4 ms·

Putting your eth wallet keys on a “do not transact with” list would be pretty similar. Having to engage in “money laundering” such as those privacy measures you

Putting your eth wallet keys on a “do not transact with” list would be pretty similar. Having to engage in “money laundering” such as those privacy measures you bring up being a reason the government may put an address on the block list would make it quite difficult to get around too. That is assuming Ethereum sees that kind of mass adoption to the point governments start to regulate its usage.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago
Is there actually a "block list" of this kind? It seems like it couldn't possibly work, e.g. there is a huge foreign entity that does zillions of honest transactions but isn't in a jurisdiction that subjects it to a given block list and it gets a transfer from some wallet that is. Either you now block anyone who transacts with them in turn and by Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon therefore the entire world, or transfers from "blocked" wallets go in there and come out non-blocked.
- kemotep 3y ago
  This is what all those chain analysis companies claim to solve for, and allegedly law enforcement agencies have done in the past to de-anonymize people. Perhaps you are right about it not being feasible given enough volume and so on. But at that point, if a government level threat actor wants to stop you from doing something and you are in their jurisdiction, jail cells tend to be quite effective at limiting people from spending money. If using non-government sanctioned cryptocurrencies is a crime in the future, than it doesn’t really matter if it is perfectly privacy preserving or not does it if you need to pay taxes in not the privacy preserving crypto.
  - AnthonyMouse 3y ago
    > This is what all those chain analysis companies claim to solve for, and allegedly law enforcement agencies have done in the past to de-anonymize people. Perhaps you are right about it not being feasible given enough volume and so on. De-anonymizing people who are not attempting to prevent it is fairly trivial. You tie one transaction to their wallet and they use the same wallet for everything. But that's an entirely different question than whether you can have a "block list" for wallets. What do you do when people in other jurisdictions pay no attention to the block list and then someone uses the money in the "blocked" wallet to buy some other fungible commodity there? > But at that point, if a government level threat actor wants to stop you from doing something and you are in their jurisdiction, jail cells tend to be quite effective at limiting people from spending money. But then it has nothing to do with the money at all. "You can't sell heroin for cryptocurrency because heroin is illegal" applies just as well to cash or gold or iTunes gift cards. And then, in a country with rule of law, they have to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The original problem was a random bank's fraud algorithm unjustly stealing your money as an innocent person.
    - kemotep 3y ago
      I will concede the concern that the bank won’t be able to just take your money in the case of using ethereum, but being unable to legally spend your ethereum in the country you physically reside in complicates things. And buying things over the internet would get the government to wonder how you can afford these things and how you will pay your taxes, thus investigating your finances and discovering the proscribed crypto wallet. Capone got busted this way and cash is 100% fungible and private.
      - hanniabu 3y ago
        Yes, let's just give in completely then and give them the ability to freeze any funds they want. That's definitely the logical approach. I gave up with privacy because I can't stay 100% anonymous online against a motivated adversary so now I just install government spyware with root access so they can watch me all the time and control my user accounts!
        kemotep 3y ago
        One can be anti-extrajudicial government powers and anti-cryptocurrency. For one, I believe cryptocurrencies will be the government spyware of the future that allows for total control over our finances, since crypto evangelists push “code is law” and the blockchain is immutable and completely transparent. There will be no privacy in such a system. We could spend our efforts making the current financial system be private and secure instead of doing nothing to fix that problem and utilize a system that gives them even more insight into your finances.
        hanniabu 3y ago
        As I said in an earlier tweet, private transactions are possible
        kemotep 3y ago
        The solution to, the government is extrajudicially spying on our transactions and without due process blocking people from their finances, is not a system that uses an immutable public ledger. It’s reforming the law to protect people’s right to privacy and due process. Ignoring solving the problem of the government not respecting people’s right to privacy and due process is not acceptable to me in my opinion. Saying Ethereum has private transactions isn’t any different than telling someone whose bank account was frozen without due process that they should just use cash.

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

Is there actually a "block list" of this kind? It seems like it couldn't possibly work, e.g. there is a huge foreign entity that does zillions of honest transactions but isn't in a jurisdiction that subjects it to a given block list and it gets a transfer from some wallet that is. Either you now block anyone who transacts with them in turn and by Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon therefore the entire world, or transfers from "blocked" wallets go in there and come out non-blocked.

kemotep 3y ago
This is what all those chain analysis companies claim to solve for, and allegedly law enforcement agencies have done in the past to de-anonymize people. Perhaps you are right about it not being feasible given enough volume and so on. But at that point, if a government level threat actor wants to stop you from doing something and you are in their jurisdiction, jail cells tend to be quite effective at limiting people from spending money. If using non-government sanctioned cryptocurrencies is a crime in the future, than it doesn’t really matter if it is perfectly privacy preserving or not does it if you need to pay taxes in not the privacy preserving crypto.
- AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > This is what all those chain analysis companies claim to solve for, and allegedly law enforcement agencies have done in the past to de-anonymize people. Perhaps you are right about it not being feasible given enough volume and so on. De-anonymizing people who are not attempting to prevent it is fairly trivial. You tie one transaction to their wallet and they use the same wallet for everything. But that's an entirely different question than whether you can have a "block list" for wallets. What do you do when people in other jurisdictions pay no attention to the block list and then someone uses the money in the "blocked" wallet to buy some other fungible commodity there? > But at that point, if a government level threat actor wants to stop you from doing something and you are in their jurisdiction, jail cells tend to be quite effective at limiting people from spending money. But then it has nothing to do with the money at all. "You can't sell heroin for cryptocurrency because heroin is illegal" applies just as well to cash or gold or iTunes gift cards. And then, in a country with rule of law, they have to prove your guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The original problem was a random bank's fraud algorithm unjustly stealing your money as an innocent person.
  - kemotep 3y ago
    I will concede the concern that the bank won’t be able to just take your money in the case of using ethereum, but being unable to legally spend your ethereum in the country you physically reside in complicates things. And buying things over the internet would get the government to wonder how you can afford these things and how you will pay your taxes, thus investigating your finances and discovering the proscribed crypto wallet. Capone got busted this way and cash is 100% fungible and private.
    - hanniabu 3y ago
      Yes, let's just give in completely then and give them the ability to freeze any funds they want. That's definitely the logical approach. I gave up with privacy because I can't stay 100% anonymous online against a motivated adversary so now I just install government spyware with root access so they can watch me all the time and control my user accounts!
      - kemotep 3y ago
        One can be anti-extrajudicial government powers and anti-cryptocurrency. For one, I believe cryptocurrencies will be the government spyware of the future that allows for total control over our finances, since crypto evangelists push “code is law” and the blockchain is immutable and completely transparent. There will be no privacy in such a system. We could spend our efforts making the current financial system be private and secure instead of doing nothing to fix that problem and utilize a system that gives them even more insight into your finances.
        hanniabu 3y ago
        As I said in an earlier tweet, private transactions are possible
        kemotep 3y ago
        The solution to, the government is extrajudicially spying on our transactions and without due process blocking people from their finances, is not a system that uses an immutable public ledger. It’s reforming the law to protect people’s right to privacy and due process. Ignoring solving the problem of the government not respecting people’s right to privacy and due process is not acceptable to me in my opinion. Saying Ethereum has private transactions isn’t any different than telling someone whose bank account was frozen without due process that they should just use cash.