Anonymity

[practicaldreamer]

Might be a naive question for some - but why is anonymity such a priority for BTC ? Why is Amir concentrating on it with Dark Wallet ? How will the anonymity of transactions benefit the average Jo (who probably won't have 2 bits to scratch his arse with anyway) ? I can see how it would be of benefit to the wealthy and their respective tax liabilities 

   Is it a security issue ? Or is it ideological ?

   It just seems to me that the main benefactors of BTC transaction anonymity would be the privileged class/wealthy/elite etc.

   I don't ask the question to make a rhetorical point - I'm guessing the likes of Amir must have a good reason for it - I'm just not sure I understand that reason at this point 

[Raya]

Bitcoin is not as anoymous as people think just take a look at the scam accusations and how many people get caight almost 90%.

[Cryptopher]

I wouldn't say that it is anonymous, but rather the connection between a Bitcoin address and a person is weaker.

For a bank account you need to provide identification and address details, whereas you can just create a new Bitcoin address ad-hoc. You have ownership of that account.

But with the Bitcoin address, it is simply a reference point that you choose to use, maybe for a few minutes, maybe for months. But it would take a lot to pin an actual person to that particular address, even if they post it with their forum handle etc.

I would describe Bitcoin as being much more lightweight than services like PayPal or banks, much more like digital cash transactions.

[hilariousandco]

Might be a naive question for some - but why is anonymity such a priority for BTC ? Why is Amir concentrating on it with Dark Wallet ? How will the anonymity of transactions benefit the average Jo (who probably won't have 2 bits to scratch his arse with anyway) ? I can see how it would be of benefit to the wealthy and their respective tax liabilities 

Because some people value anonymity and privacy, and various governments are trying to spy on everything we do, and to some people they don't want governments to know every detail of their lives or what they might spend their money on.

[keithers]

IMO it is not the anonymity of each specific transaction that matters.   It is more so important that the government doesn't have eyes on, or can at the click of a button seize all your liquid assets.   Anonymity is important to protect your net worth. 

[Cryptopher]

Might be a naive question for some - but why is anonymity such a priority for BTC ? Why is Amir concentrating on it with Dark Wallet ? How will the anonymity of transactions benefit the average Jo (who probably won't have 2 bits to scratch his arse with anyway) ? I can see how it would be of benefit to the wealthy and their respective tax liabilities 

Because some people value anonymity and privacy, and various governments are trying to spy on everything we do, and to some people they don't want governments to know every detail of their lives or what they might spend their money on.

Of course, in order to preserve anonymity then the user needs to play by certain rules. The problem is what if they are being spied on during their Bitcoin transactions?

That probably isn't a concern for the average Joe, but more for the likes of people who are already on a spy list lol.

[corebob]

It provides neutrality for everyone whether you are wealthy or not, and it provides protection from oppressive governments.

With the combination of decentralization and anonymity, a true democracy is suddenly within reach.

[RodeoX]

Some people in the world do not have the luxury of rights and freedom. For them circumventing the systems that would persecute them is moral, in my opinion. What if you are a Syrian fighting the government?
Even us in the U.S.A. face attempts to stop us from donating to wikileaks or Edward Snowden. Anonymity must be preserved as a balance against tyranny.

[franky1]

the answer to bitcoins anonimity is the same question people ask about governments trying to remove bank notes, where everyone is forced to use debit cards.

do you really want your bank selling your personal information to businesses
do you really want to have your wife finding out about that expensive gift you bought your mistress
do you want banks to inform the tax man of that $£100 your gran sent you as a birthday gift, where they would bite £$20+ out of it
do you really want you bank manager knowing you frequent casino's when you try to apply for a loan and be told that your a financial risk
do you really want to have no privacy?

[s_s]

There are some other legitimate reasons for the need for some degrees of privacy associated with bitcoin transactions that no one else has mentioned.

For example for companies to protect certain trade information that they are not required otherwise to make public and might be an advantage to competitors...or for example to prevent employees from being able to deduce what other coworker salaries are etc.

In many ways the blockchain actually can be "more" revealing with respect to transactions of some people than the way things are done now.

[traderman]

There is a new anonymous cryptocurrency called Darkcoin that uses the "coinjoin" technology. Sound promising so far. There are many reason to have an anonymous blockchain. Think Wikileaks, Gambling, Whistle blowers, Investigative Journalism etc...

Article on Darkcoin: http://razorsforex.blogspot.com/2014/02/darkcoin-anonymous-cryptocurrency.html

[guybrushthreepwood]

There is a new anonymous cryptocurrency called Darkcoin that uses the "coinjoin" technology. Sound promising so far. There are many reason to have an anonymous blockchain. Think Wikileaks, Gambling, Investigative Journalism etc...

Article: http://razorsforex.blogspot.com/2014/02/darkcoin-anonymous-cryptocurrency.html

What happened to that zerocoin or whatever it was that they were meant to be developing on top of the blockchain or something?

[s_s]

There is a new anonymous cryptocurrency called Darkcoin that uses the "coinjoin" technology. Sound promising so far. There are many reason to have an anonymous blockchain. Think Wikileaks, Gambling, Investigative Journalism etc...

Article: http://razorsforex.blogspot.com/2014/02/darkcoin-anonymous-cryptocurrency.html

What happened to that zerocoin or whatever it was that they were meant to be developing on top of the blockchain or something?

It is being developed as an independent stand alone crypto separate from bitcoin.

[traderman]

Zerocoin from what I have read is still theoretical and the math behind it has not been tested for loopholes yet. There are issues with the block chain bloating as well.
So it is a long way away from a fully functional crypto.

There is a new anonymous cryptocurrency called Darkcoin that uses the "coinjoin" technology. Sound promising so far. There are many reason to have an anonymous blockchain. Think Wikileaks, Gambling, Investigative Journalism etc...

Article: http://razorsforex.blogspot.com/2014/02/darkcoin-anonymous-cryptocurrency.html

What happened to that zerocoin or whatever it was that they were meant to be developing on top of the blockchain or something?

[marcus_of_augustus]

Fungibility. Good money needs to be fungible or the whole system of that money is inefficient as a medium of exchange and will inevitably break down.

It is not about anonymity per se but traceability. In the realm of digital money it must be untraceable to be fungible. Any piece of bitcoin must be indistinguishable from any other piece of bitcoin.

Anonymity can be a natural side-effect of untraceable digital money but is not necessarily a goal in itself.

[MakeBelieve]

Bitcoin is not as anoymous as people think just take a look at the scam accusations and how many people get caight almost 90%.

It is anoymous if the right guidelines are followed and most people follow them pretty good and I would say that the scam accusation area is normally filled with newbies or don't value annoymity and just want to scam coin quickly luckily they do that and we can find out who they are.

[hilariousandco]

Bitcoin is not as anoymous as people think just take a look at the scam accusations and how many people get caight almost 90%.

It is anoymous if the right guidelines are followed and most people follow them pretty good and I would say that the scam accusation area is normally filled with newbies or don't value annoymity and just want to scam coin quickly luckily they do that and we can find out who they are.

That's because they stupidly tie themselves to their identity in some way. If you want to remain anonymous you can do.

[leopard2]

no idea why people want to own something anonymously, with governments all over the world being more trustworthy than ever, like this

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-16/money-launderer-until-proven-innocent-italy-imposes-20-tax-withholding-all-inbound-m

some say anonymity is for criminals, others say it is a protection from criminals, it is a matter of definition 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

bank vaults were opened by IRS agents and the gold stolen, excuse me, upgraded to paper - what a coincidence that anonymous gold purchases are not allowed anymore in the US, and sure enough, anonymous BTC are considered money laundering. 

back then the gold was needed to finance the attack against Germany, today there is much more that needs financing.

[practicaldreamer]

There are many reason to have an anonymous blockchain. Think Wikileaks, ....., Whistle blowers, Investigative Journalism etc...

Yes - I can see the benefit there.

Fungibility. Good money needs to be fungible or the whole system of that money is inefficient as a medium of exchange and will inevitably break down.

It is not about anonymity per se but traceability. In the realm of digital money it must be untraceable to be fungible. Any piece of bitcoin must be indistinguishable from any other piece of bitcoin.

Anonymity can be a natural side-effect of untraceable digital money but is not necessarily a goal in itself.

The idea being that if I (Practical Dreamer) deposit 2 BTC to Wikileaks, and its traceable back to me - then those 2 BTC then become worth a different amount (less) on the open market than they would if they had been 2 BTC transferred from the Queen of England to Barack Obama ??
 How does that work ?

  I can understand the idea of it being desirable for the BTC transaction to be untraceable (for our idealist purposes lets say a donation to Wikileaks) - but why would it make those 2 BTC any less fungible in the event of that transaction being transparent/traceable/not anonymous ? Why would they be worth any more or less ?

   In other words, wouldn't BTC still be fungible without anonymity ?

[pening]

I always find the obsession from some quarters over anonymity odd.  You know whats anonymous?  Cash.  People have been evading authorities by using cash for as long as its been around.  You know whats not anonymous?  Electronic transfer, especially if the parties are not physically present.  That electronic transfer leaves finger prints and trails all over the place, while having something shipped mean giving out your name and address.  In person trade with a paper wallet is best chance of anonymous transaction, if you generated the address offline.