Snowden I own more bitcoin than anything else—but

riiiiising

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 100

Quote from: Alucard1 on May 11, 2021, 10:17:54 AM

All of the things that Snowden has said are true, Bitcoin is now a good asset for investment, the higher the risk, the higher the profit that you may have, bitcoin now is really different before, as what Satoshi Nakamoto's intention for creating this bitcoin which is for alternative currency for fiat currency and for an online payment transaction, it is now more useful for investment, no other assets that can be better to bitcoin in terms of investment. Bitcoin is the only one that can make you secure your life in the future once you hold it for a long term.

Snowden clearly said that Bitcoin is dangerous because it is only pseudonymous and the perfect tool for spying agencies to gather information. The complex problem to solve here is that everybody using it needs to understand that by exposing yourself your also expose others that you interact with. Everybody has to take care and be cautious about how they are using it or everybody will be exposed.

aysg76

legendary

Activity: 1974

Merit: 2124

The recent investment in Bitcoin by large population is just because of profits associated with it and that's why exchanges trade volumes have increased these days as investors find crypto more lucrative than stocks and fiat but the main thing is they are ignorant of the technical working behind Bitcoin and how they can use this decentralised coin for their privacy and freedom.The community decide how they want to perceive particular assest and at current they have recognised Bitcoin as financial assest or say alternative to other investments with higher returns.This can be seen from Dogecoin investment also as memecoin is pumping and declared most profitable altcoin this year but why ?Just because investors want to have profit on seeing price rise without realising that it has no potential to grow and will soon crash leaving them hopeless.People really need to understand the true usage of Bitcoin and how transaction works based on consensus mechanism secured by miners.Snowden is right on his part because he is depicting sad truth about Bitcoin growth.

Alucard1

full member

Activity: 574

Merit: 125

All of the things that Snowden has said are true, Bitcoin is now a good asset for investment, the higher the risk, the higher the profit that you may have, bitcoin now is really different before, as what Satoshi Nakamoto's intention for creating this bitcoin which is for alternative currency for fiat currency and for an online payment transaction, it is now more useful for investment, no other assets that can be better to bitcoin in terms of investment. Bitcoin is the only one that can make you secure your life in the future once you hold it for a long term.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18711

Quote from: buwaytress on May 11, 2021, 09:52:34 AM

Until and unless it's direly needed, people won't be obliged to upgrade.

Privacy has never been more needed. With the government and exchanges blacklisting addresses, with blockchain analysis companies working for the FBI, CIA, and others, and now with mining pools censoring transactions from "tainted" addresses, we need more people using the privacy tools we currently have available, and we need new and better ones to be developed rapidly.

Don't get me wrong, once we get things like taproot powered swaps and payment channels up and running I'll definitely be using them, but most people won't. Censorship is a massive threat to bitcoin and we need more people to take their privacy seriously.

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on May 11, 2021, 08:17:20 AM

Quote from: buwaytress on May 11, 2021, 07:44:17 AM

Well, I guess Taproot is the one we're all waiting for

Taproot doesn't automatically make your transactions more private though. If anything, the first people switching to taproot will experience a privacy decrease, since they will be in the minority and it will be trivially easy to identify which outputs are change since they will be the ones not being sent to a taproot address. Taproot will bring an automatic privacy improvement for things like multi-sig which use taproot instead, but for standard transactions taproot adds very little.

Look how long it has taken segwit to reach mass adoption and for all exchanges and services to support it. 4 years and we still aren't there yet. It will be years before taproot reaches mass adoption, and it will be years before useful privacy enhancing methods and services are built utilising the improvements taproot brings.

I think it's expected (the same way it was expected for Coinjoin I believe, which would actually expose the early contributors).

Agree that it's taken a really long time for Segwit compatibility (never mind native) -- I'm still only using one service that's completely switched to native Segwit, and it's not even the one I use the most.

Bring back to the necessity argument, I guess. Until and unless it's direly needed, people won't be obliged to upgrade.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18711

Quote from: buwaytress on May 11, 2021, 07:44:17 AM

Well, I guess Taproot is the one we're all waiting for

Taproot doesn't automatically make your transactions more private though. If anything, the first people switching to taproot will experience a privacy decrease, since they will be in the minority and it will be trivially easy to identify which outputs are change since they will be the ones not being sent to a taproot address. Taproot will bring an automatic privacy improvement for things like multi-sig which use taproot instead, but for standard transactions taproot adds very little.

Look how long it has taken segwit to reach mass adoption and for all exchanges and services to support it. 4 years and we still aren't there yet. It will be years before taproot reaches mass adoption, and it will be years before useful privacy enhancing methods and services are built utilizing the improvements taproot brings.

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: dkbit98 on May 10, 2021, 05:32:14 AM

How hard would it be to introduce code updates that would enable Bitcoin to use zk-SNARKs, ring signatures, mimblewimble technology or something totally new?
Everything I heard so far is some projects that re using sidechains like zCash Sidechain or mercury wallet but nothing on main chain, and of course we always have coinjoins that have some limitations, and mixers like Chipmixer.

Well, I guess Taproot is the one we're all waiting for (as you can see above discussions) as the first big step towards privacy, not the most technical person so don't shoot me if I get it wrong but I think there's already ongoing signalling for consensus for the soft fork that'll activate it (hence Snowden's rant) -- similar to how SegWit got introduced. It started out as a proposal, so I guess BIPs are still your route to do what you want.

riiiiising

full member

Activity: 336

Merit: 100

Quote from: hugeblack on May 09, 2021, 06:57:38 AM

you can read it from his twitter account ---> https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1391035543773929473

Quote

the worst part of cryptocurrency transforming into dragon-level wealth is witnessing good people emotionally devolve into dragons themselves: so intellectually paralyzed by the fear that everyone they see threatens their hoard that they lose sight of the world beyond their cave.
1) This is such a profoundly misleading TL;DR of a privacy-focused talk that it's hard to call it anything but intentionally deceptive.

2) To the extent I own crypto (unless and until it has been lost in boating accidents), I own more bitcoin than anything else—but

3) Bitcoin's disastrous privacy is the "missing stair" of cryptocurrency. Every expert understands it's a problem, but—as experts—they themselves know how to compensate for the risk in their own personal interactions with Bitcoin, and therefore feel no urgency to actually fix it.

4) Privacy coins are great, but they're too small and too easy to smother via regulatory actions like de-listing from exchanges. Only Bitcoin has immunity-via-dominance to delisting. It adopting privacy-by-design instantly normalizes financial privacy. Ultima Ratio Cryptum.

The central property of cash is fungibility—meaning a dollar spent by a plumber is honored equally to one spent by a sex worker: they are indiscriminable. Adversarial chain analysis of Bitcoin's public ledger reduces its fungibility over time. Only privacy guarantees fungibility.

Snowden believes that privacy is what guarantees replacability, just as it does to cash. I see that many people who use Bitcoin have become more interested in prices and their fluctuations than decentralization or privacy, which is the essence of the value of it.

+1 and nothing to add! Rest assured it is only the minority who still cares for privacy and decentralization. Most holders just set up their accounts and leave their crypto on exchanges. Most of them are secure, but it's not like they care about understanding the technology, the advantages it brings about and its weaknesses. Having the IRS hire hackers to get access to hardware wallets is a good reason to better educate yourself and create a secure setup for yourself.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18711

Quote from: sheenshane on May 10, 2021, 10:53:01 AM

I don’t really think that privacy has to be fixed here and I don’t think that the fungibility of the cash offers is missing in Bitcoin.

I disagree. The privacy of bitcoin could be improved and the fungibility is under threat. We already see centralized exchanges and service freezing accounts, deeming some coins to be "tainted", and blacklisting some addresses. We are now seeing mining pools which are refusing to mine "tainted" transactions. Bitcoin's fungibility needs addressed.

Quote from: seoincorporation on May 10, 2021, 12:00:46 PM

He is right about the privacy coins, they are great but they need the right markets to be traded, and if they get delisted then is like closed doors for those ones who are searching for their privacy. And it already happens with Monero, we saw how it gets delisted from a lot of exchanges.

If you are buying and using Monero because you are truly interested in the privacy it can bring you, then you aren't using centralized exchanges which require KYC in the first place. You are trading peer to peer on exchanges such as Bisq or LocalCryptos. Whether or not centralized exchanges choose to delist the coin is completely irrelevant in terms of the coin still functioning, and delisting is probably beneficial in terms of privacy because if they don't list it then they stop trying to use blockchain analysis to deanonymize it and trace transactions.

seoincorporation

legendary

Activity: 3346

Merit: 3125

He is right about the privacy coins, they are great but they need the right markets to be traded, and if they get delisted then is like closed doors for those ones who are searching for their privacy. And it already happens with Monero, we saw how it gets delisted from a lot of exchanges.

It would be nice to have more information about how he lost them in the boat accident.

grabpopcorn536

member

Activity: 476

Merit: 12

Quote from: o_e_l_e_o on May 09, 2021, 03:21:19 PM

Quote from: grabpopcorn536 on May 09, 2021, 11:07:49 AM

If Bitcoin is anonymous, they will be boycotted by the authorities as they do with Monero, Dash ...

And yet, the boycott achieves very little. It is still very easy to buy, spend, trade, use, and sell Monero, all without touching a centralized exchange. (Incidentally, Dash is not private.) Even if every government in the world banned bitcoin tomorrow and every centralized exchange shut down, bitcoin would still be able to fulfill its primary purpose of being decentralized, peer to peer money.

Bitcoin's core value comes from decentralization. The blockade of centralized institutions only hinders the global release of Bitcoin. This will cause Bitcoin to rise in price more slowly and demand to rise more slowly.

sheenshane

legendary

Activity: 2492

Merit: 1232

I don’t really think that privacy has to be fixed here and I don’t think that the fungibility of the cash offers is missing in Bitcoin.
In Bitcoin, the value you spend is indiscriminate to the extent that it is way beyond cash.

Cash will be traced, and soon once the financial institutions summons the person who owns it, they will then question the personality of him/her and ask where did they earn that cash. Like who the hell would say cash can stop indiscrimination?

IMO, it might the only agenda of this guy and why he publishes these statements is the frustration he has when he lost his cryptocurrencies. Just my two cents!

BlackHatCoiner

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 7340

Farewell, Leo

Quote from: dkbit98 on May 10, 2021, 05:32:14 AM

Everything I heard so far is some projects that re using sidechains like zCash Sidechain or mercury wallet but nothing on main chain, and of course we always have coinjoins that have some limitations, and mixers like Chipmixer.

I doubt if Bitcoin can go beyond CoinJoin. Generally, any consensus change to the protocol, would result in a fork, such as ring signatures. The solution must be found on a second layer. If you think about it, coinjoining transactions is actually happening off-chain (on its first stage). You're establishing a connection with someone and you both agree to increase your level of privacy by mixing the inputs.

So if CoinJoin isn't suitable, I guess that there aren't any other alternatives. The mixer surely helps, but a third party is required.

As for the topic, I'll state my personal opinion. Yes, Bitcoin isn't that much fungible. Yes, Monero is indeed fungible and will be needed in the future, because it has the first mover advantage. I remember reading a discussion with Satoshi and another user on bitcointalk explaining the fungibility on a very technical level. The consensus rules were his/her decision and along with a thousand other reasons, maybe that's why he/she left.

dkbit98

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 7064

Quote from: buwaytress on May 10, 2021, 04:27:26 AM

Privacy may not be the gateway, but we'll all eventually need it, whether we realise it or not.

I agree with you and we may need it sooner rather than later, so I am looking to find and collect any projects or initial ideas that are working on improving privacy on main Bitcoin chain.
How hard would it be to introduce code updates that would enable Bitcoin to use zk-SNARKs, ring signatures, mimblewimble technology or something totally new?
Everything I heard so far is some projects that re using sidechains like zCash Sidechain or mercury wallet but nothing on main chain, and of course we always have coinjoins that have some limitations, and mixers like Chipmixer.

Kittygalore

member

Activity: 868

Merit: 63

Quote from: Gamerholic on May 09, 2021, 03:31:22 PM

That's right, it always happens when something not very valuable suddenly becomes very valuable and speculators and politicians immediately appear who are ready to do anything for the sake of profit and in order not to lose the power they have.

That's how bandwagons do ever since, they try to play both sides because that way they can stay on top, this topic reminded me of a meme made from a clip in Always Sunny in Philadelphia where the guy says that he plays both sides to stay on top.

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: 20kevin20 on May 09, 2021, 10:14:57 AM

I think the time will come when Bitcoin users will be seeking privacy. Definitely not all of them, probably not even the majority, but a not insignificant part of them. I started using my first phone due to the necessity of wireless communication. Today however, I am looking for phones with Lineage support and de-Google them ASAP. While 10 years ago digital privacy may have not been a big issue, today with so many intrusive platforms and corporations it's an incrementally higher concern..

Scalability became a necessity four years ago, and that's when everyone clamoured for it, and eventually that hasted upgrades and Layer 2. I think the discussions for privacy is heating up, and development has, rightly so, been focused on it now after the scalability hoo-ha. Like you said, the time will come when they will be seeking for it. But users, not newcomers. At least, not for the next few years when speculation is still the main attractive force.

Privacy may not be the gateway, but we'll all eventually need it, whether we realise it or not.

Gamerholic

sr. member

Activity: 843

Merit: 255

8V Global | 8v.com

That's right, it always happens when something not very valuable suddenly becomes very valuable and speculators and politicians immediately appear who are ready to do anything for the sake of profit and in order not to lose the power they have. Bitcoin has opened the world to a new perspective not only on finance and privacy, but much more. As for the exclusion of confidential coins from exchanges, I think there will always be an exchange that will not play by the rules.

o_e_l_e_o

legendary

Activity: 2268

Merit: 18711

Quote from: hugeblack on May 09, 2021, 06:57:38 AM

I see that many people who use Bitcoin have become more interested in prices and their fluctuations than decentralization or privacy, which is the essence of the value of it.

Sadly, more people are interested in the price than in the decentralization, technology, development, even the whole point of bitcoin. This forum is filled with people who welcome government regulation and censorship, attacking the very essence of bitcoin itself, because it will help to push the price higher. Case in point is this guy:

Quote from: 0t3p0t on May 09, 2021, 08:31:38 AM

Profit is what matters most nowadays even billionaires did something like that if I am not mistaken. Privacy and decentralization is just a bonus I think.

Speak for yourself. Just because you don't care about the entire reason behind bitcoin's creation doesn't mean that nobody else does.

Quote from: grabpopcorn536 on May 09, 2021, 11:07:49 AM

If Bitcoin is anonymous, they will be boycotted by the authorities as they do with Monero, Dash ...

And yet, the boycott achieves very little. It is still very easy to buy, spend, trade, use, and sell Monero, all without touching a centralized exchange. (Incidentally, Dash is not private.) Even if every government in the world banned bitcoin tomorrow and every centralized exchange shut down, bitcoin would still be able to fulfill its primary purpose of being decentralized, peer to peer money.

hatshepsut93

legendary

Activity: 3024

Merit: 2148

Quote from: hugeblack on May 09, 2021, 06:57:38 AM

4) Privacy coins are great, but they're too small and too easy to smother via regulatory actions like de-listing from exchanges. Only Bitcoin has immunity-via-dominance to delisting. It adopting privacy-by-design instantly normalizes financial privacy. Ultima Ratio Cryptum.

Bitcoin delisting would be called "exchange ban". It's far less likely to happen now, as we get more and more adoption and even crypto lobbying is starting to emerge. But the governments have this power to stop Bitcoin if they wanted. Of course it would not be a full stop, but Bitcoin would essentially be underground money, like foreign currencies were in Soviet Union, for example. Not really a good scenario for mass adoption.

Findingnemo

hero member

Activity: 2366

Merit: 793

Bitcoin = Financial freedom

Its obvious that people are investing on bitcoin for the high returns and recent surge in the price not for the reason why it was actually created for while still adoption is adoption no matter what so these people who adopted bitcoin will know the value of privacy since I personally realized it after getting into bitcoin than become a bitcoiner.

Topic: Snowden I own more bitcoin than anything else—but (Read 381 times)