4 ms·

One can be anti-extrajudicial government powers and anti-cryptocurrency. For one, I believe cryptocurrencies will be the government spyware of the future that a

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
> One can be anti-extrajudicial government powers and anti-cryptocurrency. The trouble is the current system has failed to provide both of those at once, because of the incentive structure. The government wants the intermediary to try to prevent fraud or crimethink or what have you so they don't punish the intermediary for making mistakes, so the intermediary makes lots of mistakes and tramples over innocent people without enough power to push back. In other words, it's much harder to have a non-abusive intermediary than to remove the intermediary. > 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. This is true of Bitcoin to an extent but there are at least two ways to avoid this. One, you can have a blockchain that doesn't work like that but still doesn't subject you to the whims of an intermediary, e.g. Monero. Two, a blockchain like Bitcoin is completely transparent, but it also doesn't tie your name to your wallet or limit you to a single wallet, so in principle you can use a separate wallet for separate activities without any way for someone with only access to the blockchain to correlate them. Apps could make this easier to automate. You could also just use a third party payment processor which is only using cryptocurrency for settlement between payment processors, so the individual transactions aren't being recorded on the blockchain. But then you don't have to, which is important to give the user leverage over the intermediaries, and make it easy to switch because anyone who accepts Bitcoin accepts Bitcoin regardless of whether or which intermediary is used to send or receive it.

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

> One can be anti-extrajudicial government powers and anti-cryptocurrency. The trouble is the current system has failed to provide both of those at once, because of the incentive structure. The government wants the intermediary to try to prevent fraud or crimethink or what have you so they don't punish the intermediary for making mistakes, so the intermediary makes lots of mistakes and tramples over innocent people without enough power to push back. In other words, it's much harder to have a non-abusive intermediary than to remove the intermediary. > 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. This is true of Bitcoin to an extent but there are at least two ways to avoid this. One, you can have a blockchain that doesn't work like that but still doesn't subject you to the whims of an intermediary, e.g. Monero. Two, a blockchain like Bitcoin is completely transparent, but it also doesn't tie your name to your wallet or limit you to a single wallet, so in principle you can use a separate wallet for separate activities without any way for someone with only access to the blockchain to correlate them. Apps could make this easier to automate. You could also just use a third party payment processor which is only using cryptocurrency for settlement between payment processors, so the individual transactions aren't being recorded on the blockchain. But then you don't have to, which is important to give the user leverage over the intermediaries, and make it easy to switch because anyone who accepts Bitcoin accepts Bitcoin regardless of whether or which intermediary is used to send or receive it.