re: Private vs non-private
Part of my point was that perhaps people like Mark Zuckerberg should perhaps (and only perhaps) have the option to choose a non-anonymous form of payment.
If there was something like Bitcoin, but was very much open by design and not anonymous, but used by everyone, I argue that would be a good thing.
However, the crucial reason why we have to have privacy is that the world isn't perfect like that. In reality the rich would retain the privacy probably and the poor would lose it, and be taxed higher, just as they are now.
The only thing that might stop that would be economics - the system that is open is cheaper.
I don't think it's an either/or thing but it's the privacy of BC that could be the risk. Hence, I propose, why not have the same thing but very much not private as well. So that way no matter which side of the fence you are, at least you will still have a network if the private one comes under attack by the most powerful people in the world.
What if you could flag your payment as public by design? That would be something very different. There are arguments for this, and for the first time ever Bitcoin could go that route, but it does not, choosing not to take that opportunity. Are we sure that's the right thing to do? In a way perhaps you already can, if there's a email address that the results are displayed to on a website.
This is where I don't have the answers. Is it best to be open?
I also want to head this philosophical argument off before it starts. Privacy opponents, ignorant of the imperfect world reality will still say `what have you got to hide`, a non starter argument that has been disproved so many times before.
Bad idea?
I don't have the answers, I'm just trying to think ahead here, how governments could react.
------------------------------------------
a hidden monotone repository inside the anonymous i2p network
I hope so. And I think that has to be defended. Don't forget there are many other things in favour of liberty. First, the number of countries in the world, with different laws and so on.
However, I'd take no chances and I think it good to plan in advance, now. Recently we've seen the DNS seizures, which shouldn't have happened, along with the dominance of the US generally throwing it's weight about again with cultural arrogance and disrespect for borders of empire. I don't expect something like that to happen yet. But I believe something like it could if Bitcoin got to where many people would want it to be - ubiquitous.
I agree the signal can't be stopped. But it can be slowed.
--------------------------------------------
re: Languages.
Finally, remember what I say about languages. The great thing about the Anglophone oligarchy reign is the language barrier. Thus, getting Bitcoin into other languages has to be a great start to that one, the more alien to English, the better. Time for a Russian i2p experimental site, or a Spanish freenet site explaining how it works.
I couldn't find a single site in Spanish or Chinese that has really heard of Bitcoin - great oppotunity.
Chinese migrant workers would find Bitcoin extremely handy for getting micropayments to folks back home, as would all the other migrant communities... if only they knew about it. Thus, that is a direction I recommend if you speak another language and want to see Bitcoin do well and survive.
