Weakness from the standpoint of the ability of a network operator to block the protocol? GPG could be blocked quite easily. Email encrypted with GPG declares itself so
I feel upset about being modded down -- I feel I asked a fair question. Governments gain their power from being able to tax and dilute currency. Bitcoin, if it gains traction, will be a direct threat to both. It does not seem realistic to think governments will not fight back, and hard. If I'm right, it means simple tricks like changing ports and changing IP's won't work. You say "The government can't register/block every possible domain name that will be generated." -- maybe they can if they know the algorithm that is being used to generate the domain names? Or maybe they can examine the contents of the packets, so there is no need to block every domain name (or IP in the case of Fast flux). For every change to the protocol to thward getting blocked, the blockers and respond to the change because the protocol is open.
I suppose the "worst case scenario" is that Bitcoin has to be used over a generic VPN protocol, similar to what people do now to get around the Great Firewall Of China. As I understand it, the Chinese government has not blocked the VPN protocols, mostly because few enough of the Chinese people use them -- but if a large percentage of Chinese people started using VPN's, wouldn't the Chinese government start blocking VPN protocols?
Perhaps the Great Firewall Of China is the best example of the capability a government has to control its internet within its physical territory?
Blocking every VPN is something that should eventually fail because large enterprises (Fortune 500 Co) won't stand for it. So I can understand the argument that governments _ultimately_ can't stop Bitcoin or something like it. But it seems to me like they won't give up without a fight.
I feel upset about being modded down -- I feel I asked a fair question. Governments gain their power from being able to tax and dilute currency. Bitcoin, if it gains traction, will be a direct threat to both. It does not seem realistic to think governments will not fight back, and hard. If I'm right, it means simple tricks like changing ports and changing IP's won't work. You say "The government can't register/block every possible domain name that will be generated." -- maybe they can if they know the algorithm that is being used to generate the domain names? Or maybe they can examine the contents of the packets, so there is no need to block every domain name (or IP in the case of Fast flux). For every change to the protocol to thward getting blocked, the blockers and respond to the change because the protocol is open.
I suppose the "worst case scenario" is that Bitcoin has to be used over a generic VPN protocol, similar to what people do now to get around the Great Firewall Of China. As I understand it, the Chinese government has not blocked the VPN protocols, mostly because few enough of the Chinese people use them -- but if a large percentage of Chinese people started using VPN's, wouldn't the Chinese government start blocking VPN protocols?
Perhaps the Great Firewall Of China is the best example of the capability a government has to control its internet within its physical territory?
Blocking every VPN is something that should eventually fail because large enterprises (Fortune 500 Co) won't stand for it. So I can understand the argument that governments _ultimately_ can't stop Bitcoin or something like it. But it seems to me like they won't give up without a fight.