Is this the kind of world you want to live in? [read] - page 2.

legiteum

member

Activity: 140

Merit: 43

Quote from: Cryptomultiplier on January 09, 2024, 04:24:29 PM

[...]
Still, I think the concept of Bitcoin as a currency of privacy is recently being tweaked to be in favor of mostly the government and elite wealth class.
[...]

Bitcoin has a public ledger, so I really don't see how it could have ever really been conceived as a "currency of privacy". Physical cash is still way, way more private than Bitcoin etc.

Cryptomultiplier

full member

Activity: 770

Merit: 180

Eloncoin.org - Mars, here we come!

I would like to firstly point us to countries that have adopted Bitcoin as a legal tender and thoroughly scrutinize why and how the government gains from its implementation.
England is one clear country that has accepted Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies as a means of payment for transactions. Of course the network is being regulated and controlled to a minimum as you can imagine.

Still, I think the concept of Bitcoin as a currency of privacy is recently being tweaked to be in favor of mostly the government and elite wealth class.
If they fail to acknowledge the least owners or traders of Satoshis, find a way to tax the system and hike fees to extremities, they would have only failed to make it an optional asset to own or invest in, because to us who have seen the light, we would find a way to make it work in our favor, even if it means that developers would fork the system or initiatives would be implemented to ensure that the original idea of privacy and to some degree, anonymity is guaranteed.

Orpichukwu

sr. member

Activity: 504

Merit: 320

Quote from: Pikachi42 on January 09, 2024, 07:21:32 AM

Every country's government tries to collect taxes from all kinds of transactions. As we use Bitcoin for various services, the government will try to tax it. In that case, the government can take some steps in this regard. As a result, the use of Bitcoin will be threatened.

The country government you are talking about can't come into your private wallet, which you have full control over, and start taxing them unless you give them the chance to do that. How do you give them the chance to tax you and control your coins? It's by taking your holdings into centralised exchanges or platforms that are being regulated by the government, which wants to tax you, and when you make any trade, they have to send your financial record to your government, which means your government knows how much you hold and how much you are expected to pay as tax when it's due.

You can prevent all of this and control it if you don't link your holdings to your name and to any regulatory body. Always try as much as you can to protect your privacy, as you can use a private wallet you have full control of, and stop selling out your control to third parties. The safety and survival of bitcoin will start with us, the holders.

legiteum

member

Activity: 140

Merit: 43

Quote from: jennykim512 on January 09, 2024, 03:27:38 PM

This cautionary scenario vividly underscores the importance of preserving the core principles of Bitcoin - decentralization and privacy. [...]

Privacy? Bitcoin puts every transaction on a public ledger. That's about as [n]un[/b]private as you can get, IMHO.

For me, there are two ways people use the word, "private". One is "private" from companies, marketers, criminals, and maybe your own family

.

The other definition is "private" from your government, e.g. for criminal activity.

GMail is the first kind of "private", because it's absolutely private unless there is a court order. In practical terms, most people probably consider their GMail messages as private as they need it to be.

Peer-to-peer networks attempt to accomplish the second kind of "private", but again I'm not sure Bitcoin in particular really does.

***

As for "decentralized", that's a technical implementation detail, not a feature...

jennykim512

newbie

Activity: 5

Merit: 0

Quote from: NotATether on January 08, 2024, 01:26:03 PM

Every day, we are using Bitcoin to buy goods and services, and also to receive money in return for goods and services from others.

We can send money anywhere around the world, without having to pay expensive fees* which have been set by a money transmitter.

But what if it wasn't like this?

What if we were no longer allowed to store bitcoin ourselves, and be forced to leave them on an approved exchange or bank our-services/bathroom-fitting-bathroom-renovation/)?

What if we needed to submit identify verification every time we wanted to create an address?

What if lobbyists successfully split Bitcoin into two partitions - the restricted walled garden, and the rest of the world?

What if people in charge could set an arbitrarily high fee for anyone who wanted to make a transaction?

It's not so much about killing bitcoin, than it is controlling it. We are sleepwalking our way into a dystopia where Bitcoin is no longer "A Peer-To-Peer Digital Currency". Banks want their share of the pie, and with Bitcoin inevitably becoming a large force to reckon with, they will seek any way to get a share of it. So they will pay lobbyists to advocate rules that make it difficult for the normal person to use Bitcoin, while making even stricter tax reporting requirements when selling bitcoin. Sure, one may say it's the IRS collecting taxes, but then again, the government bails the banks out, time and time again. So what we have is "bitcoiners funding banks" indirectly.

Never allow this to happen, and you can do it by supporting privacy, wherever it exists.

Crypto privacy is the last weapon you have against financial corruption.

*If not mainnet, then Lightning Network.

This cautionary scenario vividly underscores the importance of preserving the core principles of Bitcoin - decentralization and privacy. The prospect of centralized control, mandatory identification, and exorbitant fees threatens the essence of a peer-to-peer digital currency. It is crucial for the community to stand vigilant against any attempts to compromise these principles. Supporting privacy features in cryptocurrencies becomes not just a matter of personal preference, but a defense mechanism against potential financial dystopia and undue influence from traditional institutions. Let's ensure that the promise of a decentralized and accessible financial system remains intact for the benefit of all.

cryptosize

sr. member

Activity: 1624

Merit: 294

Are people willing to fight the Great Reset?

And I mean all aspects of it, not just point A or B...

criptoevangelista

sr. member

Activity: 280

Merit: 543

In ₿ we trust

This is a very interesting question.

I see that many consider bitcoin to be a volatile asset, completely dismissing all the fundamentals behind it all.

It's a shame that the vast majority still haven't truly understood the power of bitcoin and the liberating power it can bring to you and your family, goes far beyond purchasing power...

It's about freedom: one of the most valuable things a human being can have.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on January 09, 2024, 11:05:22 AM

Quote from: NotATether on January 08, 2024, 10:30:15 PM

It is still hawkish in banning privacy coins, banning mixers, etc.

Maybe I'm wrong on this, but there is no official regulation that makes it blatantly clear the EU is hostile to Monero (AKA, the only truly private coin). It's just centralized exchanges voluntarily de-listing it, similar as to how theymos prohibited the promotion of mixers. But, again; I may be wrong.

go to mica link, use the [find in page] option of browser and type in "anonymisation"

mica
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32023R1114
chapter 3 - article 76 - 2&3

Quote

2. Before admitting a crypto-asset to trading, crypto-asset service providers operating a trading platform for crypto-assets shall ensure that the crypto-asset complies with the operating rules of the trading platform and shall assess the suitability of the crypto-asset concerned. When assessing the suitability of a crypto-asset, the crypto-asset service providers operating a trading platform shall evaluate, in particular, the reliability of the technical solutions used and the potential association to illicit or fraudulent activities, taking into account the experience, track record and reputation of the issuer of those crypto-assets and its development team.

3. The operating rules of the trading platform for crypto-assets shall prevent the admission to trading of crypto-assets that have an inbuilt anonymisation function unless the holders of those crypto-assets and their transaction history can be identified by the crypto-asset service providers operating a trading platform for crypto-assets.

took me 30seconds to search that

they dont mention monero specifically but monero is put into a special category of crypto assets called privacy coins or more officially AEC
(anonymity enhanced currency)

legiteum

member

Activity: 140

Merit: 43

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on January 09, 2024, 11:05:22 AM

I disagree. Legislation can bypass it. Currently, they're trying to control bitcoin via legislation (e.g., KYC). If it ever becomes illegal to transact peer-to-peer, and you need to hold everything on a fully regulated KYC-ed exchange, it won't matter if the cryptocurrency is private.

I hate to say this, but the only way to fight back legislation is by itself. That means, voting for politicians that are against this crypto dystopia.

I've been trying to say the same thing throughout this thread as well.

The good news is that investors don't care about this, and invest in cryptos anyhow as a pure speculation instrument. It's not about "freedom", it's about buying low and selling high.

TheUltraElite

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1253

Call your grandparents and tell them you love them

Quote from: sokani on January 08, 2024, 06:45:59 PM

Who knows? Maybe in the future, they'll extinct DEXs and force the KYC CEXs on us because they want to exert control over us.

But if we continue to think about such pessimistic and negative things, only we are the ones who are going to suffer.

It is a human tendency to be pessimistic and see bad things happen while maybe in your lifetime you would never actually encounter these problems at all. Who knows we may not even live that long to see bitcoin become the natural means of transaction and we are already talking about governments and banks taking everything over.

Instead my point remains same, collect bitcoin, use it if you wish, reap the profit and enjoy your lives instead of making up conspiracy theories or adding fuel to the same.

These things only lead to mental agony and the current average mental state of any person, we dont want that to worsen further.

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: NotATether on January 08, 2024, 10:30:15 PM

It is still hawkish in banning privacy coins, banning mixers, etc.

Maybe I'm wrong on this, but there is no official regulation that makes it blatantly clear the EU is hostile to Monero (AKA, the only truly private coin). It's just centralized exchanges voluntarily de-listing it, similar as to how theymos prohibited the promotion of mixers. But, again; I may be wrong.

Don't get me wrong. I very much believe the EU will try to hunt it down as much as possible (even if censorship in Monero isn't possible), but at the moment I just observe exchanges de-listing it as precaution.

Quote from: NotATether on January 08, 2024, 01:26:03 PM

Crypto privacy is the last weapon you have against financial corruption.

I disagree. Legislation can bypass it. Currently, they're trying to control bitcoin via legislation (e.g., KYC). If it ever becomes illegal to transact peer-to-peer, and you need to hold everything on a fully regulated KYC-ed exchange, it won't matter if the cryptocurrency is private.

I hate to say this, but the only way to fight back legislation is by itself. That means, voting for politicians that are against this crypto dystopia.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: famososMuertos on January 09, 2024, 10:05:08 AM

Bitcoin has a great intangible strength in its community, which is trust,

no
bitcoin was not made to need trust. it was built to verify without the need to trust anyone

however it has become a system where we now need to trust the core devs, because they dont want to be scrutinised or veto'd
we have to trust that their sponsors are not doing deals for money in exchange for code edits. because these sponsors wont disclose their payments as its "commercially sensitive"
we have to trust exchanges/services that offer custodianships. they wont prove reserve holdings nor their source code because its "commercially sensitive"

we are not in the same era of bitcoin as 2009-2013, many things have changed

famososMuertos

legendary

Activity: 1736

Merit: 2748

LE ☮︎ Halving es la purga

Bitcoin has a great intangible strength in its community, which is trust, but it is not manifested in action to a united collective outside of individual interests.

The power is held by the governments, the establishment, but the force of change is in the unified thought of action, and more than 14 years have passed and it has not been achieved, everyone who gets to know bitcoin is only interested in one thing "to moon ", he doesn't care if the premises of bitcoin are lost.

kryptqnick

legendary

Activity: 3094

Merit: 1385

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Some countries choose to be strict toward Bitcoin, and it's up to people in those countries to change that if they care enough to do that. Overall, I think we're still far from the world the op is describing as a dystopian future. Centralized entities like exchanges demand KYC, but there are other options. And non-custodial wallets are perfectly legal, as they should be. I don't think there are strong arguments for outlawing them, and I couldn't find articles that would support the idea that such a ban is something that can actually happen in major Western economies.

Familian

newbie

Activity: 24

Merit: 4

As a bitcoiner for which privacy is the bedrock of bitcoin at times when you sit down to meditate on the sudden chilly reactions of the SEC to the approval of the bitcoin ETF you just stand in utmost confusion either to be happy or sad at the same time. The institutional take over is alarming and suspicious and truly the only weapon to the distabilisation to this underground centralized crusade of taker-over against decentralisation is the use of decentralized platforms by bitcoiners. kyc is a bastard and an enemy of financial freedom and privacy.

so98nn

hero member

Activity: 2072

Merit: 603

Oh yeah, just by reading the entire post I started feeling anxious. Lolz. Nah, I do not want anyone else to control my Bitcoins. Honestly not at this point when I have created such an extensive portfolio by working hard for it. Whether it is simple signature campaigns selling my Pencil artwork or getting paid in BTC from my mod job on other forums, I have managed to create multiple streams of BTC income. I like it, I like it when I see a pop-up from my wallet, there is an incoming transaction or broadcast.

That is a crazy feeling I do not want to lose for some shitty centralization. If we wanted to live like that then, we already have the fiat system to give a feel for it. So no thank you. Bitcoin should prosper in terms of its technology and I hope most of the population understand how holding it on an individual level can help maintain its integrity and decentralization.

Pikachi42

newbie

Activity: 28

Merit: 0

Every country's government tries to collect taxes from all kinds of transactions. As we use Bitcoin for various services, the government will try to tax it. In that case, the government can take some steps in this regard. As a result, the use of Bitcoin will be threatened.

Mauser

hero member

Activity: 1694

Merit: 516

Quote from: NotATether on January 08, 2024, 01:26:03 PM

But what if it wasn't like this?

What if we were no longer allowed to store bitcoin ourselves, and be forced to leave them on an approved exchange or bank?

What if we needed to submit identify verification every time we wanted to create an address?

What if lobbyists successfully split Bitcoin into two partitions - the restricted walled garden, and the rest of the world?

What if people in charge could set an arbitrarily high fee for anyone who wanted to make a transaction?

The question I ask myself is how could something like that happen? Who would force all those rules upon us, and who would make sure that all those rules are enforced? I definitely wouldn't want to live in a world like that and would probably stop using my bitcoins very quickly. In case I don't have any influence in stopping bitcoin becoming only used by approved exchanges or banks, then my only alternative would be to not use them at all. The coins I already have I would keep spending, because I don't want to lose any money. But I just wouldn't start acquiring any new coins. Only if large number of consumers retreat from from the market we could push for the changes to be reverted.

God bless u

full member

Activity: 280

Merit: 110

Eloncoin.org - Mars, here we come!

Quote from: NotATether on January 08, 2024, 01:26:03 PM

Every day, we are using Bitcoin to buy goods and services, and also to receive money in return for goods and services from others.

We can send money anywhere around the world, without having to pay expensive fees* which have been set by a money transmitter.

But what if it wasn't like this?

What if we were no longer allowed to store bitcoin ourselves, and be forced to leave them on an approved exchange or bank?

What if we needed to submit identify verification every time we wanted to create an address?

What if lobbyists successfully split Bitcoin into two partitions - the restricted walled garden, and the rest of the world?

What if people in charge could set an arbitrarily high fee for anyone who wanted to make a transaction?

It's not so much about killing bitcoin, than it is controlling it. We are sleepwalking our way into a dystopia where Bitcoin is no longer "A Peer-To-Peer Digital Currency". Banks want their share of the pie, and with Bitcoin inevitably becoming a large force to reckon with, they will seek any way to get a share of it. So they will pay lobbyists to advocate rules that make it difficult for the normal person to use Bitcoin, while making even stricter tax reporting requirements when selling bitcoin. Sure, one may say it's the IRS collecting taxes, but then again, the government bails the banks out, time and time again. So what we have is "bitcoiners funding banks" indirectly.

Never allow this to happen, and you can do it by supporting privacy, wherever it exists.

Crypto privacy is the last weapon you have against financial corruption.

*If not mainnet, then Lightning Network.

The fact that every "What if" you mentioned is completely true about fiat money proves that you are absolutely correct about Protecting our privacy and freedom of using Bitcoin at any cost.
Govt and banks are already controlling every aspect of Fiat money. you literally can't freely use that at this point making it even more necessary that we keep Bitcoin as it is supposed to be.
But their influence is increasing day by day. they are taking over privacy of bitcoin everyday in name of regulation.

KiaKia

sr. member

Activity: 658

Merit: 384

I have said this too many times before that Bitcoin adopters are using Bitcoin wrong, we can see how many times Bitcoin investors have surrendered their BTC into the hands of centralized exchange, I have never liked this idea in the first place and sometime I have thoughts about what could have been better.

I once thought about what would have happen if Satoshi created a means of exchange for Bitcoin that's not in control of anyone, and also fully decentralized? Maybe this would have control people for the better? Yeah nothing is perfect and we learn as time goes on.

I believe that the problem of Bitcoin is the adopters, they are the ones giving the centralized entities power of them and Bitcoin, if you are using something that's decentralized in a centralized way it's no more decentralized.

Topic: Is this the kind of world you want to live in? [read] - page 2. (Read 486 times)