Bitcoin Forum

We all know that Bitcoin transactions are not anonymous but pseudo-anonymous, resulting in many problems like tainted coins etc.
Some cryptocurrencies offer significant more privacy (Monero, Zcash etc) but at a cost.
However my question is more fundamental: How 'much' privacy do we really need for a widely-adopted cryptocurrency?
I believe Bitcoin as-is won't get adopted for everyday transactions. Nobody would want showing his buying habits to the whole world (imagine how many ads and flyers you would get).
On the other hand, I don't believe cryptocurrencies that offer too much privacy will get adopted either, since they will be used for criminal activities and eventually get banned.
My feeling is that we want a currency that offers privacy to some extent, without revealing our transaction to the world but still be possible for law-enforcement to track illegal activities.
What do you think?

Either we keep the blockchain public for everybody or we don't.

The main idea of bitcoin is the decentralization and independence of governments. This means that it's not possible to block a normal user from seeing your transaction history but allowing your government to do that so they can "track criminals" without giving them too much power.

People can get a little more privacy by not re-using their addresses. This way is harder to link all the payments to a single individual.

A simple solution to this is to use an public address once and no more than that. Unless you specialize in blockchain analysis, I do not think ordinary users can trace everything in the blockchain.


Monero's solution is the "view key". If a law enforcement agency has a warrant to see all your transactions, you can give them your view key without giving up control of your wallet.



I believe Monero's view key solution is a good idea.

It better that bitcoin transaction are pseudo-anonymous and concern the bitcoin privacy issue. It will be bad for bitcoin if bitcoin transaction privacy were not revealing. We both know that despite the fact that  bitcoin transaction are revealing, one of the Australian leader still believe bitcoin was only use for criminal activities and the government of some countries that endorse bitcoin won't have endorse it.

I agree 100 percent.   How much privacy do we really need?  Total, 100 percent when it comes to government interfering in our private affairs.  If they have cause, the follow procedure, get a warrant and the accused is innocent until proven guilty.   If they can prove something fine but,  no more of this patriot act garbage.   I have no fear of the whack job in North Korea but, the US Congress has the power to take my savings, all I have worked for, 60 years of work can be confiscated by a an American whack job like Bernie Sanders.   Hopefully gold, silver and bitcoin can help me protect what I have worked so long to build.

The only exception to less then 100 percent privacy is in the context of due process.   Our constitution and the rights of a free people are almost gone.  You can burn a flag but who cares, if our assets can be confiscated by the Fed and Congress with mechanics of money printing, inflation, people won't be able to buy a flag in the first place.

I disagree with both of your predictions. The lack or abundance of privacy probably won't affect the adoption, since Bitcoin is private enough and if you are careful you can reach a near perfect privacy, but you can also reach complete transparency if you desire so, it is completely up to the user.

Bitcoin is supposed to be used in way that you use different addresses for every transaction for security and privacy so there shouldn't be any problems with the lack of it. While other more private cryptocurrencies won't get banned either, since that is near impossible as well, it is hard to ban something that is decentralized and ever adopting like that.

I don't see a reason why we wouldn't have a soft-fork down the road for adding confidential transactions so people can use them if they want.

Incorrect.

The simple use of Bitcoin in a transaction cannot result in (A) showing his buying habits to the entire world (B) increased volume of ads and flyers

These would be the result of (A) Your personal data being leaked from a bitcoin exchange (B) your personal data being leaked by the other party in a transaction

Bitcoin is anonymous because there is no personal information linked to the wallet address (if you don't use third party services like coinbase).
You're also not restricted to creating only one wallet per person.
The only privacy leak for Bitcoin is the meta data you send when you broadcast a transaction, this could be linked to your physical address.
I think it's comparable to cash, which is also anonymous but has your DNA on it

Completely agree. I feel like anonymity is necessary but   pushing anonymity to the extreme is not the way to go either. We should meet somewhere in the middle and that's where bitcoin nails it right on the head. Pseudo-anonymity is a lot better. Because having complete anonymity can be dangerous.

       


               Everybody would like to keep their confidentiality during the financial transactions whether it is Cryptocurrency or paper currency.The transaction function of bitcoin is totally different that bitcoin allows to store the funds by yourself without a third party interference so there is no burden in keeping the fund but in traditional bank account requires significant cost and much effort. For creating a bitcoin account is much easier to create in our home computer.

Most of the recent adopters and all those jumping after 2013-2014 are not so interested in Bitcoin for its anonymity that you can get with it. What Bitcoin provides is more than enough for most of them. How much privacy is needed is depending on the activity of the people using it. And most of the activity doesn't need more privacy than that

Others Altcoins with more privacy may be used for criminal/illegal activities we can't deny it, but comparing with the dollar it's nothing

Bitcoin does not offer any privacy. You create a new, empty wallet address? Yes it is anonymous. Do you get some coins from your friend? Now you are linked with your friend and whoever your friend is in turn linked to. Do you buy some coins from an exchange? Now you are linked with that exchange (which in most cases collects your personal information). Do you buy something from overstock? Now you are linked with that store. And these links are permanent. You could create another wallet and send your coins there, but all you can manage is to just make another link to all of the above.
All this is being done: https://www.elliptic.co/financial-institutions/ (https://www.elliptic.co/financial-institutions/)
Also for those who still don't want to accept it, watch this from Greg Maxwell himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHPYNZ8i1cU (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHPYNZ8i1cU)

Regarding another 100% private cryptocurrency, in the end yes it will be banned from the government(s) (see China for example). The coin itself cannot be banned, but the exchanges can. And that currency will sooner or later be used for illegal purposes (Alphabay etc.)

The more privacy the better. Then individuals can themselves decide if they wish to relinquish some (or all)based on their own beliefs. The nature of freedom.

If one person wants a camera in their bedroom and all their purchases online, that is their business.  If another doesn’t, that is their’s too.

100% agree

I am going to watch a video, but it is kind of long so it will take some time, but I still think that it offers good privacy. Sure it links you with your identity, but it also links you with plenty of other identities that don't need to have anything to do with you. You can always send your coins to a new address and no one can really know if it is still you. And when you buy it in person from someone, even if he is your friend, there isn't a reliable way to know that those coins belonged or maybe even still belonged to your friend in the first place. It is very hard to find an owner of a address, go ahead, try it yourself. There are mixers as well and Bitcoins can often travel through person to person trades or a bunch of in-wallet transactions.

I just claim that it isn't no privacy, it isn't that easy at all. It is quite the effort if someone is careful. And it is recommended to use a different address for every payment. There is nothing that is 100%, if anyone is really motivated they will always get you, that is the reality, but it can be very very hard with very little effort on the other user's part.

It is more then 150GB of simple transactions, that is a lot of analysis to do. You are trying to track a fish in an forever moving ocean.

It's debatable, 1 user has the potential to take any action, it will be difficult for the government to track addresses that perpetually transact and eventually stop tracking when the addres are replaced in a complex way.

I try to be neutral if the government wants my account privacy to be known then I will give it away, I can create another address for personal use.

i think that being anonymous is not really a big deal to most of us here or other people who uses bitcoin because most of us are happy and contented to what bitcoin has to offer and how does it works online/offline and were okay on it. if your doing illegal acticvities and dont want to be trace then use some anoymous service like tor or vpn and that would solve your concerns regarding on privacy.

Anonymity is secondary to me. I don't do illegal things so I am not concerned about the KYC and AML rules. It's knowing I am dealing with a legitimate entity, exchange, person etc that matters to me most. With legitimacy comes peace of mind.

I know privacy matters to most here and is perhaps even their primary reason for using bitcoin. But it comes with a price. As you can see, banks are reluctant to partner with exchanges that offer total anonymity to those they engage with. Governments are just as reluctant to accredit and recognise such exchanges. The reality is we live in a world where control is the key word. Governments control our lives and money. Changing that will not be an overnight process. Fighting that power and control is a difficult war. They have the means and tools to build walls and enforce sanctions which are powerful ways to keep people on a short leash.

 

Anonymity is not only for criminals and drug dealers. Anonymity is essential for everyday users, but is also required for businesses.
Imagine a business buying and selling in bitcoin. I don't think if you run this business you would want your competitors to know how much you sell, how much you buy and who you buy from.
The transactions can't be linked by a regular user, but they can by professionals.

mb creation of the wallet must be limmited, may have any person verification with passport? Create the wallet using the special service with verification, and that service will controll all transactions legality. Block of blockchain will have personal data witch can be read only by "admins"

Here's another interesting link regarding privacy in bitcoin
https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/confidential-transactions-how-hiding-transaction-amounts-increases-bitcoin-privacy-1464892525/ (https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/confidential-transactions-how-hiding-transaction-amounts-increases-bitcoin-privacy-1464892525/)

Bitcoin have anonymity which blockchain will not release any identification od the user but let everyone in the community see the transaction thats the essence of it so that the government will see it all but dont have a power to sue any one or any individual as they dont know who they are. As of now i thinkbwe have enough privacy to anyone or in the government. When one crytocurrency will exist with the "right" privacy that what you are thinking this coin will be use to many criminal activities and will be ban soon and of course with high cost like zcash and monero...

In that case, it will be able to everyone given something ALWAYS leaks from whomever these “admins” are.

Might as well just use PayPal instead of the above.

If bitcoin wants to be formally regulated by the government, then bitcoin must apply KYC, after which the government will begin applying tax for each transaction that occurs. I have no problem with it because we can still use other wallets personally. Many things can not be traced by the government and it's just a matter of ordinary rules.

Why is it so expensive to go private.

The ideal solution would be that Bitcoin gives you the same level of anonymity that Cash gives you, but with special forensic tools, some law enforcement agencies would be able to track criminal activities. Obviously these tools might end up in criminal hands too, but hackers can hack Banks and financial institutions too, so Bitcoin will be no different.

In a digital world, nothing is 100% anonymous. We can make it Pseudo anonymous to protect us from the normal thief, but we will not be able to counter the experts. ^hmmmmmm^   

if we have to saving our bit coins in wallet in that write some code like submitting ID proof like passport and other one. next finger print, next OTP for our mobile, next changing password weekly once. and next that wallet is secure or not these all parameters we want to see for saving bit coins.

As much as I love blockchain I can not over emphasize the fact that it needs regulations. High record of scam scenarios  are making the headlines Daily. We need to be able to trace transactions in other to reduce crime

Personally i think bitcoin had its appeal and what really launched in off the ground was the fact the masses believed it to be completely untraceable. but since then i think we've moved on and once youve read into bitcoin its not as simple as being untraceable. blockchain is public which i believe is an excellent idea. its means that every single transaction that has ever been done will be viewable by anyone with a bitcoin client or internet browser. therefore the community can look after each other and certain suspicious activity can be monitored by everyone.

but i believe bitcoin needs to stick to its core beliefs and keep ip addresses and personal information out of the blockchain to prevent doxing and other related activities.

The main people that scream for privacy are the scammers that want to be able to off load large amounts of BTC without people seeing it. The minute they start moving the initial bad of coins, that is when people bail and run.

Those is companies that have a desire to implement Bitcoin or crypto desire privacy for their stock holders, and that can be accomplished with a private side chain asset. Most people have no issue with their TX's being out there, just concern for their wallets.

Loss of privacy of YOUR BTC ownership can be a major security concern for your safety.  Example:  a person has 5000 BTC (currently approaching 25 million USD in value).  If that is YOU do you realize the danger in having that knowledge public?  Where I live gangs, organized crime rings, etc....   could easily ransom your family members or send you a body part of theirs if you refuse to send your BTC.  This is not movie stuff this is easy stuff.  It is very possible to keep BTC pretty close to anonymous if you understand computer networking an connectivity OPSec.  If this all seems crazy to you just know I respect your opinions but I will hold the line on mine here.

To my opinion Bitcoin is not so much private and anonimous as it was couple of years ago. New methods have appeard to reveal the Bitcoin users and to track transactions and that is also the reason why some users have abandoned Bitcoin.
Because of regulation Bitcoin exchangers and other services are more demanding regarding your private data. Honestly, I don't like that very much because I appreciate privacy very much but on the other hand I understand that this is necessary because of all abuse that appear all the time and legality of business.

The more privacy the better imo. The govts are snooping on everyone nowadays without any regard to anyone's privacy. Bitcoins and other cryptos are a small step in the direction of regaining our privacy but ofcourse, for total privacy, we need a lot more to be done.

No government can allow the bitcoin to run in the unregulated market in their country. Because you never know how it can be a threat to the country and government will take all the precaution to curb such privacy. This is what I have understood after reading some of the articles.

I don't think a chain that allows 'law enforcement' access that it doesn't allow anyone else is a good solution at all. Do you mean that law enforcement would be able to track the blockchain because they have the vast technical resources to do so, or because they are granted special access that other people are not?

There is an ideal balance between anonymity and transparency to be found. Does btc have it? How much metadata that is linkable to transactions is too much?

Law enforcement doesn't have special access of course, but it can taint dirty coins and with the help of special companies they can de-anonymize transactions. Bitcoin is not anonymous, many examples exist (some listed above, like someone who might have a 5000BTC wallet, or the bitcoins that are coming from ransomware attacks).

On the opposite side do we really want perfect anonymity?
My point is that if we somehow had a 100% proven perfectly anonymous cryptocurrency, that cryptocurrency would certainly be used also for illegal activities (money laundering, drugs etc.). If you were a criminal and you had the perfect way to receive/send money for your illegal business, you would choose this anonymous cryptocurrency to do your business. And eventually governments would shut down exchanges accepting this cryptocurrency, so instead of a mainstream currency it would eventually become a currency for illegal activities only, and that currency would only be traded on the black market.

Hey,

It`s almost same how much is privacy on bitcoin/altcoin, main point is my life how to survive? I dont steal that is wrong thing to do.
Its easy if parents pay everything, remember respect that!  ::)
I remember when my father pays everything and working two jobs. I try to be smarter then he.

I think that if country would block a crypto because it offers anonymity, then we should make Bitcoin anonymous and let them make it illegal.
We shouldn't let some government tell us that our privacy isn't worth it, it is and should be our right.
If a country wants to cut itself out of a financial revolution, then let them do it, we will see how it works out for them when the rest of countries take over the market and have all the benefits of this new and amazing tech.

I have known this tech for few years now and I have known the governments for many more and I can tell you that I trust in this technology far more then any other government in this world.
If it was up to governments or Bitcoin, I think I have a pretty good idea on who will win in the long run.

Asia is one of rising pool providers, there almost every biggest multipools on globe. Its great they accept small hashing power customers.

You are not realistic by saying
"It's our right to be 100% anonymous" or "I don't steal".

Anonymity is the right of any citizen of a modern civilized country, up to some extent. There is a red line which separates the anonymity right and the use of anonymity to conduct illegal business. If someone crosses that line, the government should waive the anonymity right for that person in question and investigate what's going on. Else if we all demand unlimited anonymity, the country will fall into anarchy. It's like demanding our right for free speech, but at the same time swearing at others. The government should protect the privacy of its lawful citizens on the other hand of course.
You might say that you don't steal and that you are righteous, but statistically there will be some people who misbehave in a society. And this must be controlled or the society will fall into chaos.

It is foolish to think that anonymity can or will destroy any chance of law and order. There are plenty of other ways to catch a criminal then to look at everybody's daily transactions. If there is an actual physical crime that took place, then start from there, the physical evidence, there is no absolute necessity to look at all the transactions of your suspect and gain knowledge about what his interests are, what websites he visits, what he writes on his social media, what he sends to his friends or a loved one, who he voted for and what his views are.

There is no necessary connection between a physical crime and information regarding someone's personal life. We shouldn't let the government scare us into giving them more power then they need. We should try to solve crimes at their core, in the physical world and leave the cyberspace as a free world of information and ideas, where no one can get physically harmed and can say whatever they want.

There is no issue with people swearing at others, that never killed or physically harmed anyone. Freedom of speech should never come second to someone's feelings getting hurt. Freedom of speech is an absolute necessity in a democracy, as all decide as one mind and there can't be limits to what that mind can think of, however scary it might be, a mind is to be free to have it's thoughts. Anonymity is a direct requirement for such democracy and freedom of speech, as lack of anonymity puts a physical body of a mind at risk for it's thoughts and ideas. Neither of those things, as they are all a product of a same idea, should come second to none. No fear should sacrifice the democracy, freedom of speech and anonymity.

It depends on the use case.

Sometimes its perfectly acceptable or even desirable to have public visibility of transactions. A charity with a public account is not a bad thing and throw away accounts just for one off transactions is also often acceptable. Generating new addresses for each transaction can also be sufficient.

But often privacy is vital, would you want your bank account and its transactions visible to the world even if they didn't know for sure who owned the account? That's where technologies like the Lightning Network with Sphinx or Hornet comes in to keep all those smaller transactions off chain and just using the blockchain for intermittent persistance of transactions.

The reality is that blockchain is one layer but not the only layer. TCP is awesome but it isn't enough for a functional corporate network. A more realistic long term solution layers technologies so there's nothing inherently wrong with combining blockchain with cloud with desktop with mobile with SQL databases, just make sure that each layer is used appropriately for its strengths.

Bitcoin remains my favourite blockchain since its the most practical and well used. Its far from perfect and doesn't cater for all scenarios but thats why we have altcoins. I don't like the idea that its Bitcoin or nothing, that's like someone inventing the car and announcing there's no need for other car makers, we have a car thank you very much.

It won't destroy law and order because law and order will destroy (or better shutdown) the exchanges that accept that cryptocurrency first.
Physical evidence is a way to catch a criminal, as long as that evidence exists.
What if that crime was committed in the cyberspace only? Someone could not even touch or physically possess drugs or dirty dollars but still committing crime by exchanging them with that super-anonymous cryptocurrency and then in turn exchanging them with USD (= money laundering).
And I'm not talking about sacrificing democracy or freedom of speech. But these freedoms should be revoked if the line gets crossed (i.e. you act against the other people's interest). And that's when you go to jail.

The majority of Bitcoin users are law-abiding people motivated by privacy concerns or just curiosity.
But Bitcoin’s anonymity is also a powerful tool for financing crime: The virtual money can keep shady transactions secret. The paradox of cryptocurrency is that its associated data create a forensic trail that can suddenly make your entire financial history public information.

We need just enough privacy to also help ensure that there are no illegal activities going on involving bitcoins. I mean just imagine if every member is too private, then they can hide all the illegal activities that they can think of.

This whole idea that Bitcoin is some kind of currency exclusive to criminals is just ridiculous. Most crime is still funded in dollars or failing that, Euro's or pounds. If you're smuggling people or funding other major nefarious activities you are far more likely to be using a more abundant, widely accepted and easy to hide currency. When HSBC got into trouble for turning a blind eye to money laundering it was for more money than the entire Bitcoin economy and that was just one single instance of serious crime.

The vast majority of use of Bitcoin is for perfectly legal and everyday activities, even Amazon has plans to accept it. Just because someone doesn't want to broadcast to the world what they're buying doesn't make it shady. If it was then everyone would have public bank accounts so we could all inspect their bank statements. Privacy is more popular these days because there's been so many abuses of people's private information whether its State or corporate or criminal hacking or whether its just trading of legal or ill-gotten data for marketing purposes. Identify theft is a massive problem and financial records are a powerful aspect of good identity theft.

I was at a presentation recently by a central bank and they talked about how privacy is vital for banking because there are many genuine reasons for banks and businesses and people to want to move money anonymously, its a major use case for any currency and doesn't indicate that a currency is somehow dirty as a result.

i think i depends on the need of a particular transaction but in general privacy in concern to your payment is a must where the traceability is subject to approval or to the position on which and how will events occur i think a regulation whereas no human intervention is needed so there will be a clean way of dealing things

Bitcoin is not anonymous, you can use bitcoin mixers and that can help you with privacy. Monero have much better protection and anonymity, but it's not 100% private as I know. How much privacy do we need, well I don't think that we need privacy if governments let us to be free and experiment with out bodies and minds, if you wish to use drugs use it, pay legally and enjoy, why do you need to hide when you pay for sex? Or you wish to hide that you are buying women clothes?
I would like to give my support for transparent bitcoins, we will know where the money from tax is going, who is paid and how much for work in government sector. Social justice can be better if we know where the money is going. Bitcoin can help us in that.

I would vote for making the crypto less private actually, transparency always goes well with the majority of people and for BTC to be accepted worldwide people needs to feel secure about it. Also governments won't want to deal with money they can trace if needed, if you keep it private then the black market and the scammers will be the 'users' of the currency as most not knowledgeable people think when you mention Bitcoin.

As I understand you are looking for bitcoin without blockchain. If people won't be able to see transaction, it's logical to consider that no one will be able to see, so no one will be able to confirm transaction and prove payment. There is no such way or choose bank where transactions aren't public but available for goverment and bankers.
Current privacy level is absolutely enough for normal users.

Privacy is a binary condition like pregnancy...
There are no degrees of privacy.

Always seems unfair to BTC to (and many still do) say it's used for primarily illegal activities.  The US dollar has BTC beat to no end on being the currency used for illegal purposes.

If we all were able to accept and complete commerce in BTC, then it would be perfect, but since the majority still use fiat, then we are never truly anonymous since we have to eventually use fiat, which is tracked.

If crypto could just be "crypto" and never cross paths with fiat, then we'd be set I think for the most part.

It will depend on the government and their tracking capabilities, some exchanges are not accepting coins that comes from casinos and this is a dangerous thing, one fundamental concept of a currency is interchangeability, the idea that a dollar in your pocket is the same as a dollar in my pocket, if that does not hold true then bitcoin is no longer a currency, so if they are willing to go that route then bitcoin needs privacy features which allow every person, service and business to treat all coins the same.

You are wrong. Private cryptos have their own blockchain, the transactions are just masked such that it is hard or impossible to trace. These masked transactions are confirmed for validity from the nodes themselves.

I think that, for most people, a good crypto coin is one that keeps them safe from theft and doesn't let others know how much they have. In some cases, you might want them to know who sent it, like when you're buying from an online retailer possibly. I think having options is good. A lesser known coin called Verge is heading that way, but we'll see once Wraith protocol comes out.

privacy is king, btc have an important "leak" in my opinion because can't be private.

we need regulators

First of all, government can't shut down all the exchanges, since there are decentralized exchanges, there are even the ones like Bisq that use fiat and are still decentralized. They really have no way of effectively stopping this revolution.

If physical evidence doesn't exist, then how can you be sure that crime even happened. There is a reason why I didn't count any crime that happens in cyberspace, because it isn't a crime in my opinion. You can't get killed or hurt in cyberspace. I think that cyberspace has nothing to do with the law or governments or the rest of the physical world and they shouldn't hold no authority over it. My point is that if no one gets physically hurt, it shouldn't be a crime and if they did, then there is evidence. And if law enforcement can't catch it by using that evidence, nor the evidence they obtain from cyberspace peacefully or anywhere else for that matter, as long as it is a peaceful way of obtaining information, then they shouldn't compromise other peoples privacy or peace just so they can get their job done. Biggest fish already have their ways of anonymity, as we saw in part in Panama papers, this is for the people and they just want to protect their power from the people. It is a biggest trick all regimes use, fear, to make people give them more power then they deserve. Money laundering shouldn't be a crime on it's own, it hurts no one, it is an actual crime they are laundering money from that is a problem and that should be stopped there, as other ways are unjust and ineffective. There will always be ways to easily launder money for big criminals, they are not fighting this battle so they can win or even make a dent in this crime, they are fighting it so they can hold power and have reason to exist and expand and employ more of their own people.

I think that democracy and freedom of speech should never be revoked, whatever you do, you should always be able to say your part of the story and give your opinion, as opinion never hurt anybody. It is just another way to stop people from expressing their opinion about the system, if you take away their right to vote or say how badly they were treated in the system, you can keep doing it and make up crimes for others to shut them up as well. I know you don't want to believe this is happening and it isn't happening in an enormous level at all, and is always decreasing, but it is happening. System is corrupt, everyone can see that. And in such system, even the worst criminals deserve a right to free speech,democracy and anonymity for their opinions.

1. Can you provide an example of a 'decentralized' exchange? Any exchange needs a form of a government permission to operate in any country. (we are not talking about crypto<->crypto exchange, but crypto<->fiat)
2. Suppose I hack into your bank account and steal all of your savings. Or use your identity to get a $100,000 loan. Did I commit a crime? Not according to you, since I didn't hurt or kill anyone.

We cant really change the fact that bitcoin and other crypto currency which do have anonymity features will not be used on criminal activities since this is the best ingredient to execute those bad doings.Its sad to think but we cant do anything about it and this is why cryptos do really have a bad image on most governments because they do only see on their negative aspect.Thinking off on what you are suggesting is somehow hard,creating anonymous or private transactions which cant be used on criminality? Its impossible.

Ok so after doing some research it seems that this is an open question out there, (applies not only to bitcoin-cryptocurrencies but to the whole online-world) and there's no definite answer for that question.
That question is better known as the "anonymity vs. accountability" debate.
I believe this article summarizes the issue: http://hosteddocs.ittoolbox.com/ks070709.pdf

It seems possible that bitcoin has now moved out of the Privacy debate. Majority of the people using a bitcoin wallet will no longer care about privacy nor will have it guaranteed by it.
As far as the original question goes a lot of people have different responses to this 'intrusion of privacy' thing. There are those who are paranoid enough to make a fuss about Amazon knowing about their shopping habits. That seems a bit of an exaggeration.

Then there are those who are concerned about their information like address, Credit card info being safe and secret. Isn't this just another hazard of our human activity?Like driving? If you drive a car, there's always a chance of a Road accident but we all follow rules, hope the others do and try to feel safe despite the fact that it never has been. So, if you need that kind of privacy (which keeps your accounts safe), maybe using a Tor-Node for bitcoin or an Anonymous Tor-based coin would be the answer..:)..

Lastly, we have the heroes/activist group of people who need anonymity because they are the Julian Assanges and Edward Snowdens of the world. Those are people who I guess are already smart enough to hide themselves. They will just need to be off-grid with a trusted sphere of people around them.

To answer whether we as normal consumers/ citizens need or even can have privacy,well, Nobody can guarantee privacy without regulations and law & order. Just like nobody can guarantee safety without your town sheriff. (Although I assume, a lot of people in USA like to keep safety in their own hands, which is quite a cultural thing; But frankly, some of the things you guy do are just hard to understand!!..:P)

Privacy is a right but if the powers that be want to interfere, then their's prolly little we can do. So be in the second group of people and try to be safe by being vigilant.

1. I did, the only one that I know that is decentralized and uses fiat<->crypto. Bisq (former Bitsquare). Just read the first sentence again more carefully :)
2. According to me, you haven't. If I had a bank and you did that, I would still not call it a crime. I considered thefts of bitcoins just as well and private information and data, like pictures and other hacks and ransomware. I have been thinking about it for a long time and I think that we shouldn't consider any non-physical act as a crime. At least not in the physical world, now will there be punishment for your cyberactions in the cyberspace, like government hacking you back or stealing your money, is a different story in my opinion and those two should be strictly held separate.

The most sensible answer I've read so far. Clearly the majority of people would fall into your second group, so the privacy question is mainly targeted for this group. Businesses also fall into this category. I believe that a cryptocurrency that satisfies this group's needs has yet to be found.


1. It seems Bisq is based on the localbitcoins.com philosophy, where it just brings trading parties together without the exchange holding currency. So technically, it's not an exchange platform. In a case of a government ban, the exchange website itself maybe wouldn't shutdown, however the transactions themselves could. And I'm not talking about cryptocurrency transactions, but the bank transfers/money orders etc where the government has control over. Maybe cash transactions would work, but no sensible and honest person would exchange large amounts with cash.
2. "If I had a bank and you did that, I would still not call it a crime" + "I think that we shouldn't consider any non-physical act as a crime" -> bank fraud not a crime? Cyberbullying not a crime?  Online predators not a crime? Child pornography not a crime? No comment!!!

OP, I will be putting your statements in different quotes to answer to each of them:

We all think we should remain completely anonymous because if "we" are holding all our "finances" on our "own", then I don't think there is any need for others to be able to actually watch our activities, though that's not possible with Bitcoins because we use to "stake" as well as "sign" our addresses to show the legitimacy of being "ourselves".

---

Bitcoin works like parent coin, so if that won't be adopted, I fear none of the others would. But you can check the daily usage and market capitalization to see if what you think is correct or the reality is totally different?(!) Those that have too much privacy are not the only that might be used for criminal activities as even Bitcoins are being used through the "Tor" way under the "Dark Web Network" for such activities.

---

Idea is great, but I feel pity to say that there's nothing in this world that could offer both of the delightful pleasures in your dish because that's where regulation is needed, and when such is enforced in this, what's the purpose of using it? Centralization under the name of decentralized?

1. It might not fit some technical definition of an exchange, but maybe Bitcoin doesn't fit some technical definition of a currency. What is a technical definition tho, doesn't matter. Bisq is practically an exchange, as you can use that program to exchange currency. Localbitcoins is centralized, Bisq is not. Website is only thing you could shut down in Bisq, just like government could shutdown Bitcoin.org, but not the transactions themselves. Bisq doesn't have cash trades, it uses various bank transfers as payment methods between peers, but no single party knows all the bank transfers connected to Bisq, this information is encrypted between traders and the whole network exists only on the Tor network. Bisq was created to be censorship resistant, it is decentralized by design, there is no single point of failure. You would have to take every Bisq offer to reveal all the users, which would cost a lot of money, as there are security deposits, Bitcoin mining fees, antispam trading fees etc. This is all assuming that Bisq traders actually want to trade with you, instead of someone they traded with before.
It is good to be always sceptical, but I think you would understand more if you read more about it. It is a pretty good decentralized system.
2. Correct. Bank fraud is not a crime in my book, banks are a fraud. Cyberbullying is not a crime, just close the tab. You really think that it should be illegal for one person to hurt other with words? Does that call for actual physical intervention by law? Online predators are criminals when they do actual physical crime, whether they talk to vulnerable people online or not, even tho it is disgusting, it should be punished physically by law. You can expose them, warn others about them, forbid the use of Internet or teach vulnerable about the dangers, but not get rid of people who talk to other people on the Internet, no matter what they say. Child pornography should be a crime when it is filmed, as children are too young to make such decisions in life and especially if they are forced. Actually watching it shouldn't. Are you going to arrest anyone who sees something you might consider disgusting to watch or are you just paranoid that every action that reminds you of a crime should be punished?

Well said. I like your insight. I do agree with you for the most part, but I don't think all governments will be banning it. What are you thoughts on the future of cryptocurrency then? Your post sounds a big negative.

No comment again. I think we must stop here.



I think that a cryptocurrency that has a chance to be adopted by the civilized world, should have transactions that are both anonymous and accountable.
Anonymous to protect the everyday user and the businesses from leaking information about their transactions (addresses and amounts).
Accountable to make it a mainstream currency, where fraud and illegal activity can be tracked.
This seems to be a contradiction, but we must find a sweet spot in between these two, and there is a question on how would a cryptocurrency achieve this in its technical design. Or maybe there could be other solutions, like off-chain or side-chain transactions.

You sound a bit too afraid of life my friend. You can't have freedom and someone to fully protect you and watch over you all the time.
Be brave and rational. not paranoid.

If you do give government full capability of tracking every transaction then they will use it for corruption, political imprisonment, personal benefits and they will get hacked and eventually all the information will leak. Giving power to the ones who consistently prove that they can not be trusted with it is absolute madness created by fears that are even more insane. You should be careful, not paranoid.

Democracy and anonymity go together. You can not have full democracy without full anonymity.

The pseudo-anonymity fits the bill just right. Complex enough for an average user and even a motivated party not to truly be able to understand what your transactions are, but on a public ledger for analysis by experts if needs be.

If you want higher anonymity for whatever reason, then you can use a different public address for every transaction as was mentioned above and initiate the transactions from different IPs if you feel that need.

Otherwise, the technology is just right in the respect of anonymity IMO.

Again, you don't get anonymity by using a new address, each time you create a new address and send your funds to your new address, that address becomes linked with your old address.

You can always exchange your bitcoins to some anonymous altcoin like Monero using any of the many decentralized crypto<->crypto exchanges (will work even better with Atomic swaps), then make a Monero private transaction and then exchange it back. It really isn't hard to stay anonymous or launder your coins once you are already in crypto and, as I mentioned before, with Bisq you can even get even get more coins with fiat anonymously and securely. The point is that not only would removing anonymity from crypto be bad for society, but it is also impossible. All that governments can do is the same they been doing with fiat for decades, witch is to keep the small fish (which make the economic minority) out of the game, not the big guys. Bitcoin tech is just allowing the small fish to be as anonymous as big fish if they know what they are doing. It was simply created to give power to the people and it does that pretty well.

Obviously if you just send the bitcoins from one address to the other, that won't work... We're talking about using a middle-man, such as an exchange. Most exchanges send from a generic or random address (not the one you use to deposit in them), so it becomes practically impossible to track.

Old address -> Exchange deposit address -> [Exchange send using their own address] -> New address

Your new address is only  linked to the generic address of the exchange and the generic address cannot be directly linked to your deposit address, so you're "anonymous."

100% privacy suits me perfectly. Exactly the same privacy that all the rich guys on the Panama papers and other lists were enjoying.

You can't rely for your anonymity on exchanges. Keep in mind that exchanges have your personal information. If you use an exchange in the middle, you might become anonymous to me, but you won't be anonymous to the professional de-anonymizers. It's like using a regular bank.

It all depends on how superficial you are... You can always sign-up on exchanges with bogus information and a fake e-mail address and do it while obfuscating your real IP. I don't want to promote any detailed guide as to how to become very anonymous, but it's definitely doable. You are arguing a lost point, clinging on details. It is definitely doable and the "professional de-anonymizers" as you call them are always one step behind the professional anonymizers.

Great response. Biggest criminals, politicians, businessman always had the anonymity. Bitcoin is in all aspects there just to give to the people what the powerful already had, the control of the money supply, ownership of the actual funds, anonymity, no censorship of transactions and etc.

If I can point out, the Panama papers are no longer anonymous, since everyone knows about them... Also, the whole "what the powerful have" narrative is getting very old. While I am by no means rich, why do bitcoin fanatics always put the rich in the same caricature/box? You don't have to be rich to have access to this "anonymity", which is not really anonymous, since a company or group of people are holding all your information and you've off-loaded the risk onto them and you better pray they know how to truly hide things.

I would argue that bitcoin gives everyone access to a better mechanism, if they know how to use it. Money can surely make a big difference, but it's knowledge that truly makes the difference at the end of the day. Money will buy you someone else's knowledge, but it will never beat you having the knowledge yourself.

There's nothing stopping you from becoming rich, if you are willing to put in the effort and time, most people aren't and therefore will never be rich. It's trite to always blame the rich for everything. You may live in a country where they are more controlling and oppressive, but there's nothing stopping you from re-locating to a place that respects competition and will allow you to rise if you put in the effort. Is it easy? No, but it's better than complaining about the rich.

I imagine that depends on your definition of rich. I don't think advocating action is wrong for seeking success, but the ludicrous wealth typically used for the "rich" in most people's minds (billionaires and such) is not a result of simple "put in X work, get out Y money." Far more variables come into play, such as creativity, connections, etc. A successful person is one that can create opportunities for themselves, yes.

Absolutely no disagreement on that! I'm also not exonerating everyone, there are for sure unfair practices used to gain a competitive advantage, but I feel that this usually gets diluted in casting a bad image on all the wealthy people as an excuse for people's own inaction.

Bitcoin is a tremendous innovation, but people may find a false sense of security in it, making it as some sort of holy grail, which it cannot be. Bitcoin will not make everyone rich, by definition only a minority of players will succeed in this market at the expense of most other participants. However, if people learn to look at bitcoin rationally, they can all derive some sort of advantage from it. I think we need some better debates about what bitcoin can mean to different people, because a lot of people think of it as their path to wealth and riches and most will likely be disappointed, but that's something that will only be proved in time. For now, almost everyone is enjoying a smooth ride up in price! Time is the ultimate test.

Cheers for the input!

Right now, Bitcoin is at its perfect place. If you just follow correct bitcoin practices, you are completely anonymous. The only instances that others will know about you and your bitcoin wallets is if you somehow manage to piss some people off and get doxxed in the process. Other than that, you and your transactions are completely hidden from the world albeit a few public records of transactions.

Ok I won't argue any more that Bitcoin is not anonymous but rather pseudo-anonymous, there are thousands google links out there to show you exactly that.
If you don't take this fact but try to convince yourselves and possibly others that bitcoin is anonymous, I guarantee that you are on the wrong path. Today you might create a random bitcoin address, buy some BTC from a bitcoin ATM or from someone on the street and there you are, having some bitcoins on your random anonymous address. In that sense, yes you are anonymous. You might even manage to move these funds around by those tricks some of you described, like using an exchange in the middle (by providing bogus identification, I seriously would not go to that direction since you are falsifying documents, which is a crime - and don't tell me it is not because you are not hurting anyone blah blah blah).

But I did not start this thread talking about how we use cryptocurrencies today. (where 99.99% of us treat it as an investment).
I am talking about a a day in the future where bitcoin (or some other cryptocurrency) might become mainstream.
This means getting your salary paid in BTC, pay your rent in BTC, take a loan in BTC,  buy your holiday vacation in BTC, pay your children's school in BTC, pay the restaurant in BTC, pay your doctor in BTC.
(Replace BTC with ETH or another crypto of your choice which does not offer anonymity, so no ZEC or XMR)
In such a situation, NO, you are NOT anonymous whatsoever. Period.

I agree with you that bitcoin is not anonymous on its own, but people can definitely find ways to make it as such. I agree that falsifying documents should not be done and I was in no way suggesting people should do that. Some exchanges allow you to move up to a certain amount of bitcoin daily with no documents by the way, but that is besides the point.

And I also agree that it should not be the scope of bitcoin. It wasn't designed for pure anonymity, but rather as a viable economic alternative, which makes it beautiful for the things you mentioned.

I was just suggesting that a truly motivated party could find ways to make themselves anonymous, not that it is a requirement of bitcoin itself though.

Cheers for the input!

What's your definition of "viable economic alternative"?
If that's restricted to use cases such as capital transfer or investment, yes its is viable.
But if we want to include more common use cases like the ones I described, I don't think it is.
Which brings me to my original question: how can we fix it? How much more private should bitcoin and other similar non-anonymous cryptocurrencies become such that they would be viable for mainstream everyday use and wide-adoption?
Someone could think a way to leave it as is, and move these transactions to a side-chain or off-chain.
Another solution would change its underlying transaction confirmation process entirely, maybe with something completely new like mimblewimble.
All this without sacrificing accountability.

Well, I think most people got confused with the word "private" in your question. People equate private with anonymity.

But for mainstream adoption, it will be a question of multiple factors, none of which have anything to do with the technology really. The technology as-is is already good enough for that, people just need to adopt it on a larger scale and it needs to gain recognition and acceptance, which it slowly is. For example, in Japan, they have declared it an official currency, with many shops accepting it as a means of payment for their goods. There are large online retailers in Europe and North America that also accept bitcoin as a means of payment. So you can already pay for tangible things in bitcoin without ever passing through fiat.

Adoption at the level of the dentist, etc. will happen when further mainstream adoption will continue, keep in mind that it is a very new form of currency/technology and that the adoption rate has already been faster than anyone expected. I don't think Satoshi Nakamoto would have predicted this rate of adoption in under a decade... Historically, new currency regimes have been approached with high skepticism, even though they were imposed by governments for the most part.

For wider acceptance there will need to be (in order of importance in my opinion):

1) Proof of price/exchange-rate stability -> The fluctuations in the price at the moment reflect speculative moves, which are not quite compatible with a widely accepted currency. It will take time for the price to somewhat reach an equilibrium before the next ramp of adoption/acceptance can take place. It may even take a massive crash at some point, followed by bitcoin's survival to this massive crash (actually a highly likely scenario if you ask me, but this is another debate).

2) People building extra services features, which is already slowly happening (banking integration, lightning network to offload the current blockchain bottlenecks, etc.)

3) Governments slowly confirming their regulatory stance, such as Japan

Basically, these all have to do with market-perceptions and market activities and less with the technology itself. I strongly believe that a calming/stabilizing of the speculative flows will be a requirement for the wider adoption and that this will only happen through time and a serious crash to wipe out most of this activity (as has been the case with most speculative manias surrounding actually viable things).

We will never know if we have the full list of people involved in Panama papers, as they weren't leaked in their raw form as a trusted source as Wikileaks would leak them. There is suspicious lack of US persona in it. Julian Assange spoke about this multiple times and said that he doesn't support the censorship they imposed. So it was more likely used to target certain people then actual leaking of sensitive information.

I also don't agree that rich must be a problem, I purposefully didn't mention the rich in my reply. However, money does give you power and the power of anonymity is one of them, so they aren't the problem, but the power they get compared to the rest is. There are people with power that aren't rich as well, but this doesn't excuse the rich, sense money always gives you power and they will always be part of this elite.

I don't discriminate against the rich, there is a lot of good folks that are rich and even use that wealth for good causes. However, I think that you are discriminating against the poor here, not out of a bad intent, but you simply can't understand the limits of poverty as you never saw it. For you it seems trivial to travel, but for the majority of people that are poor is not. You can't just buy a plane ticket if you are poor, you simply don't understand how poor majority of world population is, let along the millions of the poorest countries. Besides, getting into a developed country, like US for example, is not that easy either, even if you manage to get to there. During war time people have no choice, but to leave the country, it is either that or certain death, so they do their best to move. Many people died in the effort of migrating during a refugee crisis, as you might have seen pictures of toddles washing up on shore, that to be honest, the world wouldn't even hear about if it wasn't a shore of a developed country. And the ones who got to their destination safely went to an incredible amount of effort and huge risk for their lives and future. It is not as easy as you might think. No one is insane enough to not get out of a country they have no future in, but it isn't easy. You know the amount of problems European countries had with these people migrating peacefully. It isn't that easy to move and it is even harder to get accepted once you do.


There are two things you might be missing here. First, there are many things like Bitcoin mixers and decentralized exchanges, even marketplaces and so on. Even sending to a newly generated address before paying for stuff will give you a deniable accountability, by allowing you to claim that that address isn't yours and that you sent the funds to it. So staying anonymous with Bitcoin isn't impossible at all, but you need to have rest of the services work with you on this most of the time, these services could be anonymous by themselves, they need Bitcoin. That is the second point, Bitcoin is anonymous, you need no personal information to use it, it is using these other services that expose you, but that can be fixed as well and certain parts of it already are.

As for the bogus identification, you already know my stance from my previous posts.

The answer to your question is, all of the privacy we can get, as I still never heard of a good argument on why not or even on how would be possible to stop these private technologies in a first place. It is important to keep in mind that wondering on how world should look like makes no sense if there is only one possible way it can go and will go. What is the point of the question when there will be better and better privacy no matter what you do. You can't stop it, it isn't your choice to make, you don't have an alternative option.

So it is still possible to identify the person who use that address? Can they track it by going back on the transaction transfers?

Bitcoin is not anonymous, you can use bitcoin mixers and that can help you with privacy. Monero have much better protection and anonymity, but it's not 100% private as I know. How much privacy do we need, well I don't think that we need privacy if governments let us to be free and experiment with out bodies and minds, if you wish to use drugs use it, pay legally and enjoy, why do you need to hide when you pay for sex? Or you wish to hide that you are buying women clothes?
I would like to give my support for transparent bitcoins, we will know where the money from tax is going, who is paid and how much for work in government sector. Social justice can be better if we know where the money is going. Bitcoin can help us in that.

You are correct.  A few additional points, to some of the people above.
1. Always remember that when seconds count, police are just minutes away.  That is why many over in the US like to handle their own protection when possible.
2. Likewise, the same people who want the population of the US disarmed because that should be left to the police and other officials are the same people who are protesting about BLM etc and say the police can't be trusted.  So, you should trust the police, but can't trust the police.  Got it.
3. The same politicians who don't like citizens to have guns are surrounded 24/7 by armed guards often paid for by the citizens of the US.  If the politicians disarm first, then I suspect the rest of the US might consider it.
4. What is funniest is that this same group is arguing that Trump == Hitler and yet they want everyone else to give up their guns! If Trump were Hitler, I would personally want guns to fight with instead of meekly submit to the gas-chambers.  Some people prefer to surrender though.
5. Everyone deserves privacy and anonymity if they want it, rich or poor.  Many of the most powerful written works were done anonymously because the author (e.g. Thomas Paine, Hamilton et al, Liu Xiaobo (should've been anonymous) etc) feared for their lives.  If all of their transactions were public the world would be a much less free place because many wouldn't have been printed.  Writing alone is not enough, paying for printing, paper, distribution etc costs money.  Having your entire financial ledger public means you might as well use your name.  No one knows beforehand that a certain person needs and deserves privacy so even excluding the discussion above, that alone is enough to ensure everyone has it.

I don't want someone else deciding "how much privacy WE really need."  Please just speak for yourself - if you don't want privacy, that is your choice, but don't impose your judgments on the rest of the world.  That is wrong and immoral in a free society.

My thoughts exactly. I agree that Bitcoin has lost a great deal of privacy and law enforcement and tax authorities have much better insite into Bitcoin transactions than they had before. Because of lower amount of privacy some users have abandoned Bitcoin and embraced Monero especialy on dark markets.
But not all users everywhere in the world have the same experience of privacy. In Europe privacy is very important and it's much appreciated but in US the situation is different.
For me privacy is important and I don't want to reveal everything but on the other hand I'm ready to give up some part of anonimity for some greater goal, like anti terorrist fighting or something similar.

I imagine that depends on your definition of rich. I don't think advocating action is wrong for seeking success, but the ludicrous wealth typically used for the "rich" in most people's minds (billionaires and such) is not a result of simple "put in X work, get out Y money." Far more variables come into play, such as creativity, connections, etc. A successful person is one that can create opportunities for themselves, yes.
[/quote]

My definition of rich is having enough money to not consider money when deciding what I want to do. I personally would not need a lot for that.

There are big problems when it comes to fungibility with bitcoin. Im tired of being told im a criminal and a drug dealer if I demand more privacy.

I have been demanding more privacy for obvious reasons that have nothing to do with illegal activities. For example: If you are an artist, and you are taking donations for your paintings or music or whatever.. why other people have to see how much money are you getting? If they see that you got paid a lot, they may think, "oh wow, this guy got too much money, I will just pirate his music, he will be ok anyway".
Don't you get how stupid accepting donations in Bitcoin is? unless you are an anonymous artist, people will see how much money you are getting.

And this goes for anything else. This is why BTC needs to improve his privacy immediately. I know gmaxwell was working on Confidential Transactions so that would solve how much BTC you are getting, but im not sure how that will work in practice. In order for it to work, you must be able to create a "Confidential receiving  address" and this would mean that any BTC sent there is forced to be obfuscated in it's amount, this would allow for anonymous (at least in quantity) donations.

I think that everyone needs privacy, not just a certain type of people, like artists or any other group. It is for all of us. The most obvious reason for privacy is that you can't trust the government, simple as that. They could freeze your bank accounts tomorrow if you speak your mind against the government. This is what they did to Wikileaks, they hurt no one and it was just obvious politics. When they used Bitcoin for donations, Bitcoin got some high profile from the government and Satoshi left soon after, maybe for that reason. You never know when you will need to speak your mind and how bad your government might get, so we should all, absolutely all of us, have complete and full privacy if we choose to do so.

So you want to say that Privacy coin shouldn't be a Privacy coin? So what's the point then of the Privacy coin if it's not private and trackable by some third parties?
This topic is completely illogical. The Privacy coins Like ONION,Monero and others are exactly built for this purpose that nobody can find who is sending the coins.
It's not only used by criminals there is many people who use it just because they like to keep it all private and doesn't want for everyone else to know how much money they spend on Coins that are not private enough.

It will be depending on your purpose, if a person will use the coin for illegal activity then they will result on getting the more anonymous coin if it is for some legal activities and just as an investment then bitcoin will be an option.

No matter how much privacy you had on the coin if law enforcer eventually had a law to force people to track something then they will.

As an ordinary people, I think we need more than 80% of our privacy. But to those who joined in show business or politicians, they don't have any privacy anymore because their life must be transparent to the people so no one can accused them of something bad that could change their reputation.

the privacy we do is huge, because it allows our account from hackers who want to hack our account. opinion of a newbe

Even if a certain user wont really make re-using his address can already give the anonymity that we do seek but for extra layer of anonymity then this kind of way would really be suggested and thinking of that there are mixers in the market as of now if you are really serious on it. By the way bitcoin is created for peer to peer system without 3rd party involved and anonymity is just really a bonus after all this is why it did caught the attention of the community. These two things is really a good feature of this new way payment system. We can already get the privacy we do need in bitcoin and even now if you try to trace the owner of said of the said address would really be hard for you already. How much more on using mixing service then it would really be much more harder.

The issues with what you are saying is that will require a tyrannical state, anyone can access free tools on the web to encrypt their computers, text and communications, and to some extent the technology is so good that not even government will be able to break it, even if such technologies were made illegal there is no way to put the cat back in the bag, anonymity is now in the hands of the people and not in the hands of the government.

The amount of privacy and/or anonymity someone needs much depends on where they live, and under which government and jurisdiction. Seeing multiple solutions next to Bitcoin brings the possibility of diversity and gives users choice to use what they need to be safe in their personal situation.

You are absolutely right mate, we can always have multiple wallet for multiple transactions.Though some people are very lazy they use same address every time.Fro privacy purpose we must always use new wallet address and its free..:P

We need a 100% privacy in bitcoin,Now a days we are not sure to our government who is in clean hands and we dont want to affect that on bitcoin we need to secure from doing dirty hands in our country.I want a strong digital currency that holds our bitcoin to make a privacy in our transactions here to avoid placing it in illegal activities of others.

We dont need privacy, we need to be smarter.

Yes I think every one privacy whenever new things come up and especially regarding cypto currency as not many govt has supported it fully and accepted so people in other countries would be looking out at ways to be safe and does not get struck under such things

Privacy is a binary condition like pregnancy...

Completely agree. I feel like anonymity is necessary but   pushing anonymity to the extreme is not the way to go either. We should meet somewhere in the middle and that's where bitcoin nails it right on the head. Pseudo-anonymity is a lot better. Because having complete anonymity can be dangerous.

The most sensible answer I've read so far. Clearly the majority of people would fall into your second group, so the privacy question is mainly targeted for this group. Businesses also fall into this category. I believe that a cryptocurrency that satisfies this group's needs has yet to be found.

It all depends how you define illegal activity and/or who defines illegal activity.

Well respected studies have shown that use of bitcoin for money laundering (high on the list of mainstream media) is actually extremely low, as there are much easier ways of laundering large sums of money (eg open an HSBC account?).

The same goes for the purchase of drugs and arms.

More interesting is what governments define as illegal activity when it comes to legislation. Some examples:

- People living in UK bought bitcoins when they were a few pounds and today sell them for a few thousand, will have made a capital gain. Any gains over £11300 in any one year will be taxable.
- People living in China who want to get round exchange controls and move their wealth out of the country might use bitcoin to do so.
- Residents of Zimbabwe or Venezuala might use bitcoin to protect themselves against hyperinflation.

In many ways, it's a similar debate about strong encryption.

I tend to a libertarian view and would want maximum privacy.

Of course it is possible, the easiest way is to wait until a transaction leads to an exchange then they can ask the exchange to whom that address belongs then they give to them your name and now they know that address was yours and now any address connected to you now has their privacy compromised, there are many more methods but that is the most simple and straightforward.

I don't think that the need for strong encryption and privacy on the blockchain (kind of a silly notion) are really similar debates.
There are so many more essential structures that depend on strong encryption than on the need for privacy.

Privacy on the blockchain is already pretty limited and one could wonder if it is 100% possible to use Bitcoin anonymously, even if you make use of Tor, mixers etc.

If you want a digital currency that offers privacy, isn't it better to just look at Monero or Zcash for example?

Wikileaks itself is a reason as to why we need to improve privacy.

"Thanks" to Bitcoin not being able to deliver obfuscated transactions, now everyone knows Julian Assagne is carrying millions worth of bitcoin, because he was given a lot back in the day.

Their donation address is public, you can see how many BTC they have been donated:

https://blockchain.info/address/1HB5XMLmzFVj8ALj6mfBsbifRoD4miY36v

Final Balance    4,025.04795591 BTC

This is right now around $22,500,000 worth of BTC. Imagine how scared you would be if you got such a big donation and everyone knew. It's ridiculous really. And we are only in the beginnings of Bitcoin, once BTC reaches $100,000 during the next decade, that will be an huge fortune, and everyone knows that no matter how much they moved it, they have tons of money. I wouldn't like to be on their shoes to be honest, specially Julian since he is the visible head. Bitcoin should have had optional obfuscated transactions since the beginning, now we can only hope on further upgrades..

I agree with your argument. We can not blame the government on trying to point out that Bitcoin is an option for criminals to freely transact illegal activities because it really is. We can not get the otptimum idea of having high privacy and yet be able to track down illegal transsctions.

But I dont think the Bitcoin is the problem. Illegal activities such as drugs existed ever since and even grew in numbers even without Bitcoins. The government should try harder on catching them instead of banning or regulating Bitcoins.

yeah i agree that it really depends in the persons activity , if hes doing illegal activities like buying drugs, carding, hacking and scamming people then he really needs some serious privacy or anonymity but if hes just an average joe that dont do monkey business then it doesnt really matter and i believe most of the people are not botherd about this issue.

It is a democracy, goverment is under our control, and we have to watch them, not the other way around, so: we need the same privacy we give to the goverment.

In future we can not guess the way of cryptocurrency and goverment relations. Maybe some countrys try to reach crypto users via address informations or something else. Therefore, privacy is necessary for any bad scenarios i think.

It's equally true to say that without proper regulation, Fiat currency can ruin a country.
Witness Weimar Republic or Zimbabwe

If privacy uses certain time limits, it sounds very good to do.
Privacy is the most important things in our life, much or nothing depends on the need or its use. And we are required to be able to manage these privacy-privacy. And this applies overall either anonymous or pseudo-anonymous.

Private zone
That privacy helps a person to create different zones in his or her social relationships. Meaning? like this, each person must create its own boundaries in the relationship with the surrounding. And privacy is a zone or place where everyone will put things very personal.
Everyone needs a place to explore himself without any distraction from outside parties. Here is a person can feel very comfortable and free to express himself the truth. And here is the importance of privacy.
I agree with you.

So far I have seen some people arguing for 100% privacy, and some for (pseudo)privacy as it is now in bitcoin. (It is pseudo-privacy and not privacy, you can't be 100% anonymous with your transactions on a public blockchain free for anyone to view, no matter what tricks you use like Tor, mixers etc - if you are still not convinced there are several articles/academic papers out there that show exactly that).

I would suggest that to concisely answer the question, you have to look at the big picture, not yourself as an individual.

Let's say I am using fiat money. I get paid my salary to my bank account, I pay my bills, my doctor, I buy my vacation and my sex toys.
Q: Do I have the right to keep these transactions private?
A: Of course I do!  I don't anyone to be able to take a picture of my entire life just by looking at these transactions (not my friend, my neighbor, my employer or the government). Nor do I want to advertise my savings amounts to the entire world.
Q: Does bitcoin (as it is today) help me keep these transactions private?
A: No (see above). => Bitcoin as it is today can not be used as a total fiat currency replacement.

Now let's say I am an illegal materials/goods trader (drugs? child pornography? human trafficker?) or I am otherwise engaged in some criminal activity (money laundering? blackmailing? scamming?)
Q: Do I have the right to keep these transactions private?
A: NO. Authorities will have to suspend your privacy rights if you are suspect of taking part into illegal activities.
Q: Should authorities "unmask" your private transactions in such cases?
A: Yes. If you are part of an organized and lawful society you should think the same. If not, go find a place to live in some anarchist country on in the jungle with the monkeys.
Q: Can a 100% private - anonymous cryptocurrency (Zcash?) be auditable and accountable for such illegal transactions?
A: No. => Such a currency can not be used as a total fiat currency replacement.

Now you might argue that Bitcoin (or some other cryptocurrency) might not totally replace our fiat currencies but could somehow be a global-"subcurrency" that could be used for some types of transactions (e.g. capital transfer across countries). Such thing might be a possibility.
But those who dream ourselves living our lives only with cryptocurrencies, I think that a cryptocurrency that satisfies the properties "anonymous" and "accountable" will have to be invented first.

I added a poll to this post to see what your opinions are.

you cant just rely on the addresses because the coin address needs legitimate and exact one,you must present a government IDs before making an account in which you must indicate your permanent address or the address in your ID it self,so by then the government is 100% involved in your tratsactions

Exactly what I think as well... It is important to be able to see where transactions are going to and from, but if you want a healthy economy to thrive you can't be able to see EVERYONES transactions.  I feel like you have to have opt-in only transparency and not default transparency.  This is why Monero's view key is the best thing since sliced bread, imo. 

And it's not like if Monero is best at the whole transparency ordeal that Bitcoin is obsolete... Bitcoin is good at what it does; which I feel is a 'decentralized' public store of wealth... I put 'decentralized' in quotes because I feel mining is super centralized and ASIC resistance is a big key.

"View keys" in Monero and Zcash do indeed allow someone to see a 'hidden' transaction, but if you are doing illegal stuff, I doubt you would just voluntarily provide a view key to the authorities..!

The thing I like about bitcoin is the privacy it offers,and no government or financial institution is in the middle. The only thing that is not good about this privacy issue if it will be used on illegal activity,there should be a control unit. But nevertheless privacy issue doesnt really matter the level of privacy issue with bitcoin for now is very efficent and effective.

thats right,i think bitcoin privacy is enough for every user to feel secure,and contented ..this thing only matters for those user in which involved into other illegal activities or those dont wanna put taxes on their income,although for now no government interference so far,but when time comes that government put taxes on bitcoin user i dont think it would be problem coz its every government rights to claim whats for them.

I believe in the world of crypto .. Many find it difficult to stay careful.... Its is decentralized but yet government need to get involved to be able to track criminal ...we have lots of them...

It will always be hard to maintain anonymity when a well financed state adversary wants to know your business. But privacy is not the same as total anonymity. Privacy implies that people generally are not aware of your affairs, not that no one has the capability to discover them.

I'm okay with strong privacy from others because I don't believe that true anonymity is possible given the copious amount of searchable data we are all constantly leaking.

We need to be very careful in order to prevent hackers to hack our account. IT have many ways to hacked an account so never disclose any information that can use as a hint for them. Privacy is very important to secure our indentity so be careful on whatever information we post in public.

I guess Anonymity is not just for drug dealers or criminals. Sometimes ordinary people like us also need Anonymity to maintain our Privacy. But if a browser history is needed to understand our habits, I think we need it for our benefit. However, some parties use it to threaten us.

Privacy that I think is when we chat with people we love. I do not think it should be spit or spread, and not everyone should know.

If it is a transaction history issue, I do not really know if it should be kept secret or not. I do not think it should always be hidden. Because maybe it will make it easier for the authorities to catch the criminals.

Actually that is the feature of Altcoin is offering although Bitcoin is somehow traceable (but likely hard for those have no idea how to use blockchain tracer) but they have their point that transactions should be made to become anonymous for privacy but on the other hand that's what cyber criminals wants.
States and government Regulations will do their part by regulating crypto currency that is legal to use to protect the public from crimes, scams and other interests.
That's why each country today are on their way to build guidelines and laws to protect their own economy like banning exchange and using Bitcoin for crimes.

There are hackers that will steal this personal information, they always do. There are corrupted officials that will abuse it, there always is. There will always be alternatives for money laundering, like we saw at Panama papers. The point is this, who is a bigger threat? Small badly connected criminals that will use Bitcoin as their only means of anonymity or professional criminals that have been doing this for centuries and hold all the power in the underground.

There is a lot of political incentive to uncover the users of Bitcoin and other pseudonymous altcoins. This is one of the reasons I hit the privacy drum. It is important we understand the Internet may not stay as open and inviting as it is today, and payment mechanisms like Bitcoin will be put under heavy scrutiny the day freedom falls. Having security by design, as seen in Monero and Zcash, will then be a positive attribute.

As for me - I think that giving 100% anonymosly to cryptocurrency transaction is too much for now. There are many criminals that would like to use it.
I belive that it is fair to store IP's, but not my personal info, it can help our goverments to prevent many crimes

Since bitcoin is described as anonymous cryptocurrency because we can send and receive bitcoins without our personal identity but im not really believe that this is perfect anymomity to our privacy. for example if you used blockchain every transaction you engage is stored in blockchain. so on my opinion dont link your address to your identity to keep your privacy safe. years ago i used multibit to increase my anymomity but sad to say multibit is not supported now.

Not much privacy but the privacy which may always leads to the decentralzation and freedom from government should not be left out because that's  what make bitcoin unique that's  what makes bitcoin  so popular nowadays viewing of one's  buying is important to double check if there were illegal transactions going but not at the point that the privacy of the user will be violated like in banking secrecy is important just as viewing one's  important activities.

As much as we can get because that's  why people trust in bitcoin because you are your own currency no intrevals from someone or somebody especially government but not the privacy that people can't  looked if you are into some illegal transactions which is not supposed to be tolerized in order to prevent the downfall of bitcoin.

After Bitcoin was created people have been so fast forward that others started to create their own cryptocurrency, I hope there is a coin having all the facility you are talking about. If there isn't let's just hope that in future it will be created.

This is very interesting.
I have to agree with you all the way.

However, even conceptually, it's difficult to see how we can have regulatory entities audit transactions, that are completely "anonymous" for everyone else, without being a central authority. This might require some form of zero knowledge proofs, in a zkSNARKs fashion. If you could prove to your legal authority that you did NOT do what they say you did (transaction wise), without compromising your anonymity, that would be a good first step.

Different levels of privacy are necessary for different purposes, so I think having a range is not only important, it is necessary.

Take Quorum by JP Morgan for example. For blockchain to advance technological development and collaboration, absolute anonymity provided by Zcash is necessary so that competitors do not know what each other is doing. Otherwise, there is no way that the businesses that collaborate on Quorum would do so.

I think the government should be the one to implement the regulation of the use of bitcoins.  It is not far that bitcoins can be used for crimes, howbeit, the government should spearhead the security of using bitcoins.  Currency is the most liquid asset like fiat cash... I guess what you mean is security and regulation of using so to track down illegal transfer using this cryptocurrency...

Do you know on what are you talking about? That thing you do mention is really hard they can regulate but only the services being used by bitcoin like exchangers and other establishments and merchants but talking directly on controlling it then its an impossible stuff and we do know most government will always look out on its negative impact like crime and another illegal transactions (money laundering etc.) Tracking down would be really a tough job on bitcoin because of its anonymity and theres also an alternative one which is on Monero.

We dont need privacy, we need to be smarter.

The most wanted privacy are those who have something to hide - swindlers ... they are the first insists on this I think ... if come up with some kind of normal way to pay taxes, acceptable taxes, then, I think, no one will be against... besides, it will be able to be protected against scammers

IMHO zk-snark would be highly appreciated like it is in other cryptos.

Not even nearly the level provided by bitcoin mixer services and such.  Too much is how much we currently have.

We need less anonymity to stop the bad guys imo.

If we have good things for sure there will be few unexpected things also created by default but we have to just ignore any try to filter it. What I understand is at present the what we have is sufficient enough at the same time future will bring more changes that we can expect.

less anonymity? you mean throwing our privacy? Bitcoin itself can be de-anonymize easily if we not careful enough with it. and I bet people who do illegal transactions already use cryptocurrencies who offer better anonymity and privacy.

The amount of privacy needed by Bitcoin is fine as is. You mention getting flyers in the mail from advertisers etc who track your spending habits but in order to do that the Bitcoin address would need to be tied to some other form of identification. Like an email address or an address of an actual person. Otherwise, where would ads get sent to? You can't send a flyer to a Bitcoin wallet address. People who require additional layers of anonymity can use alternative blockchains/cryptocurrencies that satisfy that use case.

If what you do is legal, why do you need privacy?

Saying that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is the same as saying that you don’t care about freedom of speech because you don’t have anything to say... it’s a popular thought exercise for this type of ideologically problem.

There is however a difference between privacy and secrecy though... privacy is the right people have and should have to go to the toilet without other people watching them. Secrecy is more along the line of doing drug deals or any other sketchy/illegal business. The fact people could potentially be doing blow off the back of a toilet shouldn’t mean we should be monitored while we take a shit.

Not to be offensive, but I can't even wrap my head around that question.  It is perfectly legal to buy pornography, does that mean I want my porno charges posted all over the place?

ANother case, say I am in a very competitive business model and need a specific ingredient for an upcoming release.  Would it be sensible from a corporate espionage standpoint to broadcast my purchases and amounts (metadata that could be used to expose my business plan and more effectively compete with me) or would it make sense to hold my supplier to an NDA and keep my transactions as private as possible?

It's not a matter of legality, it's a matter of, it's no one elses damned business.

I agree with your point of view. The fact there are so many coins is indeed a pro since different people can use different coins for different purposes. Regarding Bitcoin, I think privacy level depends much on user's activities and habits. If someone is skilled enough, he is able to never link his true identity with his address(es).

About your question, Bitcoin won't be adopted for everyday transactions not only because of its lack of privacy but mainly because of high fees and long confirmation time. I think many people don't care so much about their privacy, they just want cheap and fast payment system (like paypal, for example...)

its all be useless. because trying hard to hide identity at least will be caught. some media social account maybe will link to the other account.

Some countries already know about bitcoin but due to there government having lacks of knowledge they didn't mind it. I would say that privacy right now in the bitcoin is good enough since its been already proven many years but as the time passes by due to the value of bitcoin getting high, its privacy might be interrogated by some computer wizards like hackers. It should have strong security implemented, so that our privacy will remain safe.

Being less anonymous doesn't mean bad guys will stop doing their bad doings though because no matter what Bitcoin will do in terms of its privacy bad people will still do what they want in able to take advantage of someones ignorance so it is much way better for the people who uses Bitcoin to take the full responsibility in their security.

Take note that in the history of Bitcoin there is no single hack happened in it, it is just that there is a Bitcoin exchange that has been hacked and it is centralized by someone so meaning it's not Bitcoin itself that has been breached back then.

Privacy is important  it depends the kind of   our businesses but in bitcoin  we need privacy specially our persoal account like  ethwallet becsuse  if someone know your personal  documents i dont know what happen.

The more privacy the better.

i think we will need a lot more of privacy in the future!
only anonymity coins will be bigplayers soon!

All of us would like to keep our confidentiality during financial transactions.It is better that bitcoin are pseudo-anonymous and concern the bitcoin privacy issue.That is why is very important our privacy.

This thread has become a place for spammers to spam. There is little to no meaningful discussion here, so it will be locked.