Topic: Privacy should be fought for - page 3. (Read 624 times)

one option WAS to stop being reliant on central services.. with the whole DEX and DEFI stuff..
..but guess what because still being "currency" jurisdiction. politics just add more rules. where instead of licencing CEX they want to licence DEX. this is with new laws where not just businesses but people operating as sole traders(self employed 1 employee businesses) offereing services of custodian/trade on behalf of other users for a fee/commission are now having to register as money service businesses and follow compliance policies. where they have to set up business level bank accounts to serve customers.

some people think "how will they find all these DEX individuals" the answer is simple follow the fiat.they are already making rules where if banks see people using personal accounts(not business accounts) to do lots of wire transfers far above what a normal account holder does. it becomes a suspicious flag

the same goes for those that avoid bank account fiat transfers and instead use paypal/venmo. they too are getting monitored by their staff more harshly to spot lots of deposit/withdrawals to declare them as possible businesses using personal accounts. flagging them

we seen this mostly happen in localbitcoins.com but now starting to see it with users using DEX/DEFI platforms

and yes altnets like LN where routing is the "person who offers payment services for a commission" apply to those too

.. the next strategy WAS to avoid actual fiat and just DEFI/DEX exchange between btc and stablecoin

kind of works. as it does not require asking for account holders real name to verify account ownership. which is why LN is trying to add stablecoins to its 'atomic swap' capability

but over all to escape the regulations. is to avoid:
services that regulators are interested in.
running services in countries where regulations are applicable
or
get bitcoin redefined back to "property" status. which gives us back better legal protection rights..

there are reasons why regulators want to grab onto having jurisdiction of stable coins.

there are issues with trying to convince governments to redefine bitcoin back to being just a "property"

and so the option is to have services set up in countries that have yet to define/ban/licence bitcoin services

This is inevitable and something that we cant really able to avoid as long we do touch up fiat money or speaking about conversions, then we can really expect that everything would really be that touched by the

government which is simply through those exchangers since this one is the main or medium for those crypto people to make out conversions and even how decentralized a certain crypto coin would be but on the

time that you do touch up these platforms then the privacy that you are really that fighting for would totally be useless, or on the time you had sent out your documents.
DEX and Mixers would really do the job on some point as long it doesnt touches up fiat conversions.

The "Privacy" is given voluntarily to a bank, it's a requirement(1)... For advanced bitcoin users anonymity is true privacy, anonymity is acquired in bitcoin without requirements, but most non-advanced users don't understand that the use of bitcoin gives anonymity to the extent that your privacy (provided¹) does not affect the anonymity of bitcoin.

And the issue is so difficult because we have ceded or surrendered our privacy by obligation for so many years that it turns out that the anonymity of each bitcoin user who is not affected today must weigh this idea that at any time it is subject to public scrutiny.

Privacy is live and I mean genuine privacy, and this is how it was meant to be if Satoshi had a textbook about Bitcoin.
The main issue now affecting Bitcoin privacy is how we use it. Many exchanges, websites, betting apps, trading platforms, online stores, and others are accepting Bitcoin, and we as enthusiasts are making use of them.
Some of these services may have comprised in terms of their users privacy just to get licensed.

I would not blame the privacy protection of Bitcoin for that. I am also from a country with issues on Crypto-currency but I get through all that by knowing the platforms I am engaging in Crypto-currency. The government is trying to truncate Crypto-currency users the more reason we need to work smart.

but thats not by finding out someone done sig campaigns via just blockchain exploring..
its from them revealing their sig campaign usage on this forum by publicly giving out an address on a public post on the forum

again its the service..

if he done private sig campaign signup via private message.  and used more addresses. he would not have been found

again not a bitcoin problem but the user->service problem linking him

EG actual real world physical gold is private..
but if i write on a forum where i want someone to send some gold to or where i store my gold..
its not the golds fault.. its the person and the forum s public posts fault

the solution is to not do sig campaign signups via public posts. and instead ask to sign up via private message thats not stored on a database

notice how in the story the guy exploring the wallets. recognised a NAME and then seen that name was associated with sig campaigns.
and also the same name was used in a scam

he tied it together more so by name recognition found on services

your also forgetting your favourate altnet and liquid is not accepted by most regulated exchanges due to them being promoted as privacy tools. and how exchanges blacklist payments that went through mixers

changing bitcoin to be ultra "privacy" will not only drop utility with services(bad for users) but also by breaking the accounting security that can easily prove that all coins are descendants from their mined coinbase. is a security risk in itself that can risk some of the fundamentals of bitcoin

Adding a privacy feature to bitcoin is a good idea but on the other hand there is already a privacy coin called monero and the exchanges are banning it left and right… What do you think would happen to bitcoin if it was also fully anonymous? It would probably get banned from the exchanges too. Without the support from the exchanges bitcoin adoption would take a huge hit. Most crypto activities are happening on the exchanges and that’s pretty sad imo.

Nope. Bitcoin users do experience privacy invasion, besides KYC & AML. The simplest way to violate your privacy is to not utilize coin control. How do you think figmentofmyass was caught to using multiple accounts? All that needed was a trivial blockchain search. Same as with address reuse.

That's for certain. It has happened with Monero, and so is with Litecoin now that it upgraded to Mimblewimble.

here is the thing people are not realising

back when bitcoin was just 'property' in 2009-13. we had good privacy. because bitcoin had property rights(strong protected rights)..
however when bitcoin became government recognised as "currency" property rights of privacy, changed to privacy rights of currency.. these rights are different. under currency the privacy rights are part of the bank secrecy act. no longer the property rights to privacy
meaning the protections of privacy got weaker

and under the bank secrecy act. financial businesses have the right to monitor their customers use of funds and report suspicious activity to government. especially of their value is being used in ways that its trying to hide its use.. such as mixers, tumblers and laundering

yep before 2013 bitcoin was treated like collectables(pokemon cards, antiques). where sales and payments and custody did not need to be monitored.

if bitcoin transitioned over to a monero algo. what will happen is that the financial services like banks and exchanges that are regulated would simply not be able to manage/handle bitcoin.. much like you dont see monero on those regulated exchanges
now here is the thing. bitcoin does not and never has asked for your birth certified identity.. you will not find a bitcoin transaction that displays who you are or what you bought

all the information that businesses get, and share and pass to governments.. is due to users passing their ID to businesses/services.

so it doesnt matter what algo bitcoin has.. the problem is the services at the edges of the network that then share information between themselves

bitcoin is not the problem its the services. and the regulations they have to follow due to the jurisdictional gains that politics has managed to get by defining bitcoin first as a currency.. then as a asset currency and lately as a commodity currency. slowly getting more and more involved in bitcoins jurisdiction

which these political definitions of bitcoin then affect how businesses and services handling bitcoin on behalf of users then has to handle the users

yep under asset.. (SEC jurisdiction) the sec could not do anything about the environment causes of mining.. but under commodity(CFTC) allows a gateway for the EPA to get involved in mining.

changing bitcoins algo to monero may cause regulated exchanges to stop servicing bitcoin. and changing the mining algo to PoS may stop the CFTC from punishing bitcoin.. but the only place to stop governments from receiving names of people and what they bought. wont be solved by any algo change.. it would only stop if people stop buying/selling things to other people that require names/home locations

because bitcoin(the protocol) does not have privacy issues.. its the services that ask for personal info thats the problem


the ultimate solution is not to mess with the algo yo avoid utility
its actually to change the definition of bitcoin back to being a tradable property instead of a currency

there are some idiots in this forum that want to brutilise bitcoin saying its not fit for purpose just to hinder bitcoin utility while they advertise their other networks as the go to place people should use instead.
they want to limit bitcoin utility. they want to change bitcoin to be less useful and less trusted.

lets not play into that game. lets instead recognise where the real problems are and solve them

will never happen. The bank will still investigate the large funds that are credited to check who the account selector is. As bank users, we can't do anything, that's their authority and it's written on the term and condition sheet that we signed. Banks have the right to investigate all kinds of transactions made.

Privacy becomes something they can treat as they please, some of them even sell our personal data to several insurance companies and others. Bitcoin remains the best privacy, no matter how many privacy transactions are carried out, it will still be safe, as long as it is not published.

Bitcoin have give us more privacy but depending with this history were Canada froze bank accounts watching people tx bitcoin and ETH addresses totally fault from the bank. I sure when using bank transaction detected with how much money sent and received actually we are influencer and investing with bitcoin only. Seems not only in Canada but my country ever have this cases, always investigate when receiving huge amount credit in our bank account. I think bitcoin have make most privacy but when needed KYC for withdrawing to be cash trough of exchange market and connected with bank account will show of our identity.

Need improvement at the future how bank more take care our privacy without any investigate when crediting huge amount in our bank account, not all claimed as illegal activities when receiving much money.

Countless of times we've been hearing onnthe embargoes levied on accounts by centralized bodies, in other to avoid unexpected and unnecessary ban, we must learn how to exercise this freedom through the means we use in securing our asset which is to be decentralized indeed without the use of centralized exchanges that could later tampers our confidentials for the government use against us.


This is a service through which is available already and you can enjoy it abundance by operating a full node on the blockchain or make ilise of hardware wallet or any other could storage means to secure your assets if full node technicals could be a challenge.

Fighting for privacy? have you ever fight a thing that doesn't allowed in your country before? just like you fight to make gambling is legal when your country not allow gambling. I believe you will get jailed since you're breaking their law and everyone disagree with your opinion, you're just a citizen without any power while you're want to force a high rank person to listen you, it's a joke lol.

It's useless to fight against the government, just protect your privacy by other way e.g. using mixer and decentralized exchange.

This is why P2P platforms shall be more entertained as compared to exchangers. This is the only thing that can save bitcoin or other coins from getting disturbed with government banishments.

Unfortunately, Some governments do ask P2P platforms as well to get their users strictest KYC and share the data during taxation.

May be being public ledger we are little on downside of its use case. But preferring P2P platform is closest thing towards winning this platform.

Bitcoin is inherently public, as we all know.

Exchanges make people's ID cards available on demand to the government, complete with their addresses.

Add these together and multiply the result with chain analysis companies, and you have a cryptocurrency whose transactions can be monitored by the government for a small amount of interesting people.

The publicity of the ledger and exchange's KYC requirements cant be removed - trying to remove the former will break bitcoin, removing the latter will just get it banned everywhere. We can do something about chain analysis companies though - use mixers to obfuscate the link between your (non-KYC-tainted) addresses.

Privacy of some sort on the protocol level will be very difficult and will take a lot of time(assuming it would actually occur someday). Also, I'm pretty sure privacy is frequently being talked about even before this incident you're referring to. Safe to assume that adding privacy(regardless if on other layers or on the main layer) is simply just not that simple to be implemented in a few years.

No. What we should be fighting against is the blacklisting nonsense. There are ways to protect yourself from trivial de-anonymization, even if the majority doesn't utilize them. The problem doesn't lie on privacy techniques, but on users who are confident with accepting arbitrary rules to pass from entities that don't want their good, and that rely on irrational mechanisms such as blacklisting every coin that comes from a mixer.

And we should fight for privacy protection, of course. The Lightning Network is a significant on-going update for those who value privacy.

The fact this isn't talked about much even more so after Canada froze bank accounts watching people tx bitcoin and ETH addresses tied to other ETH addresses are being black listed / banned is really bad.. 

BTC will fail or much much much worse become the money of enslavement if privacy is not added.. Unbreakable privacy..