Quote from Hazard on Cryptolife
"Ever since coinvalidation was announced at the end of last year, it ignited a spark within the community to work on furthering anonymity within the bitcoin protocol. 3 months later, we have a few working samples. Do they actually solve the problem though? First, it might help to define what the problem is.
First off, there’s the issue of maintaining fungibility. Imagine going to the store and being told you can’t spend your money because at some point in the past, it was used in a drug deal. That’s exactly what the goal of coinvalidation is. Governments and other entities would be all over this sort of thing if it ever came to fruition, so it’s a very real threat. Since a currency can not functionally exist without fungibility, coinvalidation seeks to essentially destroy bitcoin in order to make a quick buck. To counter this threat, their data must be poisoned. This involves conducting transactions in such a way that sources and destinations of coins are muddied. "
Are we making sure NEM doesn't have to worry about this?
"Ever since coinvalidation was announced at the end of last year, it ignited a spark within the community to work on furthering anonymity within the bitcoin protocol. 3 months later, we have a few working samples. Do they actually solve the problem though? First, it might help to define what the problem is.
First off, there’s the issue of maintaining fungibility. Imagine going to the store and being told you can’t spend your money because at some point in the past, it was used in a drug deal. That’s exactly what the goal of coinvalidation is. Governments and other entities would be all over this sort of thing if it ever came to fruition, so it’s a very real threat. Since a currency can not functionally exist without fungibility, coinvalidation seeks to essentially destroy bitcoin in order to make a quick buck. To counter this threat, their data must be poisoned. This involves conducting transactions in such a way that sources and destinations of coins are muddied. "
Are we making sure NEM doesn't have to worry about this?
Is this already been talked about? Is this nothing to worry about? Anyone?
I'm not really worried either way. TBH I really fail to see the point of trying to increase anonymity. I get the logic for it, but also worry that it will hurt cryptocurrency's success and adoption over all. For example the big MtGox heist gave crypto a bad reputation among the uneducated public that it must now fight to win back. Whatever solution would really help NEM become an actual crytocurrency rather that just a crypto-commodity would be the best course in my opinion.
I don't really care about anonymity either. I just want to make sure it's not needed. Is what Hazard is talking about a possibility? Governments taking coins from people?
I did not get listed... 