Bitcoin Forum

I think this is approaching the anonymity aspect of Bitcoin a little bit differently from what we see everywhere else. A lot of the praise of Bitcoin is the anonymity. Why is this? Yes it's true that Bitcoin can be used anonymously and not have any identity or name associated with the Bitcoin address however all transactions are readily available to be seen by everyone using Bitcoin because of the public ledger technology the Blockchain. Anonymity at a first look is by all accounts an incredible choice for individuals who might want to send and get cash on the web. Despite the fact that I think this is one of the ruins of Bitcoin. It's this exact same anonymity which is normally commended by the mass causes a ton of issues with Bitcoin and organizations trading in Bitcoin.

If you ask someone about Bitcoin and what they have heard about it then they will surely bring up one hack or one instance of an anonymous businesses owner upping ship and leaving with all of it's customers money. This isn't usually possible with businesses using fiat because of how traceable credit cards and the like are in the modern world. (unless  they are stolen which is an entirely different matter)

If you think of the way that you shop online with your USD/GBP etc then you almost certainly use either a credit card, debit card or Paypal. All of which have to have a Name, address and identity tied to it with Bitcoin this is different the only ties that a Bitcoin address has is the ones that it creates by sending and storing Bitcoin.

This opens up a gateway for malicious intent. As we all know Bitcoin has suffered from exactly this over the years. Businesses starting to trade in Bitcoin that are not normally tied to an identity and aren't registered and just leave with the customers money eventually without a trace. Quite a few exchanges and cloud mining services have done this recently. You would think that this would be easily traceable by watching the addresses which have the runaway Bitcoin in them and waiting until they use either a known address or an exchange address especially the latter as you could potentially ask the exchange to release information of the seller to the public (probably requiring a subpoena) but in most cases these people will mix their coins and making it almost impossible to find out who actually owns the addresses.

This will continue to be a problem as long as anonymity exists in the Bitcoin network. Let me also say that I'm not interested in removing the anonymity as I'm a big fan of privacy and how Bitcoin works. But possibly there's a few solutions that could prevent this event in the future.

I'm not a big fan of Bill Gates but he recently said this:

I'm not a fan of what he's implying here. But he probably has some point hidden within this statement. Let's not get into the debate that cash can also be used for much of the above. What I think he does have a point in is that some anonymity is likely bad and perhaps some aspects should not be anonymous while keeping some anonymous. I'm not really concerned too much about what he said about tax evasion etc as that's rife in fiat currencies too but more concerned about the people who use Bitcoin to trade. They probably haven't got the same protection that someone using another currency might have and these owners of companies that just up and leave are a big issue with the security and practicality of using Bitcoin on a daily basis.

I think that one way to approach this issue might be a public, volunteer-based registry that matches public Bitcoin addresses to identities. 100% optional, of course.  You or your business would self-identify one or more public bitcoin addresses and provide some information about who you are. This would serve as a record of companies and individuals who were transparent and perhaps might be considered more trustworthy to do business with under certain narrow conditions.

Of course, it's not for everyone, and there are clearly some privacy issues , precisely because of the transparency of the blockchain. However, I see that in some narrow use cases it would make sense.  If your company did a specific portion of business using crypto-currency, and you were unfazed by a public record of your transactions, and in fact some aspect of your business needed to be 100% transparent between both parties, then I could see this being used.  And, of course, if a blockchain itself was used to hold the registry data, then the record would be more or less permanent. 

Just a thought - I'm sure there are plenty of privacy advocates would be horrified - but remember, I'm talking about a very narrow, completely transparent use case.

I like the way you are thinking about this rather than just agreeing with everyone else on the matter of anonymity. Personally though I would probably disagree with your point that some things just need to be public and others private. I value coins which have as much privacy as possible.

Yes it does have it's draw backs but there's ways of countering this. Only deal with registered businesses which the identity of the person is known. In many countries it is now law to register any businesses whether that is a Bitcoin businesses or one trading in other currencies.

Developers can't do everything for it's users and requires diligence from it's users and them making their own decisions.

It might be a more popular opinion than your leading on here. It's not limited to privacy advocates but at the end of the day Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are normally used because they are transparent in that they are traceable via the blockchain but don't give away any personal data which I think is something which should be encouraged in all fields.

You could deal with only registered companies but this also presents certain problems. For example a lot of companies that are registered require identification when dealing in large amounts. Most exchanges these days require identification. The problem with this is that if the site is hacked then your ID could very well be compromised. These sort of hacks haven't been rare either and major exchanges have either been forced to shut down or put their hands up and just say they've lost the money and can't refund anyone.

Luckily the hackers of the past have only been interested in the coin and not the personal information that's also stored on these big exchanges.

I think the people who are concerned about the anonymity of crypto due to the uses are over-worried about the small percentage of the population. You are going to have people use and abuse systems, no matter the system. In other words, you are going to have people stealing money in any way possible. Now, if people would do their research before blindly sending money to a team of anonymous users leading an ICO, then that's their own fault and not the fault of the cryptocurrency system itself. Yeah, there are people who are going to buy drugs and weapons with crpyto. But, they're going to do it with cash too. How do you plan to stop people from using 100s of millions of dollars in cash? You can't and won't.

Your right in saying that there's no perfect solution but this doesn't mean we should just accept that. It's always best to strive for the best possible solution and I'm a big fan of discussing any issues and possibly coming up with new ideas and solutions.

Also where do we draw the line when trying to help people investing into skeptical projects or depositing their Bitcoin in shady businesses. Some businesses are well thought out schemes which can catch out even the most experienced people. Just look at the TradeFortress situation whether he stole anything or he was telling the truth doesn't matter there was obviously some trust put into his technical abilities and enough trust for people to deposit their money. But the site was possibly hacked and many allegations were thrown around and I'm not sure if any investigations were carried out from the authorities.

You're right. It can be extremely hard to figure out well thought out scams. I was mostly referring to the ones where the team is completely anonymous. Any time the team refuses to be known, it's shady.

One thing for sure CHANGE IS REAL.
Anonymity can be unknown or know for today.
Good effect can affect the beneficiary.
Bad effect can affect everybody.
Change is coming from unknown to known.
Known made it sometimes unknown for the sake of own.
Good luck and bad luck can lock or unlock the system.
Self interest is the center of self BTT members.

I understand in certain circumstances. For example if you aren't a businesses and you want to keep your identity separate from your trade then I'm fine with that as it doesn't always mean they have malicious intent. We've got to respect and support that people would like to remain anonymous. But the reason I started this thread was to gauge peoples opinion on whether there's too much anonymity and if it's hurting the community.

I really don't see a bad thing in anonymity with Bitcoin and other financial investments. I see it as this, if you win the lotto would you really want the world to know that you won? Personally I would not like. Bitcoin is not that anonymous though, but, rather, pseudo-anonymous.

Honestly YES, The blockchain is very transparent thanks to the open distributed ledger compared to the FIAT system, The security of the holder is guaranteed through anonymity in the blockchain.

Anonymity is good thing in the crypto society and also, It is very important factor in bitcoin project as well as whole crypto market

Seems Op hasn't gone through Bitcoin Whitepaper. Bitcoin/Crypto transactions are designed to be trustless meaning you don't need to know or trust who you are transacting with. The Whitepaper places emphasis on escrow and Reputation as a  Substitute for Identitification. This model has been working on this Forum, Localbitcoin and anywhere else. People who get easily scammed are probably using Crypto the wrong way.


 I really wonder why people act like they do not know the World we live in. Whether you live in a safe Society or not always note that some power hungry crooks are somewhere taking note of Societies's weaknesses & vulnerablity to exploit. You must patch up these weaknesses and stay safe. I think the best way to do this is through the use of Cryptocurrency and public Blockchain.

Here is my theory:
A terrorist group CANNOT successfully conquer a territory that is purely Blockchain and Cryptocurrency based.
If the act of taking over people's territories and businesses is nolonger attractive for such groups peace will reign and businesses will thrive unless ofcourse they discover a means to conquer the Blockchains.

I've read the whitepaper a few times actually and quite frankly the whitepaper needs to be made more up to date and less technical in my opinion.

People who easily get scammed aren't using crypto the wrong way. How could you possibly say that even if you use a escrow its shown in the past to not be completely safe. Many trusted escrows on this forum have either scammed or been involved in shady behavior.

A terrorist group likely doesn't care about the usage of the blockchain as most terrorist groups aren't about conquering territories but the culling of an ethnic group. I don't see how this is related to anonymity though. Even though this is a little off topic what is the blockchain going to do to hurt a terrorist group? Bare in mind that anything exposing terroist groups will likely not have an effect due to the reputation they have anyway. It's not like you could outline their corruption. The blockchain can be used for storing many things. But fighting a terrorist group with blockchain is just silly.

Is anonymity a good thing for cash?

Exactly what i am thinking! For their attacks on crypto anonymity to be valid, our fiat cash would have to be electronicly registering your identity each time it changes hands.
And there is no way to do that (even if ignoring cost to produce the bills) which the criminals are not likely to counter.

Yes, it does!

I think it's should the number one priority now.

I think down the line since the advent of bitcoin, anonymity is what has brought as this far. The idea of Satoshi Nakamoto to sty anonymous has really been really a great one. may be bitcoin wouldn't have come this far if anonymity was not introduced. Although fit it very dangerous to do transactions with someone you don't know but its really important for our own integrity. Its up to us to stay anonymous with good intentions and that will eventually save the
the criticism of bitcoin by other persons. On the other hand, anonymity has created so many scam projects and fraudulent behaviors in cryptocurrency businesses. 

Anonymity isn’t a big deal for me when it comes to Bitcoins but since most of its investors want it very much , then I think they should give it to them.Decentralization of the currency is the principal thing.

This really isn't a legitimate question related to the thread. I'm not comparing cash with Bitcoin you could say I was comparing Paypal and credit cards to Bitcoin which can all be traced. You might think you've dumbfounded me by saying this as I've seen similar questions but should we really be comparing Bitcoin with cash in the first place? We all no how much of a failed system cash is.

I for one would like to strive for better things than cash.


No. Such an ignorant statement. Any attacks on anything are valid you need to stop comparing cash especially when validating something. I'm looking to get discussion about Bitcoin and possibly offering solutions to the questions in the original topic. Not compare it to cash.

Cash is a failed system can we please not compare it? We should be striving to be much better than it.

Maybe you didn't like the way I answered your question.
But...

You think I'm trying to dumfound you by comparing bitcoin to cash?
Read Satoshi's white paper [again].
If you want it to be something else then create something else.
Digital cash is bitcoin.

I think his opinions are quite based;
sure, who can deny anonymity is a good ground for criminality?
but, who can deny we've got billions and billions of fiat money involved in crime anyway?

it's hardly the 'make or break' factor for crypto.
Regular people don't deserve to have any aspect of their life analysed and tracked by anyone without transparency.
The ability to shop and trade without anyone telling us what we're allowed to do, is a must have in my opinion.
Yes, people can buy drugs, people can launder money.
So what? that's already done today, isn't it?

Everything we do is already logged and tracked, be it in commercial or 'law enforcement' aspects.
Phone's are constantly talking with the radio towers = GPS location tied to your identity (sim card),
everywhere we go online is logged by ISPs,
most things we do on various services and websites is logged permanently,
all our banking transactions are categorized,
all our purchases are saved,
and generally, all our information is used one way or another in commercial aspects.

I never buy any drugs or launder any money, neither does the absolute majority of the population,
yet we're all being watched. Since when is it the norm for the minority to control the majority?
In this case I'm referring to the actions of 'criminals' and 'terrorists' to affect all of us on every small aspect of life.

We have the right to our privacy, even if we're not criminal.
Yet we're all treated as criminals today.

In the end, we're all just human, the CEO, the President, the average person - as usual, the rich control the poor.
And now we have a chance of regaining some control, of course it's being challenged.

It seems more like a pretext to control the public's opinion to be against crypto, because it's the new financial movement,
which the current 'giants' doesn't like.

There'll likely always be criminals, and they'll likely always find a way to do their illegal business.
Are we all going to live with a little drone above our heads watching our every move?

We must retain anonymity in crypto, as far as it's possible.
Or will we one day have a 'public wallet' that we get our paycheck deposited into, which then the government verifies, and considering it's completely public, all our transactions can be analysed and we're back to square one.
What did we really accomplish then, even if it's 'decentralized' and no 'central entity' is in charge, we're still under the same control.. illusion of freedom again.

Maybe, in time, we can leave the current governmental system, and adopt a new one where there is no 'money laundering', and it's not illegal to buy drugs.
But at that point we'll probably have AI running the world and everyone can do as they like anyway.

Bitcoin isn't really anonymous. Entities such as Interpol have been using it for over a year to track and arrest criminals and there are also start-ups/companies which have built bots to scan the Bitcoin blockchain and identify where money is coming from and who the bad actors are.

Anonymity is somehow good thing and also bad thing for me, but generally I consider it as good thing, because of this characteristic we could able to use or make trandaction with bitcoin without having any taxes. But in my opinion it doesn't matter whether it is anonymous or not but the thing is it's decentralized.