Open main menu

Suggest to delete criticism sectionEdit

I think, assertion that it "has so many problems that it probably isn't going to survive" is too strong and undue. Bitmessage is still a new system, and naturally had some bugs. No new vulnerabilities surfaced since the article date Sep 2013. Yurivict (talk) 04:25, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Article probably needs a re-writeEdit

The article is overtly promotional and reads like an infovertisement. Particularly, claims of 'secure encryption' should never be used when a project has never gone through an independent security audit. Some (non-notable) services are also given excessive mention in the article. I've cleaned it up a bit, but the article probably needs further WP:NPOV cleaning. ☃ Unicodesnowman (talk) 11:55, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


While I think it's good that different implementations are portrayed I think having four infoboxes on a short page like this clutters is quite some bit. I think the infoboxes should be removed and the relevant passages integrated into the corresponding sections of the article. Instead there could be an infobox for just the protocol as there currently is one on the German Wikipedia page. --Evotopid (talk) 12:20, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Return to "Bitmessage" page.