4 ms·
Also in practical terms how exactly would you censor "sci-hub" if you wanted to? They could generate a new address for each transaction and amounts could vary.
by zxcmx 6y ago
Also in practical terms how exactly would you censor "sci-hub" if you wanted to? They could generate a new address for each transaction and amounts could vary.
- nfin 6y agoMaybe a government could require law abiding / non anonymous miners to not mine transactions with destination addresses that are on a live-updated list. They could get those addresses the same way you would get that address. If new addresses are not only newly generated after every transaction but are user specific & encrypted, then I guess you would need a decentralized web, or governments could use gag orders to force hosting providers to let them spy into these servers [1] So I guess it is easier for them to get behind addresses of services that service diverse or bigger amount of customers. One solution mentioned by an above commenter are stealth addresses [1] At least since PRISM ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program) ) this should not sound totally inconceivable anymore
- zxcmx 6y agoRe: the servers, if you had access to their hosting then I think you wouldn't need to block their payments, you would just take them offline. But I just took a look and it seems like they've been using the same static bitcoin addres since Feb 2020. So yeah. I guess it's not a thing they're hugely worried about.
- nfin 6y agoyes you are right