Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Defending Privacy in Crypto

blog.coinbase.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#71

Post by nl »

anon9001 wrote: post #59
nl wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Crypto and digital assets should be free from regulation, even if it brings side effects (e.g. laundering). It's far from clear to me why on earth crypto should be free from regulation at all.

I think this case is a pretty clear example of why. The regulators are supposed to be protecting who from what exactly? And at whose expense? So far I've seen two lines of reasoning: 1) Regulators are needed to protect me from myself. I can't assess if these dog-coins have long-term investment potential or not, so I want the government in the loop somehow. If I can purchase something on the internet, I assume it's sa…

In terms of sanctions it's about the money laundering. And it's pretty clear that's the main use of Tornado cash so..

If you want to build private financial transactions make it so you don't enable money laundering.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#72

Post by manholio »

searchableguy wrote: post #69
manholio wrote: post #39

What I would like to see is reversible and auditable privacy in crypto: to participate I need to disclose my real identity to a broker I trust that follows all KYC compliance rules in the jurisdiction it operates, and my financial identity and transactions are private until law enforcement performs an unblinding transaction that is auditable on the blockchain, (in the vein of Chaum blind signatures), yielding my brok…

Great idea. Tornado cash already implemented it years ago. :p https://tornado-cash.medium.com/tornado-cash-compliance-9abb...

> it is entirely up to you to either reveal your transactions to parties of your choice or keep them private forever. Keep in mind, that none of it is possible without the Tornado.cash Note and it is your responsibility to keep a record of it if you want to show the origin of funds later.

That's just a digital timestamp service, only a small part of what I'm talking about.

Mind you, I don't claim any novelty in the process I sketched above - just professing the need to have it implemented before we can treat crypto-assets as anything other than a money laundry tool.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#73

Post by pjc50 »

jim_kreggis wrote: post #64
ricochet11 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, i like cash and try to do most transactions with cash. But in an increasingly computational world it seems useful, probably inevitable, that digital programmable money will play a bigger part in the future. So do we want p2p borderless networks, built on a history of foss and the internet, with varying mixtures of privacy and transparency? or do we want government digital coins that will likely be fully su…

"people are happy to give up their rights because the people they dont like will be less profitable" This is the real reason people get so irrationally mad about crypto. There's no difference between the importance of encrypted communication and encrypted transactions, except that there's money involved. There's many people using web3 hype and bullshit as a grift, and many (most) people who see crypto as a speculativ…

> Terrorists can kill thousands of people, governments can kill millions

And this is why it's important not to build a system which will allow sanctions evasion by Russia or North Korea. One crypto advocate already forgot that and ended up jailed for complicity in North Korean sanctions breaking.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#74

Post by frozencell »

hbbio wrote: post #30
Loic wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read my comment, I explicitly said that we should keep cash.

Already gone: There is a limit of 1000 euros for cash payment. Even an iPhone is out of the range now! https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10999#... ). (French government source)

This government and its services has to be a joke, "how to make it much harder than it is"... I don't know how much time it will continue to operate until toltal disruption.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#75

Post by frozencell »

imtringued wrote: post #63
nlitened wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “We will ban all crypto as soon as we consider it to create problems with taxes” Surely you were not discussing those things with the Great Dictator of EU, not accountable in their decisions to citizens and courts?

The EU parliament has elections and the politicians you can vote for are your own elected national politicians... The only questionable thing here is that you cannot vote for politicians of other EU nations and that there is literally only one EU wide party called Volt.

Genuine question. What do you know about the U.S. law and mode of operation?

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#76

Post by frozencell »

ricochet11 wrote: post #56
pudo wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you say "might" - you're aware Tornado was actually used for these things to the tune of at least half a billion dollars? Basically, the case you're making is: they might have actively aided and abetted nuclear proliferation - but they're technologists, so their actions are sacrosanct and cannot be subject to the usual penalities because we've been ultra smart and managed to create an industry where free speech…

I am saying the rights of my sister and brothers, friends and colleagues are far more important to me than clamping down on north korean hackers. I would much rather live in a world where we are free to use tornado cash and maintain our privacy in these networks, than live in a world where code can be overnight made suddenly illegal, everyones accounts historically associated with that code blacklisted, the developer…

> I am saying the rights of my sister and brothers

Username checkout, is your brother Pinochet?

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#77

Post by Dracophoenix »

orwin wrote: post #70
anon9001 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this case is a pretty clear example of why. The regulators are supposed to be protecting who from what exactly? And at whose expense? So far I've seen two lines of reasoning: 1) Regulators are needed to protect me from myself. I can't assess if these dog-coins have long-term investment potential or not, so I want the government in the loop somehow. If I can purchase something on the internet, I assume it's sa…

The governments are protecting their tax revenue (obviously), the illusion of free market(and it's obviously fully informed agents), and less obviously public order. What was Abe's killer motivation? A cult brainwashed his mother into giving all her money and pension to them. Abe was one of the most public and prominent supporter of this cult amongst japanese officials. He killed him. Do you think that can happen in…

> The influencer+scam industry, in an economically constrained period, can lead to an evolution of our belief system, from the liberal 'i get what i deserve, mostly' to the fascist 'if I'm not as (good/well of/...) as I can be, it's because of this outgroup, and particularly him'. Both are fondamental attribution error fallacy, but one is really, really more violent than the other.

A heckler's veto, even a potentially fatal one, isn't an acceptable reason to curtail rights. In justifying such bad reasoning on the grounds of the violence that may ensue, you're arguing that one must preemptively surrender to terrorism.

You're also making an error of you're own: a slippery slope. By what method would this liberal society you speak of descend into fascism? And why a fascist state? Why not an monarchial empire? Mass violence isn't particularly limited to any one kind of government.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#78

Post by mrep »

smithcoin wrote: post #55

I think we should sanction using cash, it can be used untraceably and anonymously. Tornado Cash did $7 Billion in transactions. According to the US Treasury $300 Billion was laundered in US dollars last year. I think we are going after the wrong target.

It effectively already is. You cannot cross the border with more than $10,000 in cash without declaring it.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#79

Post by orwin »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #77
orwin wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The governments are protecting their tax revenue (obviously), the illusion of free market(and it's obviously fully informed agents), and less obviously public order. What was Abe's killer motivation? A cult brainwashed his mother into giving all her money and pension to them. Abe was one of the most public and prominent supporter of this cult amongst japanese officials. He killed him. Do you think that can happen in…

> The influencer+scam industry, in an economically constrained period, can lead to an evolution of our belief system, from the liberal 'i get what i deserve, mostly' to the fascist 'if I'm not as (good/well of/...) as I can be, it's because of this outgroup, and particularly him'. Both are fondamental attribution error fallacy, but one is really, really more violent than the other. A heckler's veto, even a potentiall…

I'm not talking about the state, this isn't one of my fear right now. I'm saying that our current belief system is mostly liberal, where we attribute success and failure more to ourselves rather than luck, to the system we live in, or to the outgroup.

This is sort of a 'leftward' evolution of the old monarchist belief system where your success is based on your bloodline, whereas the 'rightward' evolution is fascism, where your failure are because the outgroup is cheating, empowered by traitors in your ingroup (thus all methods to reinforce your ingroup are good).

I'm afraid than right now, our belief system (i call it belief system, but the author i stole it from talked about the foundational myth of our ideologies) is shifting from one to the other.

And btw, i just realized that this can be misinterpreted (it's also the first time I've presented the thought like this), but I'm sure I've done this political commentary way before 2021, as I've found this definition in 2018.

Re: Defending Privacy in Crypto

#80

Post by orwin »

Dracophoenix wrote: post #77
orwin wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The governments are protecting their tax revenue (obviously), the illusion of free market(and it's obviously fully informed agents), and less obviously public order. What was Abe's killer motivation? A cult brainwashed his mother into giving all her money and pension to them. Abe was one of the most public and prominent supporter of this cult amongst japanese officials. He killed him. Do you think that can happen in…

> The influencer+scam industry, in an economically constrained period, can lead to an evolution of our belief system, from the liberal 'i get what i deserve, mostly' to the fascist 'if I'm not as (good/well of/...) as I can be, it's because of this outgroup, and particularly him'. Both are fondamental attribution error fallacy, but one is really, really more violent than the other. A heckler's veto, even a potentiall…

Reply to the heckler veto and terrorism: no, that should not be acceptable, and yes, this is like surrendering to terrorism.

First, it's not the main cause.

Second, the main job of the government is to ensure stable society. I'm pretty sure the consensus on crypto isn't 'lets make everything more stable', rather the opposite. I'm not saying that they're right, and in an utopia without bad actors, they would be absolutely wrong. It's more complicated than that though.

Post reply on HN