21–30 of 32 posts
I don't get it, who thought it was ever anonymous? Bitcoin has a public ledger by design. It has never been anonymous, it is only pseudonymous.
Most people don't realize bitcoin has any ledger, public or otherwise. They think of it like cash transactions, but with virtual money.
Basically people think Bitcoin is that which Monero actually is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good, you've leveled up. Now explain, why would someone include an adult's age in the title.
27 years old is the oldest you can be while still being part of Gen Z. This is an article showing that the latest generation to hit adulthood is performing social good.
If this article, more honestly said "a 27 year old developed a technique for tracing and de-anonymizing crypto" the article would make more sense.
What a preposterously stupid title and premise for an article. Nobody with a clue thought crypto was anonymous to begin with. It's a public ledger, it's a hyper transparent technology, it's almost the polar opposite of anonymous and untraceable. If this article, more honestly said "a 27 year old developed a technique for tracing and de-anonymizing crypto" the article would make more sense.
What a preposterously stupid title and premise for an article. Nobody with a clue thought crypto was anonymous to begin with. It's a public ledger, it's a hyper transparent technology, it's almost the polar opposite of anonymous and untraceable. If this article, more honestly said "a 27 year old developed a technique for tracing and de-anonymizing crypto" the article would make more sense.
It could be anonymous till you cash out
What a preposterously stupid title and premise for an article. Nobody with a clue thought crypto was anonymous to begin with. It's a public ledger, it's a hyper transparent technology, it's almost the polar opposite of anonymous and untraceable. If this article, more honestly said "a 27 year old developed a technique for tracing and de-anonymizing crypto" the article would make more sense.
What a preposterously stupid title and premise for an article. Nobody with a clue thought crypto was anonymous to begin with. It's a public ledger, it's a hyper transparent technology, it's almost the polar opposite of anonymous and untraceable. If this article, more honestly said "a 27 year old developed a technique for tracing and de-anonymizing crypto" the article would make more sense.
Whether you consider them to have a clue or not, many (if not most) people believe crypto to be anonymous, likely due to its disproportionate popularity with criminals and cybercriminals. Ransomware always points to a Bitcoin wallet, not bank details.
I don't get why it's "A 27 year-old". How is that relevant? 27-year-olds should be at peak capability, if not productivity, especially in maths. If it said "A 9-year-old" that would be news-worthy, suggesting bitcoin anonymity was always a case of the emperors new clothes.
I don't get it, who thought it was ever anonymous? Bitcoin has a public ledger by design. It has never been anonymous, it is only pseudonymous.
"Crypto" sounds "cryptic", so lots of people think it's anonymous by virtue of accidental branding. Most people don't realize bitcoin has any ledger, public or otherwise. They think of it like cash transactions, but with virtual money. Basically people think Bitcoin is that which Monero actually is.
I don't get it, who thought it was ever anonymous? Bitcoin has a public ledger by design. It has never been anonymous, it is only pseudonymous.
Also note that the work mentioned in this article happened 10 years ago, when public knowledge and understanding of Bitcoin was very low.