4 ms·
> Bitcoin payments are anonymous, but they are perfectly traceable. Quite the important distinction there. And I was merely saying Bitcoin has been making untr
by wfunction 9y ago
> Bitcoin payments are anonymous, but they are perfectly traceable. Quite the important distinction there.
And I was merely saying Bitcoin has been making untraceable digital payments possible (and practical/easy).
Nowhere was I saying it is impossible to also use Bitcoin for traceable digital payments.
- abritinthebay 9y agoAnd you'd still be wrong. There's nothing about bitcoin that makes payments untraceable (quite the opposite). It takes longer, but it's possible.
- wfunction 9y ago"It takes longer, but it's possible"? That's like saying decrypting RSA "takes longer, but it's possible". Yeah, good luck.
- jpttsn 9y agoThere used to be ransomware that demanded cash by mail. RSA analogy? Way too harsh.
- wfunction 9y agoThat's good to know, I wasn't aware. But cash by mail... at what scale? How many people were attacked? And I don't see why the RSA analogy is "too harsh". Impractical is impractical.
- jpttsn 9y agoFloppy disk days, no big thing. But practical enough to work in the wild. RSA bruteforce is (I hope) impractical on a different level.
- abritinthebay 9y agoBut tracing bitcoin is not impractical. It's been done.
- yenda 9y agoIsn't the ledger public ? Isn't it easier to track for the authorities than cash serial numbers ?
- abritinthebay 9y agoIt's easier in many ways but due to anonymity you have to cross trace more. But yes, it's WAY easier to trace than cash
- abritinthebay 9y agoIt's more like saying "breaking sha1 is slower than md5". Like, it's more awkward but quite doable especially with decent resources.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]