2430
Pinsent Masons
Database rights: the basics
Databases can be a valuable commercial asset and generally time and money is invested in their creation and maintenance.