Isn't the Whole Point of Bitcoin to Avoid Gov Oversight?

[Quantum_Resolve7987V]

===============================================================
                     Newbie Question About Privacy
===============================================================

Hi everyone, 

I’m still pretty new to Bitcoin and I’ve been wondering
something about privacy. If Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be
anonymous, then why should the government have any business
knowing what I’m doing with my coins? 

I mean, Satoshi is (supposedly) sitting on hundreds of
Bitcoins and nobody knows who they are. If that’s possible
for them, then shouldn’t I also be able to hold and use
Bitcoin without anyone looking over my shoulder? 

Also, I’ve seen people talk about Monero. From what I’ve
heard, everyone already knows the only real reason to use
Monero is for tax evasion. If that’s the case, then why
wouldn’t Bitcoin just work the same way? Am I missing
something obvious here? 

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but I’m trying to
understand where the line really is between privacy and
regulation when it comes to Bitcoin. 

===============================================================

[EarnOnVictor]

I’m still pretty new to Bitcoin and I’ve been wondering
something about privacy. If Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be
anonymous, then why should the government have any business
knowing what I’m doing with my coins? 

Let us perish the idea that Bitcoin's transaction is anonymous, I guess many are mistaken privacy for anonymity. Of course, you can try to make your Bitcoin transactions to be anonymous, but will have to take extra steps before doing that, even as experts claims that nothing is 100% anonymous in Bitcoin transactions, but extra efforts like mixing/blending/tumbling can only increase its anonymity.

As for the government, no one should expect them to sit back and watch people use Bitcoin as they like without being accountable for their transactions. This is not so good for the economy, and the security concern is enormous. Even if Satoshi wanted it that way, so long as you are dealing with people to send and receive Bitcoin, you can be compromised and the government may still detect you. They also want to be involved for tax payments.

[knowngunman]

It's unnecessary to attach design to your post. For your information, just like EarnOnVictor said above, Bitcoin is not anonymous because the transaction can be seen and traced publicly. Although, a user can be anonymous behind the address but if they're using exchange, everything anonymous and privacy is gone.

Government is interested to know how you spend your coins because they are afraid you might use it to carry out illegal activities that may pose threat to society. No entity will be looking over your shoulder if you spend your coins in the appropriate manner and give them what they want from you (tax).

[rbynxx]

Reported this to be moved on Bitcoin Discussion board as it's appropriate there.

No it's not anonymous, it's pseudonymous. I think Satoshi have that in vision that to this day government intervention will be possible but what did the government done with your bitcoins specifically? Satoshi doesn't have only hundreds of bitcoins, he got a million of it. I don't think Monero was created to be used like that, you probably sourced the wrong information.

[AVE5]

I’m still pretty new to Bitcoin and I’ve been wondering
something about privacy. If Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be
anonymous, then why should the government have any business
knowing what I’m doing with my coins? 

I mean, Satoshi is (supposedly) sitting on hundreds of
Bitcoins and nobody knows who they are. If that’s possible
for them, then shouldn’t I also be able to hold and use
Bitcoin without anyone looking over my shoulder? 

Satoshi and the rest of them that holds largely number of bitcoins which has only been as Speculations but neither not verified of their portfolios is claimed that they acquired their assets when mining was very cheap and easier with higher rewards after block mines.
Then transaction was extremely done on p2p decentralized networks when there was no exchange services. And in as much as there had beenno connection with the wallets and the exchange that proves the users reality identity, Satoshi who had even never been revealed to anyone or authorities will always remain anonymous.
So if you also want to maintain such esteem of anonymity, then you must embrace decentlized networks that doesn't ask for Kyc and you must prioritize your connection with your assets on self custodial.

[Russlenat]

It’s misunderstood sometimes -- Bitcoin doesn’t promote full anonymity, it’s actually pseudonymous. Transactions can be seen on the blockchain, but they can’t be directly linked to the owner unless there’s already some connection made. That part really needs to be clarified, because a wrong understanding leads to wrong decisions.

And speaking of government, we’re living in a world where we’re required to follow the law of the land, which the government has created. Whether we like it or not, regulation is inevitable, even with Bitcoin. I honestly believe that if regulation never happened, Bitcoin would have been banned already.

[Ambatman]

Isn't the Whole Point of Bitcoin to Avoid Gov Oversight?

To answer your thread title. No,  Bitcoin was created to give self custody without reliance on a third party.

If Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be
anonymous,

Bitcoin wasn't created to be anonymous but pseudonymous hence it having some level of privacy
Not to forget it's a public ledger.

Satoshi is (supposedly) sitting on hundreds of
Bitcoins and nobody knows who they are

Because they have not been spent or linked with their real life information.
People only know the addresses not the person behind it, hence the word pseudonymous.

If that’s the case, then why
wouldn’t Bitcoin just work the same way?

That's because monero was built for privacy
While Bitcoin was built to be money. A decentralized payment method.

[Zlantann]

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but I’m trying to
understand where the line really is between privacy and
regulation when it comes to Bitcoin.  
===============================================================

As long as you live in a jurisdiction you would have to obey the laws set by the government. Bitcoin was created to promote privacy in financial transactions. But the government wants to control everything, including how people use their money. As the years go by, they are making regulations to reduce the pseudonymous use of Bitcoin.

We cannot fight the government because they have the authority to control almost everything within its jurisdiction. We can lobby our lawmakers to enact crypto-friendly laws and can also promote decentralised transactions. For now, we would have to enjoy privacy and decentralisation as long as it lasts because nobody is sure what the future holds.

[henry_of_skalitz]

It’s misunderstood sometimes -- Bitcoin doesn’t promote full anonymity, it’s actually pseudonymous. Transactions can be seen on the blockchain, but they can’t be directly linked to the owner unless there’s already some connection made. That part really needs to be clarified, because a wrong understanding leads to wrong decisions.

And speaking of government, we’re living in a world where we’re required to follow the law of the land, which the government has created. Whether we like it or not, regulation is inevitable, even with Bitcoin. I honestly believe that if regulation never happened, Bitcoin would have been banned already.

I agree.

It's secure, not private; there are other chains if the person wants full-on privacy-style coin, or wants his privacy secured.

[Luzin]

It’s misunderstood sometimes -- Bitcoin doesn’t promote full anonymity, it’s actually pseudonymous. Transactions can be seen on the blockchain, but they can’t be directly linked to the owner unless there’s already some connection made. That part really needs to be clarified, because a wrong understanding leads to wrong decisions.

And speaking of government, we’re living in a world where we’re required to follow the law of the land, which the government has created. Whether we like it or not, regulation is inevitable, even with Bitcoin. I honestly believe that if regulation never happened, Bitcoin would have been banned already.

That's right, I agree with you. Bitcoin is not completely anonymous. It is identified by the user's public key or address. Although the owner's real name is not known, once Bitcoin enters an exchange, it becomes easier to detect because exchanges implement KYC systems.

Regarding regulations, I believe Bitcoin is becoming stronger due to government regulations. Whether the government is benefiting from it or not, regulations enhance user trust. Therefore, more users are gaining confidence because of the regulations in place.

[peter0425]

I’m still pretty new to Bitcoin and I’ve been wondering
something about privacy. If Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be
anonymous, then why should the government have any business
knowing what I’m doing with my coins? 

They shouldn't but the truth is that we can no longer avoid the eyes of the government when bitcoin has grown this big. Whether we like it or not, the government has the power to make laws that will govern over us.

I mean, Satoshi is (supposedly) sitting on hundreds of
Bitcoins and nobody knows who they are. If that’s possible
for them, then shouldn’t I also be able to hold and use
Bitcoin without anyone looking over my shoulder? 

You can. The difference between you and Satoshi is that he has been careful with his tracks. You can still be anonymous only if you are careful and you won't leave tracks.

[hero_the_bossman]

It’s misunderstood sometimes -- Bitcoin doesn’t promote full anonymity, it’s actually pseudonymous. Transactions can be seen on the blockchain, but they can’t be directly linked to the owner unless there’s already some connection made. That part really needs to be clarified, because a wrong understanding leads to wrong decisions.

And speaking of government, we’re living in a world where we’re required to follow the law of the land, which the government has created. Whether we like it or not, regulation is inevitable, even with Bitcoin. I honestly believe that if regulation never happened, Bitcoin would have been banned already.

That's right, I agree with you. Bitcoin is not completely anonymous. It is identified by the user's public key or address. Although the owner's real name is not known, once Bitcoin enters an exchange, it becomes easier to detect because exchanges implement KYC systems.

Regarding regulations, I believe Bitcoin is becoming stronger due to government regulations. Whether the government is benefiting from it or not, regulations enhance user trust. Therefore, more users are gaining confidence because of the regulations in place.

Any CEX and all in between is the bane of your custody and privacy, and you agree to it while you enter such platform or go through KYC.

[Kruw]

Also, I’ve seen people talk about Monero. From what I’ve heard, everyone already knows the only real reason to use Monero is for tax evasion. If that’s the case, then why wouldn’t Bitcoin just work the same way? Am I missing something obvious here?  

You are correct, the only real reason to use Bitcoin is for tax evasion. But Bitcoin's privacy is executed differently than Monero's - Anonymous Bitcoin transactions are called "Coinjoins", and require specific wallets like Wasabi and JoinMarket to build them.

Here's an example of a large Wasabi coinjoin transaction: 93d31d3c51e48a5583ccdc2e9342e7c07c95531825c03e7dc6807cb27be48155

[Despairo]

Land, water, nature etc are supposed to be free, why we have to pay to get that?

It's the same like Bitcoin, it's a decentralized currency and it supposed to be free, but the government want to get the cake, hence they create any rules in order to get it e.g. tainted coins, taxes etc.

I haven't ever read Bitcoin was created to avoid government oversight, what I had ever read Bitcoin was created to get rid from banks.

[348Judah]

I’m trying to understand where the line really is between privacy and
regulation when it comes to Bitcoin. 

Privacy talks more about the way you appear been anonymous and difficult to be tracked, in bitcoin network, we needed our privacy in other to be able to perform its transaction without anyone seeing and been able to trace everything to us, despite the blockchain technology is an open distributed ledger, we can still achieve maximum privacy if we want to be more left unseen by the public and traced down to our identity, we have to be more careful of the exchange we use, the wallet type we use, while regulations are the actual means the government or any other authority and institution may use to penetrate into our personal information causing data leakage.

[BitGoba]

===============================================================
                     Newbie Question About Privacy
===============================================================

Hi everyone, 

I’m still pretty new to Bitcoin and I’ve been wondering
something about privacy. If Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be
anonymous, then why should the government have any business
knowing what I’m doing with my coins? 

I mean, Satoshi is (supposedly) sitting on hundreds of
Bitcoins and nobody knows who they are. If that’s possible
for them, then shouldn’t I also be able to hold and use
Bitcoin without anyone looking over my shoulder? 

Also, I’ve seen people talk about Monero. From what I’ve
heard, everyone already knows the only real reason to use
Monero is for tax evasion. If that’s the case, then why
wouldn’t Bitcoin just work the same way? Am I missing
something obvious here? 

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but I’m trying to
understand where the line really is between privacy and
regulation when it comes to Bitcoin. 

===============================================================

Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be money a digital peer-to-peer cash system. Money has three main use cases medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account.

Medium of exchange means that money serves as a tool people use to exchange goods and services. Instead of directly trading items (like in a barter system), they use money as a “middleman” in transactions. For example, instead of giving one kilogram of honey in exchange for ten eggs, you sell the honey for money, and then use that money to buy the eggs. This makes trading easier, faster, and more efficient.

The second function of money is as a store of value. This means that money can be saved and retrieved in the future, maintaining its value over time. People can hold onto money today and use it later without losing purchasing power, allowing them to plan and save for future needs.

Unit of account Money serves as a common standard for measuring the value of goods and services, which allows people to easily compare prices.

If you use Bitcoin as money and a medium of exchange, you can have a high level of privacy because the money circulates within the economy. For example you buy meat from the butcher, the butcher spends Bitcoin to buy bread from the baker, the baker buys fuel at the gas station, and the gas station owner pays for lunch at a restaurant. This way, Bitcoin anonymously circulates through the economy.

However, if you use Bitcoin for speculation  aiming to make more fiat currency by trading on exchanges  then your privacy is significantly reduced, because transactions on exchanges are linked to your personal information

[mindrust]

There isn't one use case for bitcoin. Different people might find different use cases. Some people don't care about privacy at all. They only need a good performing asset and so far bitcoin has accomplished this perfectly. Some don't even want to own it physically or even on an exchange. They just invest in bitcoin ETF's.

Some on the other hand hodl physical bitcoin in cold wallets because they want to be financially sovereign. "be your own bank" kind of stuff.

Some use it to buy stuff or make international transactions, so trade it, some build a business on it  and so on. As you see there are multiple use cases.

Since bitcoin provide some kind of anonymity too, some people may want to use btc for that purpose too.

[Findingnemo]

Bitcoin is meant to be a decentralized network not an anonymous one, you should know the difference between in these two then only you can get the essence of this discussion.

We can send or receive bitcoin using the bitcoin address which is nothing but alphanumeric data and you can't track much of someone's personal info with these and satoshi hasn't moved the coins anywhere so it's private but the moment he uses any centralized platform and moves coins from one of his address,es then he may even be exposing himself.

You can have privacy to an extent with bitcoin as long as you are avoiding the KYC and centralized platforms but it neve meant to be privacy focused chain.

[bullbandit9]

Satoshi designed Bitcoin to be money a digital peer-to-peer cash system. Money has three main use cases medium of exchange, store of value, and unit of account.

Good, but those are mostly not relevant at all to the discussion of this thread.

If you use Bitcoin as money and a medium of exchange, you can have a high level of privacy because the money circulates within the economy. For example you buy meat from the butcher, the butcher spends Bitcoin to buy bread from the baker, the baker buys fuel at the gas station, and the gas station owner pays for lunch at a restaurant. This way, Bitcoin anonymously circulates through the economy.

Not necessarily. If you acquired the Bitcoin the way that most people acquire it which is using centralized exchanges, then using it as money and a medium of exchange does not give you any privacy. These features of money are independent from privacy. They don't require privacy and they don't guarantee it. If you use Bitcoin in ways that preserve privacy, only then can you retain your privacy. This will exclude you from most commercial activity. Anywhere you have to provide a name or delivery address, your privacy is already gone.

I haven't ever read Bitcoin was created to avoid government oversight, what I had ever read Bitcoin was created to get rid from banks.

Anyway there is no way to get away from government oversight. Even Monero which is very private and anonymous is being surveilled all the time. That does not mean that the surveillance works, but the oversight is always there. Oversight could only disappear with the disappearance of governments.

[Obim34]

Any CEX and all in between is the bane of your custody and privacy, and you agree to it while you enter such platform or go through KYC.

For someone not doing something illegal with Bitcoin, why be filled up with reasons to be anonymous using Bitcoin, clearly no one is ready to track down your wallets spending, down to the CEX you use, for hard reasons will CEX accept giving out your informations, so there is still privacy and anonymity in Bitcoin. I see Bitcoin advantages far beyond maintaining anonymous, Bitcoin is an investment opportunity, this is the major reason for current adoption.