12. Conclusion

We have proposed a system for electronic transactions without relying on trust. We started with the usual framework of coins made from digital signatures, which provides strong control of ownership, but is incomplete without a way to prevent double-spending. To solve this, we proposed a peer-to-peer network using proof-of-work to record a public history of transactions that quickly becomes computationally impractical for an attacker to change if honest nodes control a majority of CPU power. The network is robust in its unstructured simplicity. Nodes work all at once with little coordination. They do not need to be identified, since messages are not routed to any particular place and only need to be delivered on a best effort basis. Nodes can leave and rejoin the network at will, accepting the proof-of-work chain as proof of what
happened while they were gone. They vote with their CPU power, expressing their acceptance of
valid blocks by working on extending them and rejecting invalid blocks by refusing to work on them. Any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism.

https://t.me/BitcoinWP/405

From the BitCoin White Paper:

- Not double spending.
- Not trusted third party.
- Peer-to-peer distributed timestamp server.
- From one party to another.
- Timestamps transactions by hashing.
- Chain of hash-based proof-of-work.
- Record in a public history of transactions
- Small casual transactions (micro transactions)
- Payment system based on cryptographic proof.
- Protect sellers from fraud.
- Routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented.
- Chronological order of transactions.
- Chain of digital signatures.
- Verify by the chain of
ownership.
- The earliest transaction is the one that counts.
- The proof-of-work solves the decision making.
- The honest chain will grow the fastest.
- Incentive make more profitable to play by the rules.
- Moore's Law, storage should not be a problem.
- Accept alerts from network nodes (WP Section: 8- SPV)
- Privacy: by keeping public keys anonymous.(similar to stock exchanges)
- A new key pair should be used for each transaction.
- Nodes do not need to be identified.


Not from the BitCoin White Paper:
- RBF (Replace By Fees)
- SegWit (Segregated Witness)
- Lingtning Network
- Taproot

https://t.me/BitcoinWP/406

CSW
Jun 26, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1624710449324400?thread_ts=1624710449.324400&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2638

Craig Wright awarded default judgment in first Bitcoin white paper lawsuit
Jun 28, 2021
https://coingeek.com/craig-wright-awarded-default-judgment-in-first-bitcoin-white-paper-lawsuit/

"London 28 June 2021 – London’s High Court today granted ONTIER LLP client and Bitcoin creator, Dr Craig Wright, default judgment in his copyright infringement action against ‘Cøbra’, the pseudonymous operator and publisher of the bitcoin.org website."

https://www.ontier.digital/post/uk-court-awards-bitcoin-creator-default-judgment-in-bitcoin-copyright-infringement-claim

Craig Wright’s Bitcoin Whitepaper Copyright Battle Continues.
Zemes Gaoson
Jul 3, 2021

https://gaoson.medium.com/the-bitcoin-whitepaper-copyright-battle-continues-93d4bb54ac3a

Continúa la batalla por los derechos de autor del libro blanco de Bitcoin de Craig Wright
 Zemes Gaoson
 3 de julio de 2021
https://telegra.ph/Craig-Wrights-Bitcoin-Whitepaper-Copyright-Battle-Continues-By-Zemes-Gaoson-07-03

Wright v Cøbra: How Satoshi took back the Bitcoin white paper from BTC
Jul 1, 2021
https://coingeek.com/wright-v-cobra-how-satoshi-took-back-the-bitcoin-white-paper-from-btc/

Double Spending
https://t.me/Double_Spend

CSW
Jul 22, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1626943089084300?thread_ts=1626943089.084300&cid=C5131HKFX

https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2744

Una razón por la que creé Bitcoin está directamente relacionada con la naturaleza de los pagos y el hecho de que los mecanismos tradicionales de pago por Internet que utilizan tarjetas de crédito no funcionaban para transacciones de pequeño valor. Si bien las transacciones de gran valor en Bitcoin y cualquier sistema relacionado pueden revertirse, es económica y computacionalmente inviable hacerlo con transacciones pequeñas.


Bitcoin as a Security
Por Craig Wright
25 julio 2021
https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/bitcoin-como-sistema-de-seguridad-por-craig-wright/
---------

"Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System
Satoshi Nakamoto

1. Introduction

...Transactions that are computationally impractical to reverse would protect sellers from fraud, and routine escrow mechanisms could easily be implemented to protect buyers. "

https://t.me/BitcoinWP/394

Bitcoin: un sistema de efectivo electrónico p2p
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/353

BitCoin White Paper
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/188

- Resumen *
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/373

1. Introducción
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/374

2. Transacciones
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/375

3. Servidor de sellado de tiempo
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/376

4. Prueba de trabajo. PoW
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/377

5. Red
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/378

6. Incentivo
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/379

7. Recuperación de espacio de disco
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/380

8. Verificación de pagos simplificada SPV
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/381

9. Combinando y dividiendo valor
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/382

10. Privacidad
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/383

Tercero de confianza
https://thelawdictionary.org/trusted-third-party/

12. Conclusión
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/384

*******************

Pre release 8 pages
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/21

https://craigwright.net/bitcoin-white-paper.pdf

Bitcoin WP Charles Sturt University https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3440802

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3440802

Web de BSV
https://bitcoinsv.io/bitcoin.pdf

Web de BTC
https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

https://web.archive.org/web/20130311201237/http://iweb.dl.sourceforge.net/project/bitcoin/Design%20Paper/bitcoin.pdf/bitcoin.pdf

Here's the Bitcoin whitepaper wrapped in a Bitcoin transaction.
https://powping.com/posts/495c20e1c2848db7953ff62330cf9705526264be32aef40ddab115cc8b01ca4f …

https://bitcoin.org/en/posts/regarding-csw

--------------------------
En ESPAÑOL
-------------------------

Isabel Díaz /(26 dic. 2013) Bitcoin: un sistema de dinero electrónico entre iguales (P2P).Satoshi Nakamoto

El Libro Blanco de Bitcoin, de Satoshi Nakamoto - BitCoin White Paper

https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/bitcoin-wp/

Maec-Traduccion
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/42

Traducción de Angel León
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/34

BitCoin White Paper
En castellano
Traducción: @breathingdog
https://t.me/BitcoinWP/353

-------------------------
Isabel Díaz /(26 dic. 2013) Bitcoin: un sistema de dinero electrónico entre iguales (P2P).Satoshi Nakamoto

El Libro Blanco de Bitcoin, de Satoshi Nakamoto - BitCoin White Paper

https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/bitcoin-wp/

1/2
One CPU, One vote

           The bitcoin whitepaper (Wright, 2008, p. 3) notes that proof of work is “essentially one CPU one vote”. Unfortunately, for many, this has been falsely misconstrued out of context as a system providing democratic rights to all participants in the network. However, this majority decision is not democratic. The nature of proof of work and the limitations of the system don’t provide a majority decision for users but rather a majority for commercial nodes. It is not one vote per IP address or machine but rather one vote per unit of investment that decides the ordering of transactions. Additionally, this methodology doesn’t allow for protocol changes.[1]

           Further error is to assume complete autonomy. The longest chain represents the majority decision, but the error assuming that each node must follow this is to ignore the right for a node to follow what the node operator sees as the longest chain of valid transactions. Where a node believes that the chain is invalid, the node operator can manually override the system and select the alternative chain. As the proof of work section in the whitepaper notes, if “the majority of CPU power is controlled by honest nodes, the honest chain will grow the fastest and outpace any competing chains”.[2] Consequently, the argument that a node must automatically follow the longest chain is invalid. Node operators decide what they believe is the honest chain and risk losing profit in the short term to ensure the honesty of the network, which increases their profit in the long-term.

[1] Set in stone
[2] Ibid. p. 3.

The whitepaper references both honest and competing chains.[1] Hence, the argument that the system must be automated and that node operators cannot decide to risk losing profit by following the longest chain in seeking to build on the chain without double-spent transactions or other attacks are in error. The whitepaper notes that nodes vote with their CPU power. Nodes accept or reject valid blocks by working on extending and rejecting invalid blocks. Hence, the argument that the system must be automated can be easily falsified. Computers don’t make decisions. Human agency is required if the expression of acceptance or rejecting a block is to be incorporated into the system. Computers don’t vote; humans do.

[1] Ibid.

The argument that nodes must blindly follow the longest chain ignores the section of the White Paper defining bitcoin and setting the unilateral contract that allows nodes to decide what the node operator believes is the honest and correct chain. While nodes do not need to be identified, they remain identifiable because of proof of work. In particular, a large node with sufficient CPU power to determine a network change is visible and easily identifiable. The only way to confirm the absence of a transaction is to be aware of the transaction, and hence this requires the public announcement of all transactions in the system.[1] Through this process, the nodes come to an agreement on a single history of the order of transactions received across the network. Each node operator may only trust the information they have independently obtained. The timestamp cannot be trusted, and only the receipt of a transaction can prove the time ordering.

[1] Ibid. p. 2.
So, I'm sorry for those individuals who like to believe that bitcoin acts without human intervention but machines do not make decisions, people do.

At any point in the Bitcoin White Paper where it discusses the voting or decision-making processes, the White Paper is referencing a human operator making a human decision.

In section 4 on pagge 3 of my paper,, I reference that a majority of CPU power when controlled by honest nodes will grow the honest chain faster than the competing chains.

CSW
Aug 10, 2021
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1628584004442500?thread_ts=1628584004.442500&cid=C5131HKFX
1/2
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/2858

On the whitepaper view of hidden chains and double spends
by Steve Shadders
August 13, 2021
Introduction Bitcoin SV has recently been subject to attacks by an actor with substantial hashpower and attempting to defraud millions of dollars worth of BSV.

https://bitcoinsv.io/2021/08/13/on-the-whitepapers-view-of-hidden-chains-and-double-spends/

La resiliencia de Bitcoin original al ataque de un mal actor con mucho dinero y poca cabeza, le ha costado cerca de 20 mil dólares al atacante, mientras la cadena de BSV continuó sin obstáculos, procesando un volumen récord de transacciones e incluso varios bloques récord de 1GB.

Revisamos las cadenas ocultas y el doble gasto, con el White Paper.
por Steve Shadders
13 de agosto de 2021 https://es.ramonquesada.com/espanol-es/revisamos-las-cadenas-ocultas-y-el-doble-gasto-con-el-white-paper-por-steve-shadders/

BSV DevCon 2021 | Fireside chat with Dr Craig S. Wright
3 ago 2021
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP5ELK8vh-k


Steve Shadders, CTO, nChain sits down with Dr Craig S. Wright for a candid discussion on development in #Bitcoin.