1773 sats \ 4 replies \ @davidw 26 Oct 2023 \ on: Coinjoins are NOT the way bitcoin
Coinjoins are the way. We need to normalise their use and for the providers to default using them.
Payjoins are the evolution from the original versions, and given they are indistinguishable versus regular coinjoins… they will allow us to have default privacy WHEN (not if) businesses adopt them.
This scaremongering and the archaic regulations that are in the pipeline are just distractions. Technology in the form of newer coinjoin implementations will render them unenforceable.
But why? Pooling and obfuscation was the original point of Bitcoin. I mean...
reply
When the incentives are beyond just privacy and actually saving money on transaction fees, pooling will naturally take place.
People maybe won’t want to pay $800 for a single base layer transaction fee, but they will pay $20, if payjoins can pool the transaction fee. Also businesses using the base layer could skip transactions entirely by having their customers pay their suppliers directly. Without a second transaction to charge onto customers. New payment terms will arise from this arrangement. Gone will be 90 day net rip-off payment terms.
When it’s more than about privacy, people will adopt it.
When it’s just about privacy, there’s the “should I, shouldn’t I” debate. And the nervousness about the footprint you’re leaving onchain. Cowards in legal teams will take the least risky option and enforce mass surveillance into their products, because they don’t want to be hit with fines for not following vague ‘regulations’. When it’s about being more profitable, efficient and competitive, legal will have a backseat role. Incentives are important.
And finally, to complete my rant, we don’t need a useless privacy coin to achieve the ‘original point of Bitcoin’ as you put it.
reply
Disagree. Bad solution
reply
What’s a better solution? Using Monero? Don’t make us laugh.
Not doing it at all, is also a defeatist mentality.
What would you like to see done differently?
reply