Monero terminated in Italy, along with other privacy coins

[carlfebz2]

It was supposed to be followed by all the countries. I remember after the 2018 significant altcoin season, there were countries popping up which was talking more against privacy coins. Well, it's not really possible to regulate privacy coins because of the nature of the txs. Maybe privacy coins will have an end due to regulation. It's going to be followed everywhere and I doubt with such regulation, people would simply use privacy coins to hide their financial activity.

Not really that totally been shocked with this news and its true that its been a while or going back into those several years earlier on which on the time that these full privacy coins had emerged specially that
XMR and ZCASH as far as i remember where it did really make out that kind of buzz in speaking about that fully anonymous since transactions cant really be able to trace up and this is something that government
doesnt really like on the first place and now having this kind of removal doesnt really give me some shock or even to those people who had been anticipating for this thing.

Government doesnt really like on things which cant be controlled or totally anonymous and since these platforms are heavily regulated or abiding government rules then for sure they would be simply be
that obeying on what the government been saying or trying out to impose. If there's some removal or delisting which it doesnt mean that its already over and we do have that other places
on which we can able to deal with if ever we do own one of those, this isnt only talking about Binance though.

[Kavelj22]

What caught my attention in the list of currencies is that there are no other currencies among them that have a high degree of privacy, such as the Grin currency, which was developed according to the famous mimblewimble protocol, like which we find the BEAM currency that uses the same protocol, but the BEAM currency has been canceled while Grin is still listed . Even the Litecoin currency, it had announced its merger with the mimblewimble protocol in order to become completely secure and maintain privacy, despite this, Litecoin is still listed on Binance.

That is because Litecoin MibleWimble implementation is opt-in, it is completely different from say like Monero or any other cryptocurrency where the implementation of the privacy mechanism is by-default.

Binance has known that blocks Litecoin's MimbleWimble transactions, take a look at https://www.binance.com/en/support/announcement/notice-on-deposits-and-withdrawals-of-litecoin-ltc-utilizing-mimblewimble-extension-blocks-mweb-61d4510b1ada4ba78b5384e8c2d3527c.

It is pretty clear the only reason they still list Litecoin is because of the nature of the privacy features implementations. Certainly, as a centralized body, they won't take a single bet to accept a strict and strong cryptocurrency that contains privacy features for any usage. They trying at their best to imitate any usage of transactions with a strong privacy technologies.

Thanks for these important clarifications regarding Litecoin. I am sure that the questions have crossed the minds of many, and I am almost certain that no one has seen that explanatory article from Binance after the MumbleWimble update. According to the article, it is not possible to make withdrawals or deposits using the new update because the addresses used cannot be verified. This confirms the general trend of the platform to abandon all privacy coins.

Any LTC deposits made to Binance through the MWEB function will not be received or returned as we are unable to verify the sender's address, resulting in the direct loss of funds. To ensure security of your funds, please do not deposit LTC through the MWEB function.

I would also like to point out that I made a mistake in my previous comment about Grin because after checking the markets, I found that Binance does not list it. In this way, it can be approved that Binance does not list any privacy coins on its market, meaning that the last privacy opportunities on the platform have been canceled forever.

[vv181]

They trying at their best to imitate any usage of transactions with a strong privacy technologies.

My autocorrect got the wrong word, I mean mitigate, not imitate.

Thanks for these important clarifications regarding Litecoin. I am sure that the questions have crossed the minds of many, and I am almost certain that no one has seen that explanatory article from Binance after the MumbleWimble update. According to the article, it is not possible to make withdrawals or deposits using the new update because the addresses used cannot be verified. This confirms the general trend of the platform to abandon all privacy coins.

I believe the decision that Litecoin trying to make is beneficial for its own ecosystem. There are some user who defies their decision due to an opt-in implementation of a privacy mechanism is meaningless, but looking at the bigger picture, Litecoin still be able to be listed on popular exchanges.

My take regarding the implementation is that the community playing on the safe side, they make it opt-in so centralized bodies like exchanges are still able to "control" it, and on the other hand, those who seek privacy are able to utilize the MimbleWimble transaction. It is a win-win solution.

[Kavelj22]

Thanks for these important clarifications regarding Litecoin. I am sure that the questions have crossed the minds of many, and I am almost certain that no one has seen that explanatory article from Binance after the MumbleWimble update. According to the article, it is not possible to make withdrawals or deposits using the new update because the addresses used cannot be verified. This confirms the general trend of the platform to abandon all privacy coins.

I believe the decision that Litecoin trying to make is beneficial for its own ecosystem. There are some user who defies their decision due to an opt-in implementation of a privacy mechanism is meaningless, but looking at the bigger picture, Litecoin still be able to be listed on popular exchanges.

My take regarding the implementation is that the community playing on the safe side, they make it opt-in so centralized bodies like exchanges are still able to "control" it, and on the other hand, those who seek privacy are able to utilize the MimbleWimble transaction. It is a win-win solution.

Litecoin is nothing but a light version of Bitcoin since it was launched according to the same protocol with the addition of modifications that distinguish it and make it work more efficiently. The biggest difference between the two networks is that Bitcoin is completely decentralized, including decision-making power over development. Whereas, Litecoin has the developer's decision-making authority to activate updates as it deems appropriate.

This appeared when the launch of the Segwit update was studied in the Bitcoin network in 2015, so that the update would be launched on the Litecoin network in what looked like a trial phase, and after its success, it was activated in 2017 on the Bitcoin network.

The same thing happened before the launch of the Lightning Network, as it was tested on the Litecoin network before being activated on the Bitcoin network.

Now we are dealing with the MimbleWimble update which is also scheduled to include the Bitcoin network and here is Litecoin supporting it on his network. I think it's a trial period, as usual, before it includes the Bitcoin blockchain.

[vv181]

Thanks for these important clarifications regarding Litecoin. I am sure that the questions have crossed the minds of many, and I am almost certain that no one has seen that explanatory article from Binance after the MumbleWimble update. According to the article, it is not possible to make withdrawals or deposits using the new update because the addresses used cannot be verified. This confirms the general trend of the platform to abandon all privacy coins.

I believe the decision that Litecoin trying to make is beneficial for its own ecosystem. There are some user who defies their decision due to an opt-in implementation of a privacy mechanism is meaningless, but looking at the bigger picture, Litecoin still be able to be listed on popular exchanges.

My take regarding the implementation is that the community playing on the safe side, they make it opt-in so centralized bodies like exchanges are still able to "control" it, and on the other hand, those who seek privacy are able to utilize the MimbleWimble transaction. It is a win-win solution.

~
This appeared when the launch of the Segwit update was studied in the Bitcoin network in 2015, so that the update would be launched on the Litecoin network in what looked like a trial phase, and after its success, it was activated in 2017 on the Bitcoin network.

The same thing happened before the launch of the Lightning Network, as it was tested on the Litecoin network before being activated on the Bitcoin network.

Now we are dealing with the MimbleWimble update which is also scheduled to include the Bitcoin network and here is Litecoin supporting it on his network. I think it's a trial period, as usual, before it includes the Bitcoin blockchain.

Litecoin is a fork of Bitcoin, so they are sharing a similar codebase. But that does not mean or imply any Bitcoin improvements are only or directly tested on Litecoin. Bitcoin developments do have a rigorous process and their own testing process.

In regard to MimbleWimble, as far as I know, there is not any plan that Bitcoin will implement the system. We can see on the bitcoin improvement proposal repository: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Abitcoin%2Fbips%20mimblewimble&type=code, that MW implementation does not exist.

The Bitcoin communities do already talking and discussing the MW implementation on Bitcoin but until today, we seem to haven't reached any conclusion on that developments.

[Kavelj22]

Thanks for these important clarifications regarding Litecoin. I am sure that the questions have crossed the minds of many, and I am almost certain that no one has seen that explanatory article from Binance after the MumbleWimble update. According to the article, it is not possible to make withdrawals or deposits using the new update because the addresses used cannot be verified. This confirms the general trend of the platform to abandon all privacy coins.

I believe the decision that Litecoin trying to make is beneficial for its own ecosystem. There are some user who defies their decision due to an opt-in implementation of a privacy mechanism is meaningless, but looking at the bigger picture, Litecoin still be able to be listed on popular exchanges.

My take regarding the implementation is that the community playing on the safe side, they make it opt-in so centralized bodies like exchanges are still able to "control" it, and on the other hand, those who seek privacy are able to utilize the MimbleWimble transaction. It is a win-win solution.

~
This appeared when the launch of the Segwit update was studied in the Bitcoin network in 2015, so that the update would be launched on the Litecoin network in what looked like a trial phase, and after its success, it was activated in 2017 on the Bitcoin network.

The same thing happened before the launch of the Lightning Network, as it was tested on the Litecoin network before being activated on the Bitcoin network.

Now we are dealing with the MimbleWimble update which is also scheduled to include the Bitcoin network and here is Litecoin supporting it on his network. I think it's a trial period, as usual, before it includes the Bitcoin blockchain.

Litecoin is a fork of Bitcoin, so they are sharing a similar codebase. But that does not mean or imply any Bitcoin improvements are only or directly tested on Litecoin. Bitcoin developments do have a rigorous process and their own testing process.

In regard to MimbleWimble, as far as I know, there is not any plan that Bitcoin will implement the system. We can see on the bitcoin improvement proposal repository: https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Abitcoin%2Fbips%20mimblewimble&type=code, that MW implementation does not exist.

The Bitcoin communities do already talking and discussing the MW implementation on Bitcoin but until today, we seem to haven't reached any conclusion on that developments.

According to the information available to me, even the previous updates in which Litecoin was preceded by Bitcoin, this was not within the framework of a plan from the developers. I mean, when we say that a trial period was with Litecoin before confirming its update on the Bitcoin network, it was in the form of diligence by the Litecoin developer team due to the similarities between the two networks.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/litecoin.asp

I've heard about upcoming updates being discussed that merge the Bitcoin network with the mimblewimble protocol, but this is not supposed to be done officially since both protocols are open source and any developer team can work on them.

It is likely that if the update succeeds with Litecoin, the discussion about merging it with Bitcoin will become more serious. Of course, this is supposed to be expected during an appropriate time that may extend to several years. In the end, all hypotheses are possible and nothing is certain just as nothing is impossible.

[vv181]

I've heard about upcoming updates being discussed that merge the Bitcoin network with the mimblewimble protocol, but this is not supposed to be done officially since both protocols are open source and any developer team can work on them.

That is the take. If it is not officially proposed/drafted in the bitcoin improvement proposals, it won't be implemented on Bitcoin.

It is likely that if the update succeeds with Litecoin, the discussion about merging it with Bitcoin will become more serious. Of course, this is supposed to be expected during an appropriate time that may extend to several years. In the end, all hypotheses are possible and nothing is certain just as nothing is impossible.

The MimbleWimble has been activated for more than a year in Litecoin network, and so far I did not see any problem with their network. But it is still, there is no progress in Bitcoin which mentions the MWEB implementation proposal. There is some discussion, but nothing serious. If you take a look at the bitcoin mailing list, mimblewimble is hardly being talked about.