Title: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: SeanArce on September 07, 2013, 08:34:00 AM Truth?
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: AbendWind on September 07, 2013, 08:38:36 AM No, of course :)
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: cypherdoc on September 07, 2013, 12:09:57 PM False.
You need to think of Bitcoin as a fixed supply digital cash. Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Haro on September 07, 2013, 12:13:14 PM Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: chmod755 on September 07, 2013, 12:46:25 PM There will always be ways to make it easier or more difficult to identify the purpose and the parties involved in a transaction no matter what the currency is or what tools are being used.
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: jackjack on September 07, 2013, 12:47:10 PM Wrong
Quote For cash to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/288/635/672.pngTitle: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Lethn on September 07, 2013, 12:51:08 PM That is the logic of government loyalists, not everyone else.
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: TraderTimm on September 07, 2013, 07:08:51 PM Truth? You're completely and utterly wrong. Privacy is a human right, and sucking up to the "regulators" and government entities is a recipe for disaster. I am glad the Bitcoin Foundation is providing a big fat target for the government - it lets us do what we want while they believe they are in control. Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Sheffield on September 07, 2013, 07:50:04 PM For bitcoin to stabilize you need way more BTC in the system, then it works out to a sweet spot. Which is basically when only 2 or 3 entities are able to sustain profit.
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: will1982 on September 07, 2013, 08:04:53 PM Why? The currency seems to be doing just fine as it is...
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: franky1 on September 07, 2013, 08:32:41 PM for bitcoin to stabilise requires nothing to do with anonymity it requires an averaging out of wealth,
EG if 50 people are only playing about with 1-2BTC on the markets. and then a guy with 100 bitcoins comes along.. expect instability. anonymity is more of a concern when it comes to trust in transactions, due to the fact that once the bitcoin is handed over, its not reversible. this is about main-streaming / usability of the coin, not stabilising it. Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: saif313 on September 07, 2013, 08:35:22 PM wrong
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: justusranvier on September 07, 2013, 08:39:13 PM http://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdowd.com/msg12325.html
Quote Speaking as someone who followed the IPSEC IETF standards committee pretty closely, while leading a group that tried to implement it and make so usable that it would be used by default throughout the Internet, I noticed some things: * NSA employees participted throughout, and occupied leadership roles in the committee and among the editors of the documents * Every once in a while, someone not an NSA employee, but who had longstanding ties to NSA, would make a suggestion that reduced privacy or security, but which seemed to make sense when viewed by people who didn't know much about crypto. For example, using the same IV (initialization vector) throughout a session, rather than making a new one for each packet. Or, retaining a way to for this encryption protocol to specify that no encryption is to be applied. * The resulting standard was incredibly complicated -- so complex that every real cryptographer who tried to analyze it threw up their hands and said, "We can't even begin to evaluate its security unless you simplify it radically". See for example: https://www.schneier.com/paper-ipsec.html That simplification never happened. The IPSEC standards also mandated support for the "null" encryption option (plaintext hiding in supposedly-encrypted packets), for 56-bit Single DES, and for the use of a 768-bit Diffie-Hellman group, all of which are insecure and each of which renders the protocol subject to downgrade attacks. * The protocol had major deployment problems, largely resulting from changing the maximum segment size that could be passed through an IPSEC tunnel between end-nodes that did not know anything about IPSEC. This made it unusable as a "drop-in" privacy improvement. * Our team (FreeS/WAN) built the Linux implementation of IPSEC, but at least while I was involved in it, the packet processing code never became a default part of the Linux kernel, because of bullheadedness in the maintainer who managed that part of the kernel. Instead he built a half-baked implementation that never worked. I have no idea whether that bullheadedness was natural, or was enhanced or inspired by NSA or its stooges. In other circumstances I also found situations where NSA employees explicitly lied to standards committees, such as that for cellphone encryption, telling them that if they merely debated an actually-secure protocol, they would be violating the export control laws unless they excluded all foreigners from the room (in an international standards committee!). The resulting paralysis is how we ended up with encryption designed by a clueless Motorola employee -- and kept secret for years, again due to bad NSA export control advice, in order to hide its obvious flaws -- that basically XOR'd each voice packet with the same bit string! Their "encryption" scheme for the control channel, CMEA, was almost as bad, being breakable with 2^24 effort and small numbers of ciphertexts: https://www.schneier.com/cmea-press.html To this day, no mobile telephone standards committee has considered or adopted any end-to-end (phone-to-phone) privacy protocols. This is because the big companies involved, huge telcos, are all in bed with NSA to make damn sure that working end-to-end encryption never becomes the default on mobile phones. I'm not saying that everybody who suggests that essential features of Bitcoin must be removed is a government shill, but... Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Deafboy on September 07, 2013, 08:45:18 PM Using bitcoin doesn't mean you HAVE to be anonymous. If you want (or have to, while buying physical goods online) to reveal your identity, you have full right to do so. However, Bitcoin itself should be as much anonymous as it can. If you think otherwise, start by marking all your addresses with your name on blockchain.info. You can as well attach link to copy of your ID and proof of residence ;)
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: saif313 on September 07, 2013, 08:48:10 PM Using bitcoin doesn't mean you HAVE to be anonymous. If you want (or have to, while buying physical goods online) to reveal your identity, you have full right to do so. However, Bitcoin itself should be as much anonymous as it can. If you think otherwise, start by marking all your addresses with your name on blockchain.info. You can as well attach link to copy of your ID and proof of residence ;) agree Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Sheffield on September 07, 2013, 09:07:12 PM Quote Using bitcoin doesn't mean you HAVE to be anonymous. If you want (or have to, while buying physical goods online) to reveal your identity, you have full right to do so. However, Bitcoin itself should be as much anonymous as it can. If you think otherwise, start by marking all your addresses with your name on blockchain.info. You can as well attach link to copy of your ID and proof of residence Wink Good Quote and pithy! Yes, the currency should remain anonymous. But in the business world, your pay address gets tagged with your shipping info. End of anonymity, they are compelled to keep that info for legal reasons, and financially they sell your pay address, email and shipping info marketers. If you want to circumvent this, you might compromise trust in the currency as a whole since trust is not established... Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Nancarrow on September 07, 2013, 09:12:57 PM I have one word for the OP, just one word: cash.
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: rix5 on September 07, 2013, 09:28:12 PM claims like these are good for destroing the BTC
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: UncleBobs on September 08, 2013, 12:52:21 PM Wrong. Anonymity's stock just keeps rising:
http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2013/Anonymity-online.aspx Bitcoin needs more anonymity, not less. Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: QuantumQrack on September 08, 2013, 02:46:14 PM Pseudo-anonymity is one of the big selling points of bitcoin. Hopefully it can get fully anonymous with user opt in.
Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: countryfree on September 08, 2013, 05:01:34 PM Stability? What's that? Nothing in this world is stable.
World-wide acceptance? Nothing in this world is like that. The U.S. dollar is quite popular, but in Switzerland, North Korea and some other countries, it is not. I want BTC to remain quite anonymous as it is, and I don't see stability nor world-wide acceptance as goals. Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: virtualmaster on September 09, 2013, 07:19:08 AM "Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die"
Bitcoin needs additional services like zerocoin or coinjoin to be more anonymous in some sitruations. In other situations needs an identity system like Namecoin when no anonymity is necessary but a secure identification. May be this is what you mean. Title: Re: For bitcoin to stabilize and be accepted, anominity needs to die Post by: Cudahuda on September 09, 2013, 10:17:59 AM Lack of anonymity would not affect price stability imo... why do you think it would?
|