IMO there is too much focus on 100% anonymity (not just here, but crypto in general) and I don't believe it is needed for a crypto to become mainstream for a number of reasons.
Let's see if everyone is still of that mind set when the governments are potentially expropriating every dime after 2017.
Anonymity is not only about moving money, but about being able to continue to do commerce when the government bans you from doing commerce, i.e. they regulate everything and we all become slaves to Facebook and Google.
As the Moneronistas often point out, it is also about fungibility to prevent coin blacklists, whitelists, and redlists.
However, I am hedging my bets which is why I have decided to make the anonymity orthogonal and let others implement my anonymity breakthrough. Because maybe it is possible that non-anonymous Knowledge Age can innovate so fast that the slow moving gubermint don't even understand what is going on even if it is not anonymous.
So let's do both. But let me work on the non-anonymous parts, so I can be out of harms way and push the coin in the mainstream channels. I already did the holy grail anonymity whitepaper, so I already made my career exclamation mark there.
But I will agree with you that enabling commerce is the highest priority. Everyone should be using crypto-coin when they use social networking. Bitcoin is scaling way too slowly for this to come to fruition fast enough to keep up with how fast the Knowledge Age is accelerating.I used to be of the same mindset, but came to a few conclusions that led to the realization that providing the anonymity was as good, or slightly better, than what Bitcoin offers, then there isn't any real point to spend large amounts of time chasing 100% it down. Of course, if a solution should show up right in front of your nose, then take advantage of it by all means, but I think you should consider following
1. There has to be a trade off at some point of anonymity vs some other factor. Be it the size of the transactions, the speed which they can be processed, or functionality limitations later on.
The trade-offs appear so far to have become insignificant in my designs, but let's wait for it all to come together with all the pedantic implementation issues, before we make final conclusions. You may end up being correct.
2. TPTB will fight against any crypto that is truly anonymous, preventing it to gain any significant mass market adoption with the usual rhetoric of drugs etc....
That might just make adoption grow faster. Let's not assume we know the state of the world as it wakes up to the reality that the world is in a massive default on $227 trillion of debt, $quadrillion of derivatives, defaulting socialism as a dying paradigm, and thus all profit opportunity moving into Knowledge Age work. Humans have a way of suddenly realize the tide is turning and they all move to the other side of the boat at once. That Minsky Moment could be upon us soon.
3. Nor will any infrastructure you need to build on allow you to use it to get it out there.
Base infrastructure is sorely lacking, such as Tor and I2P are not anonymous against national security agencies that can see all network packets. I invented a simple solution to this problem a couple of weeks ago. Was a spontaneous discovery when I was helping one of the Nxt developers.
4. The general public doesn't give 1 single thought to anonymity on a daily basis, most people don't care that the governments read their email/sms/web activities etc.
Ahem. Did you not see the applause that Rand Paul got on this point at the first Republican convention. It was the only point where he was resoundingly cheered.
The public is starting to wake up and we are in the early innings yet. When the government starts doing more shit like Spain fining you for taking a photo of a police car parked in a handicapped parking space, then the people start to smell a rat.
Anonymitys main purpose in a mass market targeted crypto IMO is to guard against criminals figuring out what you own and who you are, second to that is privacy.
Yes that too. And thus hiding all three of payer, payee, and values is beneficial, even if you do give your viewkey to the authorities to KYC compliant. But that assumes the rule of law doesn't entirely breakdown and the government is actually the criminals (which appears to be a potential outcome).
If mass market adoption is your goal, I would seriously consider the above because it WILL come and bite you in the ass if you don't implement it wisely.
The anonymity will be as orthogonal as possible if and when it gets done. People can choose if they want to use it or not.
On the other hand, if you simply want to take over the worlds black market, then full steam anon is the way to go
It is another market. Why not go after it, for as long as it is orthogonal. I am attempting in my design to make it impossible to control which format users want to use for transactions. Thus the government can't claim we put anonymity in the coin. The users did. They can put any feature they want in the coin. It will out-of-our-control. But wait to see if I can really achieve this. Some of these finer details I am still working through.