Some people claim that Bitcoin is eventually consistent. They are wrong. This post tries to dispel the myth and explain the right way to evaluate the consistency guarantees of distributed systems.
Evidently, a requirement for becoming a CEO at a Bitcoin exchange or payments company is to believe that your company has no power and works entirely at the discretion of the miners. I try once again to correct this myth.
I make the case that Bitcoin users have just as much of a say, or more, than all the miners combined. They wield this power through exchanges, and the exchanges need to live up to their responsibilities.
The data breach involving sensitive data on 191 million voters portends a future where everyone has access to everything there is to know about everyone.
In an effort to bring the fruitless Bitcoin block size debate to a close, this post outlines Bitcoin-Unified, an approach to accommodate both small and large blocks.
The phrase "developing the fee market" gets used a lot in Bitcoin circles. This post makes the case that this is a thinly veiled euphemism for jacking up the fees.
Some people say that "if Bitcoin relies on altruism, then it has already failed." Bitcoin relies heavily on altruism, and it has not failed.
Emin Gün Sirer
Hacker and professor at Cornell, with interests that span distributed
systems, OSes and networking. Current projects include HyperDex, OpenReplica
and the Nexus OS. more...