Comment by lordofgibbons

Comment by lordofgibbons 18 hours ago

41 replies

Bitcoin maximalists are learning that having a non-fungible and fully traceable ledger might be a problem. Even Satoshi called this out! As is, BTC is somewhat of a privacy nightmare. All of your transactions are on the public ledger for anyone with basic knowledge of statistics to correlate and see all of your transactions. Blockchain Analytics is big business!

All the things the Treasury is considering to be "suspicious activity" simply can't be tracked with something that's non-fungible and untracable like Monero. This suspicious activity - aka privacy - is just how all monero transactions are done.

tchock23 17 hours ago

That assumes Bitcoin maximalists ultimately see it as a means of transaction. The ones I come across in the wild are purely maximalists for speculative purposes and couldn’t care less about the “practical” use cases for it.

  • swinglock 12 hours ago

    Being able to transact is the point of it all. If practical use is not possible that makes it useless and that makes it worthless.

    • teiferer 11 hours ago

      This has never been the main use outside an unrealistic dream world. Its main purposes are speculation and ponzi-like scams.

      • fluoridation 11 hours ago

        There are two components to price: what the thing is worth, and what you might be willing to convince someone else to buy it from you in the future for. The latter is the speculative component. The former must be related to some intrinsic property of the thing. For example, an orange has some minimum price, because if nothing else it's composed of matter and so can weight things down. If bitcoin is useless to transact, then its intrinsic worth is zero, so its price is 100% speculative. That's not so much a bubble as just air being pressurized by no container.

  • oofbey 8 hours ago

    Not saying anything new here, but at the core there are only a few key reasons for using bitcoin: investment, hiding your finances, and the idealism of de-centralization.

    The intrinsic value of decentralization is the ability to operate outside any fiat system of laws or government. So that one lines up a lot with the criminal side of hiding your finances. The investment aspect sure is enticing to lots of folks, but without a real core underlying value it's just bubbles and rug-pulls. So all this has the effect, wittingly or not, of lining up the incentives of all BTC users with money launderers.

    Sure there are TONS of perfectly legal reasons not to want people to track your finances. Many of them are even moral. But obviously many are neither moral nor legal. (The edge case of moral but illegal sure gets people fired up, but it's a vanishing minority of actual use.) So when the regulators come looking for criminals, we unsurprisingly get lots of sound and fury about how there are lots of perfectly valid reasons why good people will want to act in ways that make them look like criminals. Uh huh. Yes, there sure are.

rocqua 17 hours ago

But with Monero, you see that it is effectively shut off from the Fiat ecosystem entirely. The proposal here clearly lays out how bad Bitcoin is for privacy. But it's not like the more private alternatives are actually allowed to be viable alternatives.

  • drozycki 12 hours ago

    Is this true? Kraken and Bitfinex both seem to support XMR <-> USD

ibejoeb 17 hours ago

Yeah. I understand the excitement over the past two decades about the possibility of cryptocurrencies, but it came with a lot of naivete. After the fight to create sovereign central banks, did anyone seriously think that they were just going to give it up? Sure, maybe they can't stop you technologically, but it's very easy to simply make it unlawful, and then the men (and robots) with guns call.

SubiculumCode 16 hours ago

Very true. In my opinion, and strictly from an American-centric view, privacy should only extend to transactions within borders between citizens. As soon as it involves transactions from outside our borders, then it is a national security concern. We know, right now, that both Russia and China are fueling internal political tension via massive and sophisticated disinformation/influence campaigns, a certain part of which involves paying influencers, extremists, shady media outlets, maybe a Representative or three in America to push their agendas, foment discontent aiming to destabilize and control the United States. Monero is definitely being used in this information warfare. I am pro-privacy, pro- individual rights, but we have to resolve this central tension of these things and the very real hyper connected world we live in which very real nation-state enemies. I am at the point where I think restricting the internet to allied countries might actually be a good idea, as currently we are leaving citizens unprotected from every nation-state actor who wishes to manipulate us with targeted, data-analytic, bot- and ai-empowered campaign against us. It is out of control, and as long as a monetary instrument like crypto enables that attack surface, it will be hard for me to support crypto-maxamialism.

  • beambot 14 hours ago

    > a certain part of which involves paying influencers, extremists, shady media outlets, maybe a Representative or three in America to push their agendas, foment discontent aiming to destabilize and control the United States.

    Doesn't this describe every political party and megacorp in the US too...?

    • xp84 6 hours ago

      If you don’t like those guys, you really won’t like the guys who will be in charge when the nation actually does descend into chaos.

    • le-mark 10 hours ago

      Political parties and mega corps don’t strive to undermine the fabric of democracy itself though.

  • IAmGraydon 9 hours ago

    One of the biggest platforms this happens through is Reddit, and they intentionally leave it wide open. You don’t even have to have an email address to register and start posting. Bots make these platforms a fortune, and they’re happy to sell out their country to foreign influence for a dime.

    So yes, and I’ve been saying this since it started really getting bad in 2020, we need to completely cut enemies of the US off from our internet. There will obviously be attempts to proxy through western countries, so it needs to be strictly enforced, possibly with an identity requirement for participants.

    For those against this, imagine a physical country where anyone can spawn thousands of faceless, nameless drones disguised as real people which are free to do whatever they want in society with zero risk of consequences. What would happen to that country? It would fall. As digital societies have now become larger than countries themselves, this is the very situation we’re dealing with. It’s not the utopia we hoped for, but it will be a dystopia unless action is taken.

    • SubiculumCode 7 hours ago

      I used to be against the real ID moves of early social media platforms, and now I wonder. How would information spread if social media users on X, for example, were clearly identified as 1 to 1 associated with a named person? Sore they might spread something, but unless that guy in Russia has an American ID, then he's not posting.

      The current, put as many bots as you want on, approach is pure war.

      • IAmGraydon 7 hours ago

        Exactly. The basis of the problem is an unlinking of actions and real world consequences. People wil do whatever they want when consequences no longer exist.

thrance 17 hours ago

If Monero ever came close to Bitcoin's popularity, it would be outlawed. Plain as that. You can't get freedom through technology.

  • nunobrito 17 hours ago

    Monero has already been delisted from relevant exchanges last year because "reasons".

    The main website that matched people to trade fiat for monero (localmonero) got closed recently because "reasons".

    It is pretty popular and outlawed since a while. Basically the only relevant crypto currency used for purchases on the street since several years now. You can look up the number of daily on-chain transactions and tends to be on top every day.

    You likely would only notice this if you need to donate money for someone with the wrong opinions or live at a non-aligned country.

    • [removed] 14 hours ago
      [deleted]
  • user34283 17 hours ago

    Freedom here means transacting without:

    --

    anti-money laundering safeguards

    sanctions enforcement

    consumer protection

    tax enforcement

    fraud prevention systems

    --

    It is very true that technology won't get you this freedom from sensible legal requirements we impose on financial transactions.

    That's obviously a good thing, but I guess people who are in crypto would disagree.

    • palmfacehn 16 hours ago

      Conversely, property rights are also a good thing. I don't agree that it is as simple as you present it. Even if you believe that the state has a right to confiscate, regulate or inflate away value for a "greater collective good", reasonable people might also recognize the potential for abuse.

      So no, it isn't obviously a "good thing", unless you reject these nuances in favor of an all powerful state.

      • user34283 16 hours ago

        Talk about rejecting nuance, but now the state is "all powerful" because you can't transact privately.

        Yes, the state has control of finance and transactions. It always does.

        Democracies are build on principles like Popular sovereignty, political equality, or the rule of law.

        Private transactions or tax-free property isn't a democratic feature. Yes, it's that obvious.

      • lokar 16 hours ago

        In an organized society there is no absolute right to personal property, there never has been and there never will be.

  • Mouvelie 17 hours ago

    Which, I believe, would make it even more prevalent. It would be the confession that they cannot control it, and while most people would be deterred by this, I can see a shadow economy growing because (or thanks ?) to this.

  • 1gn15 17 hours ago

    It's not so black and white. Obviously social and political change is the goal. But in the meantime technology can help if you're living under repression.

    Take VPNs and Tor helping people jump the Great Firewall of China for example. Obviously, yes, this is a political problem; the GFW shouldn't exist. But it would be foolish to dismiss the technology as a vital part of fighting back against the state.

  • GeoAtreides 17 hours ago

    You are being downvoted, but you are correct. I am east european and I know how hard the fist of the State hits. Sometimes I think westerners see technology like some special moves that you can quickly combo so you can defeat the evil boss at the end. No, there are no special moves, just a boot stamping on a human face -- forever.

  • mindslight 16 hours ago

    > You can't get freedom through technology

    I'd argue the opposite - if Bitcoin had been created with secure private transactions (untraceability) it would be in the same popular position it is today, but the attacks on it (chain analysis etc) would be failing instead of inevitably marching forward.

    Your argument seems to rely on an assumption that the insecurity of Bitcoin has been legible and apparent to the [greater] government for most of Bitcoin's life, and so the government allowed it to gain popularity knowing those insecurities would eventually make it succumb to government control. But in general government sees any lack of identification/data as a problem to be rectified, and the popular wisdom for quite some time has been that Bitcoin is "anonymous". so I'd say the government acted as quick as it would have regardless of the actual security properties. It feels like any holding off had more to do with financial lucrativeness rather than an understanding of its long term security flaws.

    Now that we're here though, Bitcoin does seem like a very strong inoculation against financial privacy technology. Government is now well aware that software/cryptography can be used for money, and the first question asked is why isn't your new niche system grokkable to chain analysis?

  • immibis 15 hours ago

    Monero is outlawed in the EU. It's not illegal to possess, but no business is allowed to touch it.

    Which proves that it does what it says. (Much like when the police suspect someone of being a drug dealer for using GrapheneOS)