Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Scaling Bitcoin conference micro-report

From: "NxtChg" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2015 10:27:14 +0300

>The state is the threat in the Bitcoin threat model. You comments below
>acknowledge it. The assumption of hostile state actors is the only
>rational starting point. That which is regulated (and regulatable) 
>in Bitcoin is the attack surface.

I think, you just proved my point. If your goal is to shrink the attack surface as much as possible,
you are better off being a marginalized alt-coin.

>This threat represents the difference between Bitcoin and Fedcoin.

_This_ is the false dichotomy. There's a range of coins between DarkCoin and FedCoin.

>This is extremely naive. At a minimum, getting popular/successful (and regulated) is the formula for regulatory capture.

Let me give you an example.

Suppose you are a regular guy, say Peter Todd, and you are faced with 10 policemen in anti-riot gear.

You can fight them in two ways:

1. become stronger, so you could provide an adequate response, either by turning into Hulk or by getting another 30-50 Peter Todds.

2. lose some fat, learn a few parkour tricks and move around mostly by night behind dumpsters.

The worst you can fare is just being Peter Todd with a backpack and an expensive camera on his neck, wandering around the city in daylight.

Your vision of Bitcoin is the most vulnerable to government attacks.