<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=windows-1252"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><div>On Dec 17, 2013, at 8:15 PM, Jerry Leichter <<a href="mailto:leichter@lrw.com">leichter@lrw.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">...completely missing the point of Ben's paper. It really comes down to the following:<div><br></div><div>"<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: CMR10; font-size: 13px;">So now we have either an existence proof of an efficient solution, or a proof that Bitcoin doesn’t work."</span></div></div></blockquote><div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"></div></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><br class="webkit-block-placeholder"></div><div>[..]</div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><blockquote type="cite"><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: CMR10; font-size: 13px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Courier; font-size: 14px;">The paper is offered as a proof by contrapositive that "Bitcoin doesn't work" - though you have to read that phrase in context. What's being denied is that "Bitcoin is a decentralized currency" in the sense described in the paper.</span></span></div></blockquote><br></div><div>As far as I was able to tell, the paper was a restatement of the well-known 51% problem.</div><div><br></div><div>Am I wrong? If so, please explain how.</div><div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Greg</div><div><br></div><div apple-content-edited="true">--<br>Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.<br>
</div>
<div><div><br></div></div></body></html>