[Chugalug] Bitcoins: It's all about cash, that is, the real stuff

Eric Wolf ebwolf at gmail.com
Wed Sep 4 04:41:15 UTC 2013

Mike R.,

I hope repeating what I said helps you feel better about yourself, knowing
that you getting suckered like us. You could make the same argument about
being conned by Nintendo for their fancy computers and expensive software
that just waste time.

As for public key cryptography, it's not intractable, it's just hard given
current computing power. If the cryptography were "truly intractable", you
would use the minimum length key because the length wouldn't matter. The
reason you want to use a longer key length is to increase the difficulty of
the problem.


Eric B. Wolf                           720-334-7734

On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 10:23 PM, Mike Robinson <miker at sundialservices.com>wrote:

> Now, mining has largely become a matter of getting your hands on the newest
> miners [[ early enough to generate a profit (barring another bubble). ]]
> There
> are [[ very few ]] [[ technical ]] barriers to mining other than cash.
> Right now, that
> requires a minimum $5K [[ investment ]] and [[ may ]] not deliver returns
> [[ any time soon
> (if at all). ]] [[ That is, barring another bubble. ]]
> "There are none so blind as those who will not see."
> YES, "there are NO technical barriers to 'mining.'"  Other than the O-N-E
> ... T-H-I-N-G ... that actually matters to the clever mathematicians who
> conceived of it:
> You're paying $5,000 USD for "a magical money machine," and it's
> S-L-O-W-L-Y dawning on you that the words which I have enclosed in [[
> double brackets ]] can be omitted entirely from these sentences.
> You're being very cleverly suckered.  It's as simple as that.  And, you're
> pouring serious money ( >= $5000 USD ) into "the same damn con" that has
> been foisted upon "clever, smart" (sic) people, well, since time began.
> "Public-key cryptography" is designed around a truly-intractable (so far
> as we know ...) mathematical problem. Whereas "bitcoin" is designed around
> a =difficult= problem (at least, "difficult" in the way that all of you
> have been taught to approach it ...), yet "not so difficult that it cannot
> be, by sheer brute force, periodically solved."  A quarter has to drop out
> of the one-armed bandit now and then, just to keep the suckers going.
>  Obviously, there IS a "private key" to this puzzle, and, equally
> obviously, you don't have it.  All of this is plenty good enough to enable
> people to sell you(!) these mathematical one-armed bandits for $5,000 USD a
> pop.
> There is no "bubble."  There is only:  "sucker."
> " ... and two to take him."
> _______________________________________________
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
> http://chugalug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/chugalug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chugalug.org/pipermail/chugalug/attachments/20130903/455e0d14/attachment.html>

More information about the Chugalug mailing list