Bitcoin should never become fully anonymous- don't fool yourself

[Harlot]

You say it is not anonymous but in a way it is, as long as you've never submitted KYC.
If I were to do a p2p transaction to get cash with BTC that I've acquired in 2014, that would pretty much be an anonymous transaction.
Say I wanted to take my BTC to a store that accepts such payments and bought a new computer. That would be an anonymous transaction.
I have anonymously exchanged Bitcoin for cash in the past. It's not very easy but it's possible.

Monero is being harder and harder to exchange every year. What if it becomes delisted from 90% of exchanges one day?

People might be exchange Bitcoin right now anonymously but just like Monero it will be harder to do it in the future once a full enforcement of regulation will happen which is inevitable. Majority of the governments who are willing to accept cryptocurrencies are always pointing about the regulations the industry will undergo in order for it to be accepted. Since the characteristic of it only digitally existing their KYC process and enforcement are always round the clock due to AML compliances, the enforcement might not be strict in your country now but once the crypto industry becomes popular in your country I would expect anonymous transactions happening in the internet would be less and less likely to happen.

[pixie85]

People might be exchange Bitcoin right now anonymously but just like Monero it will be harder to do it in the future once a full enforcement of regulation will happen which is inevitable. Majority of the governments who are willing to accept cryptocurrencies are always pointing about the regulations the industry will undergo in order for it to be accepted. Since the characteristic of it only digitally existing their KYC process and enforcement are always round the clock due to AML compliances, the enforcement might not be strict in your country now but once the crypto industry becomes popular in your country I would expect anonymous transactions happening in the internet would be less and less likely to happen.

Majority is the keyword for me here. There will always be some people ready to exchange it for you without asking for your ID.

Even with KYC there are some limits. Many exchanges allow you to skip KYC if you don't go above 5000 dollars or something like that. For me that's fine because I usually exchange less than 1000 at a time.

Like gentlemand said wven when they all restrict it there will be someone ready to go against the majority.

[witcher_sense]

I think that's totally inevitability myself. Anyone not planning for it is a bit of a silly sausage. The day is coming.

But that doesn't mean the death of it by any means. There'll always be exchanges on the fringes happy to deal with it and at some point there'll be robust and decent decentralised options with some volume.

When we get more decentralized options to facilitate our daily exchanges, it will be easier for non-criminal people to avoid any KYC, AML, CFT banking procedures. Governments will need to find other ways to fight criminals without having to exclude half of the humanity from financial system. It will also depend on grade of adoption of cryptocurrencies in our life. If there is no necessity to exchange bitcoin or monero to fiat money, then these cryptocurrencies might get any level of anonymity they need. People should have a right to transact anonymously like it has always been in cash transactions. We almost lost this right when decided to switch to a cashless world in which all transactions are intermediated.

[Pamadar]

I look into the moment will come that Bitcoin and its transactions are no longer anonymous. It probably will come sooner as the government will try to regulate and legalize the use of crypto, everything wanted to be controlled and much more to stop illegal activities which some of them are using cryptocurrency.

Id thats happen then i Mixing services will be in demand?because thats the only way that we can at least hide our identity and continues to be anonymous?

As to the fact that our address and its transaction already have a blockchain record and traceable enough, I feel this a start of losing our goal to keep anonymous. At this point, we're still unknown but sooner, it can't be anymore especially when the leading country has taken an action to that.

i think Those Leading country won't be bother pertaining our anonymity because they will only focus on their People and not the whole world.

and just like what i have said above that it is the mixing services will be used more .

[20kevin20]

i disagree. it may be a tiny part of the reason but the main reason is because bitcoin is decentralized and can not be banned. not to mention that bitcoin's main usage has never been for anything illegal. if it were any other way then truly anonymous coins such as Monero would have been banned already, which is obviously not happening.

Bitcoin might be decentralized, but that doesn't make it non-bannable. It's as simple as declaring any Bitcoin tx a crime (or however it'd be called). Imagine a private network created by & for drug dealers - would it be left alone by intel because it's decentralized?

You could give me Tor as an counter-example, but how many of those using Tor do you think are really using it the right way leaving no identity trace behind? Most of those downloading it are using JavaScript and logging into their personal accounts through it. Now comparing Tor with a private network created by drug dealers, we're talking about the average Joe who is unconsciously accessing illegal sites (or falls in CIA's trap by paying for some "red rooms" or "hitman" fake services created by them to catch criminals) with drug dealers who obviously learn how to properly use the private network not to get caught.

Every little backdoor we leave makes it easier for the authorities to find out who you are and what's your business. I highly doubt that at least one intel agency from US doesn't have some software that makes identifying BTC users an easier job - something like an AI-powered blockchain analysis.. They have tech decades more advanced than us, this could be as easy as 1-2-3 if they right now own the perfect tool to do this.

Monero is the best example you could've given: it's starting to lose ground, isn't it? It's a quite hot topic right now that Monero is getting delisted from big exchanges and I doubt it's a decision taken by the exchanges' will. Look at what happens when you use CoinJoin and then place your money on an exchange - you get your funds locked, don't you?

It's because using these features the right way makes you an almost invincible target for the intel agencies willing to see what's up with you.

[Vatimins]

     If you look closely, you will understand that the creator of Bitcoin didn't want it to be anonymous. Although it may have some anonymity to an extent in the eyes of a lazy person, one cannot say it if mainly for anonymity purposes. If anonymity is the main goal, then leave Bitcoin out of it. Because there clearly are better choices out there if you want anonymity.

     Now, talking about bitcoin being mainstream, it is highly possible. The thing is though, is that a lot of businesses will be losing a lot of money if this currency really does go mainstream. And the reasons as to why are pretty obvious. But then again, who knows? It may or may not happen. All we can do for now is to wait and see what happens in the future.

[gentlemand]

When we get more decentralized options to facilitate our daily exchanges, it will be easier for non-criminal people to avoid any KYC, AML, CFT banking procedures. Governments will need to find other ways to fight criminals without having to exclude half of the humanity from financial system. It will also depend on grade of adoption of cryptocurrencies in our life. If there is no necessity to exchange bitcoin or monero to fiat money, then these cryptocurrencies might get any level of anonymity they need.

I think that's the biggest unanswered question in the future. If the Bitcoin economy becomes largely a closed loop how will governments react? I've not to far off reached it myself. I'd rather sell stuff for BTC and I spend plenty of it too. There'll always be a need for some people to get back into fiat but if a big percentage of anyone's earnings or spending never leave what are they going to do?

It's a piece of piss when everyone's tied to fiat or still wants it, vastly less so when fiat is treated like a pain up the arse rather than the end goal. Will we wind up with government registered wallets?

[Stedsm]

@OP,
I believe you are already overthinking the situation here. When you already know and see that Bitcoin is at pseudonymous state currently, then this debate doesn't make any sense. I truly believe that Satoshi made Bitcoins to keep our finances in our hands and stop the loot that Governments are running on us since ages through their shit currencies, by printing enormous amount of money and going under huge debt already. I believe BTC can be traced via Blockchain and there are almost 95% of the users who either don't mix their coins at any cost or just have their traces findable through many sources online.

[Sanugarid]

@OP,
I believe you are already overthinking the situation here. When you already know and see that Bitcoin is at pseudonymous state currently, then this debate doesn't make any sense.

Well it is clear that the OP is confused between anonymous and pseudonymous. This has been discussed for many times, I think this has to stop and should just re-up the old threads like this.

I truly believe that Satoshi made Bitcoins to keep our finances in our hands and stop the loot that Governments are running on us since ages through their shit currencies, by printing enormous amount of money and going under huge debt already. I believe BTC can be traced via Blockchain and there are almost 95% of the users who either don't mix their coins at any cost or just have their traces findable through many sources online.

Based on the whitepaper, Satoshi made it peer-to-peer transaction without the use of middlemen obviously the government agencies and third party services like banks so most likely he is trying to do what is beneficial for the people, but then with our society structure our taxes is just as important as everyone's lives because it is not the money of the government only but to our public servants. It will be blockchain in the end.

[Stedsm]

--snip--
Based on the whitepaper, Satoshi made it peer-to-peer transaction without the use of middlemen obviously the government agencies and third party services like banks so most likely he is trying to do what is beneficial for the people, but then with our society structure our taxes is just as important as everyone's lives because it is not the money of the government only but to our public servants. It will be blockchain in the end.

Sorry, what will be Blockchain?
And yes, I do understand that Governments need taxes in order to maintain the country well, but then, they are also just giving our hard earned money that we pay as taxes - to big venture capitalists and business tycoons who just scam and run away and what do we get? Hopes, and nothing else.

[bitbunnny]

Bitcoin was maybe fully anonimous at the begininig and now it's not. With time Bitcoin has lost a great deal of anonimity and transactions become more traceable. To.think today that Bitcoin is anonimus it would be foolish thing to do and it's not only because of KYC. At the end, although we all like our privacy, we need to give up a part of our anonimity for the protection and safety.

[pixie85]

Bitcoin was maybe fully anonimous at the begininig and now it's not. With time Bitcoin has lost a great deal of anonimity and transactions become more traceable. To.think today that Bitcoin is anonimus it would be foolish thing to do and it's not only because of KYC. At the end, although we all like our privacy, we need to give up a part of our anonimity for the protection and safety.

It used to be when you were able to mine but then you weren't able to really spend it because the acceptance was so low.

I think that the best time to anonymously spend was when all those now defunct exchanges like BTCe were running. You could really use Bitcoin and then get all the information wiped when the exchanges disappeared.

You can still avoid KYC if you want but most people prefer to associate their real ID with their exchange account through the middle man (bank).

[Stedsm]

I think that the best time to anonymously spend was when all those now defunct exchanges like BTCe were running. You could really use Bitcoin and then get all the information wiped when the exchanges disappeared.

First of all, not all exchanges will disappear FYI.
Another thing, such exchanges which disappeared still have your KYC on their servers and they can, at any point of time, either misuse or just sell your data (grouped into a zip file) through darkweb and even earn through it no matter how the opposite party uses our data. So don't just think that if it's wiped out on your end after the exchange being vanished, the exchange also wiped it out at their end.

[Sadlife]

I agree on the first part that Bitcoin shouldn't become fully anonymous because governments need to take taxes from businesses small or large.
But the second part that governments could kill it through exchanges is not possible because other exchange are not in just one country making it hard to stop Bitcoin.

[witcher_sense]

I think that's the biggest unanswered question in the future. If the Bitcoin economy becomes largely a closed loop how will governments react? I've not to far off reached it myself. I'd rather sell stuff for BTC and I spend plenty of it too. There'll always be a need for some people to get back into fiat but if a big percentage of anyone's earnings or spending never leave what are they going to do?

It's a piece of piss when everyone's tied to fiat or still wants it, vastly less so when fiat is treated like a pain up the arse rather than the end goal. Will we wind up with government registered wallets?

Bitcoin economy is widely open economy, a free market where governments have no ability to control prices and total supply of dollars. I don't think that Bitcoin will work as closed loop thing since it still require electricity to secure the network. There is no possibility to use electricity without having to pay governments. It is really hard to predict how governments will react when they realized that bitcoin is not just a toy for geeks. They will try to undermine the network in some way, ban mining, increase electricity bills to make mining not profitable, they have enough of printed money to sustain 51% attack long enough to discredit the network, etc. Will they do that? Will they all collude to destroy the network? I don't think so, each government pursues its own goals, some will allow mining to exist and bitcoin economy to grow. When anti-bitcoin governments see bitcoin governments thriving, they might change their minds and switch to bitcoin standard or they will collude to conquer thriving economy, you never know.

[Wind_FURY]

One thing I often hear is how bitcoin should become a fully anonymous cryptocurrency.  No, it shouldn't.  If people want bitcoin to truly become mainstream then making bitcoin fully anonymous would destroy that goal.  I believe in these types of currencies, such as with Monero whom I support fully.

It would if there's consensus, but you are free to your opinion.

Here's why- the governments wont allow it.  Right now the U.S. government is working on bitcoin/cryptocurrency legislation that Steve Mnuchin (Secretary of the US Treasury) is putting together and recently said should release soon. I'm fearful of what's to come and bitcoin isn't even anonymous at the moment.  Governments can kill the exchanges.  Sure there's always over the counter, but that's not going to bring this to the heights we all hope it's headed.

? You're confused.

The "government" cannot do anything about Bitcoin consensus. They're not part of the network.

Think of it this way.  How many countries still don't allow for women to vote or even show their face in public, how many countries don't allow for freedom of speech, how many countries still don't allow freedom of press...and you think they'l be okay with a massive global currency they can't control what so ever?  Not a chance.

They're not, but what can they do to stop the actual network?

I hope LN is something that stays on another layer and is used for anonymous transaction or something else is created so that bitcoin has both options..but making it fully anonymous wont work out well.  As a financial advisor this is something seemingly obvious to me after spending over a decade in finance and seeing how this kind of stuff is received by governments. 

Would love to be wrong or hear how it could still work. 

You're a financial advisor? Educate yourself on the basics.

[DooMAD]

One thing I often hear is how bitcoin should become a fully anonymous cryptocurrency.  No, it shouldn't.  If people want bitcoin to truly become mainstream then making bitcoin fully anonymous would destroy that goal.  I believe in these types of currencies, such as with Monero whom I support fully.

It would if there's consensus, but you are free to your opinion.

An important point.  Because privacy has the potential to be somewhat contentious, it's difficult to say how many privacy-oriented features will find their way into the base protocol.  There are many opinions, but we'll have to wait and see what rules users choose to enforce.  Some people have also speculated in the past about "privacy layers" that can be built separately and users can opt in to those if they desire more anonymity.  These could potentially exist even if others disagree with them.

[Debonaire217]

I agree on the first part that Bitcoin shouldn't become fully anonymous because governments need to take taxes from businesses small or large.
But the second part that governments could kill it through exchanges is not possible because other exchange are not in just one country making it hard to stop Bitcoin.

What about, an idea of a hybrid use of bitcoin? There are times that we want to transact fully anonymous and bitcoin isn't restricting us to have this kind of transaction using mixers. There are times that we want to withdraw our funds and in that sense, we could have a wallet from a local exchange that we can use for local transactions. For transactions that are private, we can have a separate address to make sure that there's no way others will recognize us.

This is just for private matters and not for an illegal purpose there's just some people that don't want their transactions to be known publicly.

[Kakmakr]

People might be exchange Bitcoin right now anonymously but just like Monero it will be harder to do it in the future once a full enforcement of regulation will happen which is inevitable. Majority of the governments who are willing to accept cryptocurrencies are always pointing about the regulations the industry will undergo in order for it to be accepted. Since the characteristic of it only digitally existing their KYC process and enforcement are always round the clock due to AML compliances, the enforcement might not be strict in your country now but once the crypto industry becomes popular in your country I would expect anonymous transactions happening in the internet would be less and less likely to happen.

Majority is the keyword for me here. There will always be some people ready to exchange it for you without asking for your ID.

Even with KYC there are some limits. Many exchanges allow you to skip KYC if you don't go above 5000 dollars or something like that. For me that's fine because I usually exchange less than 1000 at a time.

Like gentlemand said wven when they all restrict it there will be someone ready to go against the majority.

The only time when majority will be a true factor, is when the majority of the citizens of countries start voting for a government that accept Bitcoin as it is. Bitcoin was only supposed to be pseudo-anonymous... not 100% anonymous.

If your goal is to be 100% anonymous, then buy some of the 100% anonymous Alt coins like Monero. Remember, when something is 100% anonymous, criminals will be drawn to it and following that would be the government regulations to stop them.

So we will have to sacrifice 100% anonymity for the government not to over regulate it....  

[ChiBitCTy]

I hope LN is something that stays on another layer and is used for anonymous transaction 

LN is not that much of anonymous as it is expected. Afaik, LN payments can be traced although it will be hell lot of works. Either way, if BTC becomes anonymous, it will barely survive in the market.
Like you said, most countries don't have freedom of speech etc. In case of financial activity privacy, all countries are more strict and in such case, BTC would never be legalized.

Thanks for your response on this.  I had heard that it was originally from Andreas Antonopoulos.  He was doing one of his ask and answer youtube sessions and spend that particular video answering most of the questions on LN.  I guess I'm kind of glad to hear this as I've used LN and it truly is insanely fast.