3 ms·
>why would there not be a block list of “known bad addresses” (for cryptocurrencies) It’s a good question. The soft libertarian crypto-advocate answer might b
by curiousObject 3y ago
>why would there not be a block list of “known bad addresses” (for cryptocurrencies)
It’s a good question.
The soft libertarian crypto-advocate answer might be: Because this discrimination based on ‘badness’ of transaction purposes is antithetical to the whole original ethos of Bitcoin.
The practical answer, in my opinion, might be: Because this powers the adoption of Zero Knowledge obfuscation technologies that make tracing transactions almost impossible. So then the only solution is a total ban on all non-approved, untracked financial transactions, which is a frightening intrusion into personal liberties.
And, obviously, many people’s answer would be: Yes, that sounds good, and it will protect us from many bad things.
- kemotep 3y agoSo the solution to me is protecting personal liberties with respect to private transactions. A right to privacy with regards to digital transactions, a culture of impeaching, recalling, or otherwise voting out politicians who propose legislation that would curtail those rights, and a legal system that would punish corporations and people who violate others rights to privacy doesn’t necessarily mean that we need crypto. It could help facilitate that, but fiat, specifically cash can do all that (just not yet digitally).
- curiousObject 3y agoWell, yes. Good. We work the political, regulatory and legal systems to develop this utopia. I agree this is what we should be working towards. I am delighted by your optimism, it’s wonderful. But, looking At Washington right now (for example), can you honestly see this happening anytime soon? I’m sorry, but I can’t. I think we should think about how we can work around that gridlock, even if we’re just doing it to pressure the powers-that-be (government, banks etc) to do a slightly better job.
- kemotep 3y agoSubstantial amount of various systemic reforms would be required to reach this. Election reform, voting reform, constitutional reforms (to the point a new one would probably be necessary), and so much more. All while, like you point out, dozens if not hundreds of thousands of people, politicians, legal frameworks, and corporate interests would work to undermine, delay, or prevent these reforms. They are possible. But it isn’t easy. I just feel, that what cryptocurrency advocates want is really a right to privacy. That the current systems do not have. A currency using a hardcoded hyper deflationary monetary policy and is barely able to make a fraction of the current rate of fiat transactions is hopefully not what they are actually after.
- curiousObject 3y agoThanks that’s a good answer. I don’t have time to respond, but I appreciate your thoughtful response.