Topic: Is anonymity the future for bitcoin??? - page 8. (Read 1138 times)

anonymous is the great thing in one side and bad thing in other side, for the user of bitcoin anonymously its mean that the transaction that they make is secure and nobody know about it, but in other side it will makes the government think about the criminals that happen because of the anonymity of bitcoin, and this is makes some country in the world is banned bitcoin

Anonymity now makes people think negative is money laundering, so to be transparent for Bitcoin we need to show the activity clear and honest.

all i'm saying is that it wouldn't have inflated the supply. we already had a bug like this many years ago with an overflow bug which i believe some miner by accident created a block that created a gigantic amount of new coins instead of giving him 50BTC+fees! the bug was caught and since there was an alert system in place back then and the network was small everyone was alerted fast and the bug was fixed while invalidating that block.

as for "anon" coins which i believe that is what you mean by "private or non-transparent" blockchains they also have certain consensus rules checking these things. it wouldn't be impossible to detect invalid blocks like this in an anon coin like Monero for instance. otherwise they wouldn't have worked at all in first place. which is why i said this is off-topic.

In a way yes, but I dont think anonymity isn't  good thing it leads to black market sales and illegal transactions. so there are many more cons than pros to anonymity.

The focus now for bitcoin is what to do in an overloaded environment. It is clear that transaction speeds needed to be improved and the fees lowered. For privacy there is monero and zcash which will attract the darker crowd

Not entirely, because it serves as a point to make a debate against an "anonymous" and "private" Bitcoin.

But for you, ok. I will start another topic about it or ask some developers.


Hahaha. Thanks.

I think anonymity is a dilemma for bitcoin, because on one hand anonymity makes an opportunity to obscure transactions, but on the other hand, if it isn't made anonymous, then our data is vulnerable to being hacked and misused

No, because there are other cryptocurrency which focused on anonymity and fungibility such as Monero. Besides, most privacy (or other fancy) features would be rejected by majority of the community due to scalability trade-off.

But, there's few Bitcoin technology/features which could improve anonymity such as CoinJoin, Schnorr, MAST and LN without much scalability trade-off, in fact some of them improve scalability problem.
This article (https://bitcoinmagazine.com/articles/bitcoin-privacycoin-tech-making-bitcoin-more-private/) should give you good insight.

Here you can look from two sides. The first is that the set of digits and letters is already anonymous. The other side is that everyone can see this set of numbers and letters. This is what we have now, this is a golden middle, something between anonymity and openness.

I dont think anonymity is the advantages of bitcoin. Right now many coin with anonymity features like monero coin. Bitcoin advatages is on network security and its already proven for many years.

True. This the answer to your question.

Look there is not much information in the blockchain but just an Address. You still do not know who the guy is. Maybe if he did sign a message with his information then you can track him easily but not much does that. They still prefer to be hidden.

Exchanges though like Coinbase provides knows some people who uses address for they need to sign up with full info. But there is still a law of privacy so you cannot just get it from them.

Regarding the anonimity. It is already enough to stay private.

finally some great thought from wind_fury
you have definitely earned 10 merit for this

i may add some points to the 'consequences' and explain the 'simply works'
some privacy concepts being discussed by devs are to hide the VALUE being moved.
this alone can make bitcoin UNauditable and thus challenge the point of a transparent trustable chain where people can see that coins at Z are real because they can be seen right back through the chain back to their original mined block A
many dont care about WHO.. but they still want to clearly and simply know the coins have a clear visible path from A-Z

these privacy codes actually add bytes of data to a transaction and only work when multiple parties mix funds. meaning its not only a bloated multisg transaction. but a multisig with extra bloat for the value privacy.
which means less transactions per hard drive space. which is not an optimisation of transactions vs space. but a de-optimisation

then theres the fact of adding too many features to something that should just be about send A to B. that it opens up risks of bugs where certain checks are not instantly done because theres just so many checks to do. thus causing risks by skipping a check initially to attempt to optimise relay speed, and do checks after. that then cause bugs of their own

as windfury said. if you want privacy that your name wont get attached to a transaction on the chain that you do not want seen. use other services/networks that do not publish details that need to be checked.

bitcoin is about checking and validating data. if we stop checking and validating data. then blockchains become pointless

With this anonymous account, there are many concerns in some countries in the world to ban cryptocurrency because they have the opportunity to commit criminal acts, this is the reason for many countries that prohibit cryptocurrency, even though they record every transaction on the blockchain but cannot find out their true identity.

this is entirely off-topic here since it has nothing to do with the anonymity subject being discussed.

as for the "attack", don't forget that any block that used this vulnerability would have been an invalid block. the problem was simply that certain versions of bitcoin core nodes were not verifying blocks for detecting this particular problem so they accepted it as valid. but that  doesn't make the supply inflate, it just made those nodes go on a fork and start an altcoin.

I believe the latest bug, that would have made an "attacking miner" inflate the coin supply, proves that the Bitcoin's transparency and auditability on the base layer is the best.

If a hacker exploited a bug that would inflate the coin supply of a "private blockchain", how would the developers tell if there were 1 coin or 1 billion coins inflated in the total supply?

Bitcoin has a future as digital asset/investments and digital currency which will be regulated just like other assets and investments

Anonymity is certainly a point in Bitcoin's favour, but at what point does anonymity become a novelty? At the end of the day, unless you are involved with something shady, anonymity doesn't really matter, does it? Although, on principal, it is a good and noble feature.

Anonymity is not a concern for bitcoin at the moment and there is other better option already available for private transactions. Next move for bitcoin will be the more precise scalability so that the network does not get congested when demands get high. Also to reduce the transaction fees as low as possible.

OP, I believe not, not for a network as mature as Bitcoin. Changing the rules now to make it more "anonymous" and "private" would have consequences.

The Bitcoin blockchain's transparency has its advantages too. It proves, with our own eyes, and without trusting that some privacy technology "simply works", that the ledger is balanced and auditable.

Adding more anonymity and privacy might also attract government agencies to discourage it more, or make more unfavorable laws against using it.

Plus if the Core developers truly wanted a more "private Bitcoin", then maybe do it off-chain, in the Lightning Network. But leave the blockchain alone.

A possible next step for Bitcoin is Schnorr signatures which may indeed add some more privacy. Unfortunately I don't really know more details and I didn't find yet a source easy to read and understand and still with all the information (but I just started digging).