Privacy vs. anonymity

[BlackHatCoiner]

This is actually entertaining to read.

No government would ever accept widespread use of a completely untraceable coin like XMR.

There are just so many people who link privacy to crime. They would probably never like the idea of Monero and automatically think of criminals when hearing about it.

Weren't the same discussions made about Bitcoin few years ago? Weren't the people arguing that it'll never be accepted by the government? That it's used mostly by criminals? A holy grail for privacy and anonymity. A currency that if you knew what you were doin', you could incommode your traceability. And here we are, 2021, a country made it legal tender.

The governments obviously want to trace you, but they periodically seem to apply based on the people wants; same thing happens with authoritarianism, it gets blunted. There were times when if you found your husband/wife unfaithful, they were executed. Now, unfaithfulness is a right. Times when slavery was a common phenomenon; services for the government and the rich. Now, that's a crime. Wasn't cryptography illegal in past times?

The governments always had this alibi, that whatever they're doing, they do it to protect you, such as against terrorism. Whoever vilifies that Monero is linked to crime or admits that the governments would never accept its widespread usage should also consider to stop using Tor as it invades the governments' business and makes harder for them to trace us. They should also propone http and believe that https is for those who have something to hide.

I thought we were supporting privacy. No? Half-ass jobs?


Anyway, in my opinion, in the next few years, there is going to be a cataclysm of CBDCs which will replace our fungible cash with a highly-censored and anti-private currency. I don't believe we'll ever experience a scenario where everyone will use Bitcoin or Monero unless they're disgustingly KYC-ed.

[1714215335]

1714215335

[1714215335]

1714215335

[1714215335]

1714215335

[Shenzou]

I think that once you have used the internet, you already have given up your privacy whether you like it or not, because somewhere on the internet you have put your address or name for some reason or another or you search for something and the next thing you know you are flooded with ads about it, the world over the past few years has gotten more and more connected because of the internet but we have paid the price of this by giving up our information, so we are no longer anonymous, even if you didn't personally give that information some of your friends or family unwillingly did, but this is not because of using bitcoin itself, bitcoin and its transactions are still made in an anonymous way its just the purpose of using it that makes using it anonymous, you are still identified by an address and no one is gonna go out of their way to identify you unless they have a reason to, and even then that is way difficult, and if you are using it to buy things that are shipped to your address that is the nature of how things work and there is no way around it, but bitcoin is still way more secure and somewhat private than fiat and to me that is enough.

[herurist]

Privacy is indeed a pretty good thing to do, because in addition to protecting ourselves from the disclosure of personal data to the public, this will also be useful so that our data is not used by irresponsible people.
but you made the right thread and maybe even now especially when it's still on track as it is now we can't continue to maintain our privacy because the longer we are in a scope like crypto the more updates will go wrong one is that it requires us to do KYC because until now there are many platforms or that support us in cryptocurrency, not a few of which require us to do KYC which incidentally is one of the common distributions of privacy data for now.

[o_e_l_e_o]

A currency that if you knew what you were doin', you could incommode your traceability.

There's the distinction. If you know what you are doing you can make a good effort to hide your traces, but even then it might not be enough for blockchain analysis companies.

Mass surveillance isn't about stopping terrorism or catching criminals, and indeed, there is no good evidence that mass surveillance has ever been the thing which thwarted a terrorist plot. Mass surveillance is about control of the population. If >99% of people don't mix or coinjoin their bitcoin or otherwise try to maintain their privacy, and of the 1% who do the majority do it poorly or incompletely or slip up or make a mistake, etc., then that's good enough for the government. Just as mass surveillance can't track everyone who uses Tails and Tor and PGP and disposable email address and so on, but that's OK because it can track the vast majority of people.

If Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Opera, Edge, etc., all came out in unison and said they would all implement mandatory Tor routing which you couldn't turn off, you can guarantee the government would start screaming about terrorism and "Won't someone think of the children!" For the same reason, they would never accept global use of XMR.

Whoever vilifies that Monero is linked to crime or admits that the governments would never accept its widespread usage should also consider to stop using Tor as it invades the governments' business and makes harder for them to trace us. They should also propone http and believe that https is for those who have something to hide.

There is a difference between me using Monero and the government accepting everyone in the country using Monero.

[BlackHatCoiner]

There is a difference between me using Monero and the government accepting everyone in the country using Monero.

But, you're a miniature of how the world could operate if they'd want to. Yes, the government would never accept everyone in a country on using an untraceable currency, but what if the people started to constantly asking for it?

Didn't Bitcoin survive the same way? Most of the governments were justifiably against a so anarchic currency from the very beginning. Weren't we reading FUDs that they'll turn it down, ban it, make it illegal? And here we are, eleven years later and it seems like it's succeeding more than ever. Why? Obviously, the people want it.

And they want it, not only due to these speculations, but because it'll provide them financial sovereignty in the long run. Because, it has the properties of the best store of value asset they've ever witnessed. Because, they prefer owning money that do not lose value every year. Because, they like the idea of distinguishing money from the state.

There may be need for privacy in the future. I'll let that sink.


Besides, aren't LN and taproot privacy improvements in the protocol? Did we ever ask ourselves, what the government thinks of it? No, because we're the rulers after all.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Yes, the government would never accept everyone in a country on using an untraceable currency, but what if the people started to constantly asking for it?

People constantly ask not to go bankrupt from healthcare bills or for a wage they can actually live on. The government don't care.

Didn't Bitcoin survive the same way? Most of the governments were justifiably against a so anarchic currency from the very beginning. Weren't we reading FUDs that they'll turn it down, ban it, make it illegal? And here we are, eleven years later and it seems like it's succeeding more than ever. Why? Obviously, the people want it.

Some governments have banned bitcoin, and most of the ones which haven't are trying to regulate it to oblivion. The same and worse is happening to Monero, for example the IRS offering a bounty of $1.25 million (initially $625,000, but they doubled it when no one could claim it) to anyone who can track and de-anonymize Monero transactions.

Look, if the whole world decided to adopt Bitcoin and Monero as global currencies, I couldn't be happier, and I will continue to use both in the most private possible ways. But I am not naive enough to think governments like those of the US or China are going to let their citizens use a currency which they absolutely cannot trace. The need for privacy is only going to grow over time, as is the government's desire to invade it.

[BlackHatCoiner]

People constantly ask not to go bankrupt from healthcare bills or for a wage they can actually live on. The government don't care.

I wasn't referring to these phenomena. Yeah, life's cruel, I understand that. What I want to mean is that if something's useful, no matter how much you try, no matter how strict you're towards your people, in the end, you can't be hiding it forever. The better always stands out.

Just like you can't prevent me from browsing through Tor, you can't prevent me from using Monero. You may dictate that if I do so, I'll have my head taken off, but that's just a temporary solution. You can't intimidate everyone likewise. You have to admit that a better form of currency exists and get along with it.

And just because you can't stop me from using it, you can't stop me from recommending it to my acquaintances. Thus, another revolution may begin by that thinking which reminds of this quote that was written from a forum member and I think it has a lot of point:

The Revolution Will Not Be Centralized

I'm neither foolish to believe that we'll walk around with Monero wallets and feel happy about it. This is never going to happen, but the reason I replied above wasn't meant to support such statement. I wanted to remind you that the same words were said about Bitcoin not long ago and we're now talking about global adoption and other facetious facts.

I'm still confused by yours and Kevin's sayings, so please enlighten me. Governments have to regulate a currency in order to adopt it. Bitcoin transactions can be traced by chain analysis companies whether you're careful or not. However, we have a solution for this; atomic swaps. That way, we can leave much fewer footprints as we'll keep most of our balances in XMR and will convert them to BTC whenever we'll want to make a purchase.

Don't you find it hard, or at least a pain in the ass, to trace every citizen if they have so many options to retain their privacy? Why would a government accept a currency which makes traceability so difficult to be achieved instead of introducing an e-euro which is fully centralized and controlled by them?

Maybe we don't have to use or support a currency whose position is going to be global; significant advantages of it may be sacrificed.

[franky1]

but if they see $10k go into one exchange.. and $10k come out of another exchange. it can light up some flags

Does this happen in practice? Having never used centralized exchanges, I'm out of the loop on this one. If you deposited $10k (or £10k since I think you are UK based?) to Coinbase, and then next month transferred the same amount from Binance back to the same bank account, would you be flagged up as money laundering and get threatening letters from tax agencies and law enforcement? I've never heard of that happening.

thats because in fiat world. when you buy shares from broker X those shares stay in broker X's portfolio service. and when you sell its from the same portfolio/broker so when withdrawing the fiat its easy to show tracability your your bank to not flag it as new income.

however fiat going to one exchange account and then randomly another allotment enters you bank account from another exchange does flag as new income.

this is why for the last decade some banks have been freezing accounts that show linkages to exchanges and why in some countries people get contacted by the IRS

i know that users playing with their sums dont see it from the same prospective. because they can see their movements. but get out of the box and see it from the banks prospective of what they cannot see and how they would perceive it

[Tigerheart3026]

when i created account in the forum, if first one year i tried to remain anonymous but when i see my local board here i got acquainted with some people and i meet them,

even now i using a few centralized exchanges also here i completed kyc,

so now i think my identity a bit public, i can't be called anonymous now.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Just like you can't prevent me from browsing through Tor, you can't prevent me from using Monero.

Sure, but here's the difference: Let's say the US government makes Tor illegal. I can hide the fact that I am using Tor altogether using pluggable transports and Tor bridges and all the rest of it, and continue to fully use Tor to access any and every website I want to. Now, let's say the US government makes Monero illegal. I can hide the fact that I am using Monero by running my own node over Tor and not linking it to my real life identity and all the rest of it, but what can I do with my Monero? No merchant accepts it. I can't use it to buy goods or services. I can maybe trade it peer to peer for bitcoin or fiat, but I can't use it as a currency.

Don't you find it hard, or at least a pain in the ass, to trace every citizen if they have so many options to retain their privacy?

As I said above, the vast majority do not retain their privacy. Even on here, a bitcoin forum which is supposed to be built on the principles of not trusting third parties, we frequently see people more than happy to send their private information to complete strangers to claim some scam airdrop, and we frequently see people (even some senior members) state something along the lines of anyone that is trying to mix or otherwise obfuscate their transaction history is obviously trying to hide something illegal and should instead just let the government stick their noses in and monitor their entire bitcoin history. If that is the general feeling of bitcoin enthusiasts, then what do you think the general feeling would be among the wider population?

As I said above, the government don't ban Tor because so few people use it that their mass surveillance programs still give them the data they want. They don't need to ban bitcoin because so few people use it privately that their blockchain analysis still gives them the data they want.

Why would a government accept a currency which makes traceability so difficult to be achieved instead of introducing an e-euro which is fully centralized and controlled by them?

I mean, that's the route we are going. Pretty much every major government will introduce their own CBDC in the coming years.

however fiat going to one exchange account and then randomly another allotment enters you bank account from another exchange does flag as new income.

So lets say I buy $10k of BTC on Coinbase, send it to Binance to trade some shitcoins, and then instead of cashing out from Binance, I just sell my shitcoins to BTC, transfer the BTC to Coinbase, and cash out from Coinbase. My fiat bank sees money leave to Coinbase and come back in from Coinbase.

Seems a trivial work around for this particular issue, although if you are using centralized exchanges then the IRS have all your details anyway, so the whole process is pretty irrelevant at the end of the day.

[DaveF]

Seems a trivial work around for this particular issue, although if you are using centralized exchanges then the IRS have all your details anyway, so the whole process is pretty irrelevant at the end of the day.

Depends what you mean by 'centralized exchange' to convert to fiat to cash / cash equivalent then more then likely you do have to go through KYC.
Just to trade alts and move money in and out of a stable coin to do it. Then no, there are still some left that you just need an email address to use with low but usable withdrawal limits.

There is risk, obviously of using a exchange, but to 100% say that you are giving away PII is not fair.

-Dave

[BlackHatCoiner]

No merchant accepts it. I can't use it to buy goods or services. I can maybe trade it peer to peer for bitcoin or fiat, but I can't use it as a currency.

Yes, you can't. As long as the government says no, you're forbidden to accept it as a payment method in your store. But, you still can use it as you said. Trading BTC for XMR, XMR for BTC, back and forth. It still hides your footprints and can't be prevented from a government.

So, if you (as a government) decide to accept Bitcoin in your country, you ought to ensure there's no easy way for your citizens to bypass your traceability. Do you still think that having Bitcoin globally adopted instead of a CBDC is a possibility? I highly doubt it.

As I said above, the vast majority do not retain their privacy.

Still, there's a decent percentage of people who have found ways to retain it. With a CBDC, you've covered those too. Besides, if it's possible to retain privacy, what makes you think the world won't start educating each other?

Bitcoin as a currency, is nothing, but a threat for the government. They'll find their way to introduce a far more regulated currency for the sake of the children no matter the demand it'll have. As you said;

The government don't care.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Trading BTC for XMR, XMR for BTC, back and forth. It still hides your footprints and can't be prevented from a government.

Sure, but XMR isn't being used a currency - it is being used a surrogate mixer effectively. BTC is the currency in this scenario.

Do you still think that having Bitcoin globally adopted instead of a CBDC is a possibility? I highly doubt it.

I'm sure governments will push for their CBDCs relentlessly, but I'm also sure that bitcoin will continue to become more popular over time.

Besides, if it's possible to retain privacy, what makes you think the world won't start educating each other?

We already do, and yet Windows is the most popular OS despite being spyware, Chrome is the most popular browser despite being spyware, and Facebook is the most popular social media site despite being spyware. What makes you think the masses will suddenly become interested in privacy when they start using bitcoin?

[Evgenklm]

I think that anonymity has been said goodbye to on cex exchanges for a long time, KYC is introduced everywhere, even on binance they recently made it a mandatory action, I am sure that exchanges transmit information to third parties or they are hacked and our data is leaked in an unknown direction.

[BlackHatCoiner]

What makes you think the masses will suddenly become interested in privacy when they start using bitcoin?

They may not become interested in retaining their privacy, but they may do it, unconsciously. Your analogies with Facebook, Windows and Chrome aren't the same when it comes to a currency and here's why.

Yeah, if you want to have Facebook since your relatives/coworkers do, you're most likely to lose a good proportion of it. You can't really convince me to switch to Linux as the entire world works on Windows, even if it's a spyware. Same goes for Chrome, although chromium is open-source. (AFAIK)

But, when privacy is retained on a protocol level, then the project protects the users' privacy without needing them do it for their good. For instance, with the LN, you can't trace what I do, especially if I run my own node. I haven't read much about Taproot and Schnorr signatures, but I know it's going to help for large transactions.

I'm just saying that Bitcoin doesn't have that many privacy issues as a currency where each citizen's transaction is known. And by all these features, I can't comprehend why a government would accept its usage, officially.


I have a feeling that a privacy crisis will outburst in the late 20's and people will trade their digital currencies for Monero (& Bitcoin).

[o_e_l_e_o]

Yeah, if you want to have Facebook since your relatives/coworkers do, you're most likely to lose a good proportion of it. You can't really convince me to switch to Linux as the entire world works on Windows, even if it's a spyware. Same goes for Chrome, although chromium is open-source. (AFAIK)

These things are all much easier to do than retaining your privacy when using bitcoin. If you can't delete Facebook, then just have an account to follow your friends and don't share anything. Easy. An OS like Linux Mint is so similar to Windows that it can be used by any Windows user pretty much immediately, comes with wide support for pretty much everything, and anything which needs Windows can be ran on Wine or similar. Easy. Switching from Chrome to Firefox is almost trivial, since Firefox will import all your bookmarks, saved passwords, etc., with a few clicks. Very easy!

Compare this to only using DEXs and peer to peer trading, mixing or coinjoining everything, running your own node over Tor, and all the other things you need to do to remain private with bitcoin. If you can't be bothered to switch your browser away from Chrome for the sake of privacy, then you definitely can't be bothered to run your own node.

But, when privacy is retained on a protocol level, then the project protects the users' privacy without needing them do it for their good.

I agree with you here. Any privacy enhancing techniques need to stop being optional, since we know from experience that the vast majority of people just won't use them, which decreases the privacy for the people who do. It took almost 4 years for segwit to break 50%. I suspect it will take significantly longer for taproot, since most users don't have the same incentive (greatly reduced fees) to switch. If we want privacy, it needs to be built in to the protocol, as it is with XMR.

[BlackHatCoiner]

If we want privacy, it needs to be built in to the protocol, as it is with XMR.

But, according to what we've said, privacy ≠ global adoption. So, for the sake of our wealth, should we make privacy techniques mandatory or is it too daring?

[o_e_l_e_o]

But, according to what we've said, privacy ≠ global adoption. So, for the sake of our wealth, should we make privacy techniques mandatory or is it too daring?

Global adoption and wealth are not necessarily the same thing. However, I'm going to choose privacy, and I've said as much before:

The day I can't spend my bitcoin without completing KYC is the day I trade all my bitcoin to monero, I'm afraid.

There is no requirement to sacrifice your privacy to use bitcoin, and the day I have to complete KYC simply to use my own wallet is the day I sell all my bitcoin.

So I'm happy to continue using bitcoin while I can be private and not trust third parties while doing so. I don't think that is going change and I think there will always be a way to use bitcoin privately, but if it does become impossible to use bitcoin without third parties sticking their noses in and telling me what I can and cannot spend my own money on, then for me bitcoin will have failed in what it set out to do. I would like to see some more privacy built in to the protocol - taproot gives a little more once people start using it en masse, Lightning also helps - but going for complete privacy like Monero will simply result in governments everywhere banning bitcoin or making it illegal to use outside an approved custodial third party or similar.

[GamblersArea]

Although Bitcoin is anonymous it's not private and I think it's better that way. The whole idea was to decentralize the currency while keeping it transparent.

Without transparency, Bitcoin would be the underground token of 'criminals' like the majority of unaware perceive it.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Global adoption and wealth are not necessarily the same thing.

They're not the same thing, but a global adoption of an asset you've bought early will increase your passive income. We all want global adoption firstly to be able to use it as a currency everywhere and secondly to be wealthier.

However, I'm going to choose privacy, and I've said as much before

If it ever becomes impossible to use bitcoin privately, what makes you think Monero will be the solution? Based on what we've said, you should never take Monero seriously.

I think you're falling into your own contradictions.