697 sats \ 1 reply \ @k00b 2 Dec 2023 \ on: Btc privacy tradeoffs, overt and covert bitcoin
We talked about this a little bit on this post.
I wouldn't have guessed that weak privacy is a feature and not a bug, strictly on the grounds of soothing regulators, but it seems so. It makes me wonder what it might mean if bitcoin had worse privacy. If bitcoin imparted no privacy benefit, the government's argument against bitcoin could only be economic. Would we be able to defend bitcoin on purely economic grounds? Would bitcoin be as valuable?
Of all political issues, taxes are one of the weirdest. They are highly favored by governments and highly disfavored by citizens (at least when they themselves are subject to them). I don't know what to make of the pronounced mismatch but governments would do themselves a favor if they closed the gap some.
I'd wager governments will make every attempt to remove lawful private use of bitcoin. Bitcoin's weak privacy will make those attempts more likely to succeed too.
We talked about this a little bit on this post.
Argh, I hate when I repeat myself. Although I guess it's a hazard of everything being connected to everything. Good call-out.
I'd wager governments will make every attempt to remove lawful private use of bitcoin. Bitcoin's weak privacy will make those attempts more likely to succeed too.
I recently stumbled on Cory Klippsten's framing: the race to prevent the war [1]. I think you're right, unfortunately; I'm trying to think of any elements of the race that could preclude it other than simple raw adoption.
reply