5 ms·

Ah yes, my Monero nails. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero Observers cannot decipher addresses trading Monero, transac

Ah yes, my Monero nails. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monero Observers cannot decipher addresses trading Monero, transaction amounts, address balances, or transaction histories, but im sure my old 14th century hammer will address this issue somehow even though subaddresses can be created that arent even remotely linked to my main address. https://monerodocs.org/public-address/standard-address/ https://monerodocs.org/public-address/standard-address/

rnk 3y ago
You just ban Monero then. If something is a problem, and you want to ensure financial visibility then ban all transaction types that hide visiblity, like banning mixers. This is separate from whether it's a good idea or not.
- dogman144 3y ago
  And then you mix in DeFi. Or into and out of L2/HTLCs. Or via atomic swaps, which went live but are buggy, and won’t show the monero interaction. Or cross-chain. And on and on. Let’s ban it all?
  - rnk 3y ago
    Yes, that's where I think financial regulators are heading. And anyone who thinks for one second of course sees that these are also problems with cash that drug cartels deal with by sending bales of $100 bills around. And so we added kyc and discourage cash. I don't think you can ban people doing crypto entirely, but you can make the financial exchange points where cash goes in and out ever more difficult.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Let’s ban it all? It’s in the process of being grey listed. Similar to running an all-cash lifestyle, it’s possible. But you’ll have your money frozen and seized and stolen from time to time. And you will hit intentional roadblocks any time you attempt a major financial move.
- DANmode 3y ago
  > You just ban Monero then. You just ban encryption, then! You just ban liquor/drugs, then! Monero making law enforcement investigation more difficult due to privacy algorithms does not make it legal to ban.
  - rnk 3y ago
    Those two first things have sure been tried, over and over as everyone knows. I said the obviousness of banning monero next was separate from whether it's a good idea.
- miohtama 3y ago
  There is no need to ban, because Monero is already so niche cryptocurrency that it is unusable for paying ransoms. You cannot ask ransoms in a currency the victim cannot access.
  - Stevvo 3y ago
    It's just as easy to buy Monero on a major exchange as it is to buy Bitcoin. Just as easy to send a ransom.
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> yes, my Monero nails At $3bn “market cap,” Monero is not a serious problem.
- DANmode 3y ago
  Its max supply is uncapped. The tech and established network are unlikely to go back in the box.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Its max supply is uncapped Sure. If it gets bigger, it can be addressed then. As it stands, it isn’t a problem.
acdha 3y ago
First, you misunderstood the point: the hammer is a poor metaphor because it's something which _hasn't_ changed massively over time – for the 14th century, if you took the ancient Roman who was used to working with these to Home Depot, they'd they'd immediately know what to use work with their modern counterparts: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1982-0103-248 https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1982-0103-... https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1956-0403-1 https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1956-0403-... Now, back on topic. Monero's claims have been lightly tested but never against a nation-state level adversary, so I'd be hesitant putting anything onto a blockchain which would be problematic if a flaw is discovered since there is, of course, no way to remove it. That said, let's assume that everything works exactly as planned and they've perfectly nailed the implementation. Do you ever wonder why cryptocurrency people call what they're building cash? That's because while a 14th century treasury officer wouldn't known a thing about hash functions, they were already very familiar with the problems caused by a truly anonymous means of exchanging value: actual cash. If you've ever read old novels where people had to show explain their source of wealth, maintain accounts at specific banks with good reputations, visiting traders were required to store funds at state sanctioned banks, etc. that's because while it's impossible to tell where someone's coins came from you can make crime, especially tax evasion, considerably harder by requiring people to show positive proof of income and adding points where other people would have to collaborate with you. That certainly doesn't prevent fraud but it can reduce it considerably by increasing the cost and likelihood of being caught. Obviously we have a big shift in the technology, but that same basic approach works well now: you don't need to control every blockchain transaction if the gateways into the real financial system are required to follow money laundering laws like everyone else. That's one of the reasons why almost no businesses used Tornado Cash, Monero, etc. because they didn't have a need to and when your accountants ask “how will we avoid the drug cartels using us to launder money?” and you say “we can't, that's a feature!”, they're going to start asking questions like who's going to go to prison.

rnk 3y ago

You just ban Monero then. If something is a problem, and you want to ensure financial visibility then ban all transaction types that hide visiblity, like banning mixers. This is separate from whether it's a good idea or not.

dogman144 3y ago
And then you mix in DeFi. Or into and out of L2/HTLCs. Or via atomic swaps, which went live but are buggy, and won’t show the monero interaction. Or cross-chain. And on and on. Let’s ban it all?
- rnk 3y ago
  Yes, that's where I think financial regulators are heading. And anyone who thinks for one second of course sees that these are also problems with cash that drug cartels deal with by sending bales of $100 bills around. And so we added kyc and discourage cash. I don't think you can ban people doing crypto entirely, but you can make the financial exchange points where cash goes in and out ever more difficult.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Let’s ban it all? It’s in the process of being grey listed. Similar to running an all-cash lifestyle, it’s possible. But you’ll have your money frozen and seized and stolen from time to time. And you will hit intentional roadblocks any time you attempt a major financial move.
DANmode 3y ago
> You just ban Monero then. You just ban encryption, then! You just ban liquor/drugs, then! Monero making law enforcement investigation more difficult due to privacy algorithms does not make it legal to ban.
- rnk 3y ago
  Those two first things have sure been tried, over and over as everyone knows. I said the obviousness of banning monero next was separate from whether it's a good idea.
miohtama 3y ago
There is no need to ban, because Monero is already so niche cryptocurrency that it is unusable for paying ransoms. You cannot ask ransoms in a currency the victim cannot access.
- Stevvo 3y ago
  It's just as easy to buy Monero on a major exchange as it is to buy Bitcoin. Just as easy to send a ransom.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> yes, my Monero nails At $3bn “market cap,” Monero is not a serious problem.

DANmode 3y ago
Its max supply is uncapped. The tech and established network are unlikely to go back in the box.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Its max supply is uncapped Sure. If it gets bigger, it can be addressed then. As it stands, it isn’t a problem.

acdha 3y ago

First, you misunderstood the point: the hammer is a poor metaphor because it's something which _hasn't_ changed massively over time – for the 14th century, if you took the ancient Roman who was used to working with these to Home Depot, they'd they'd immediately know what to use work with their modern counterparts: https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1982-0103-248 https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1982-0103-... https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1956-0403-1 https://www.britishmuseum.org/collection/object/H_1956-0403-... Now, back on topic. Monero's claims have been lightly tested but never against a nation-state level adversary, so I'd be hesitant putting anything onto a blockchain which would be problematic if a flaw is discovered since there is, of course, no way to remove it. That said, let's assume that everything works exactly as planned and they've perfectly nailed the implementation. Do you ever wonder why cryptocurrency people call what they're building cash? That's because while a 14th century treasury officer wouldn't known a thing about hash functions, they were already very familiar with the problems caused by a truly anonymous means of exchanging value: actual cash. If you've ever read old novels where people had to show explain their source of wealth, maintain accounts at specific banks with good reputations, visiting traders were required to store funds at state sanctioned banks, etc. that's because while it's impossible to tell where someone's coins came from you can make crime, especially tax evasion, considerably harder by requiring people to show positive proof of income and adding points where other people would have to collaborate with you. That certainly doesn't prevent fraud but it can reduce it considerably by increasing the cost and likelihood of being caught. Obviously we have a big shift in the technology, but that same basic approach works well now: you don't need to control every blockchain transaction if the gateways into the real financial system are required to follow money laundering laws like everyone else. That's one of the reasons why almost no businesses used Tornado Cash, Monero, etc. because they didn't have a need to and when your accountants ask “how will we avoid the drug cartels using us to launder money?” and you say “we can't, that's a feature!”, they're going to start asking questions like who's going to go to prison.