From iang@iang.org Fri Jul 6 02:37:57 2018 From: Ian G To: cypherpunks-legacy@lists.cpunks.org Subject: Re: [cryptography] Digital cash in the news... Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2018 02:37:57 +0000 Message-ID: <172289268521.3881296.1683146176988680191.generated@mail.pglaf.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2329238788289795611==" --===============2329238788289795611== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/06/11 9:01 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 03:58:07PM +1200, Peter Gutmann wrote: >> "John Levine" writes: >> >>> I wouldn't call bitcoins digital cash. They're more like digital tulip b= ulbs, >> >> Finally an analogy I can use to explain bitcoin to the masses (well, assum= ing >> they know about the tulip mania). I've been using Bartercard, which is a = good >> analogy but somewhat limited in international recognition. > > Tulips were an investment bubble, not means of payment. A requirement for a bubble would be a promise of ever-growing value, the =20 rest is just the marketing. > People are so > quick to trust alternative local currencies and digital currencies > because the official currencies have issues with being gamed (e.g. > built-in inflation tax). Yes, this is what I mean by the obsession against government monies, which=20 makes people vulnerable to putting their value into alternate currencies. =20 Their desire to thumb their nose against the government outweights their=20 desire to manage value wisely. To the extent that people put their funtime=20 income into this, it's the same as movies, gambling, porn. Fine, but some=20 people will inevitably invest their fortunes in it... What is most extraordinary about the current thing -- and what tends to =20 confirm "bubble" to me -- is that the same people who were desperate for =20 the privacy promise of blinded bearer coins are projecting their old =20 privacy beliefs on the nymous BitCoin: http://www.pcworld.com/article/230084/us_senators_want_to_shut_down_bitcoins_= the_currency_of_internet_drug_trade.html http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/08/us-financial-bitcoins-idUSTRE7573T3= 20110608
The biggest drive towards the use of Bitcoins on sites like Silk Road is =20 that they supposedly cannot be traced [1]. However, a member of the =20 Bitcoin core development team told Gawker that "...because all Bitcoin =20 transactions are recorded in a public log, though the identities of all =20 the parties are anonymous, law enforcement could use sophisticated network=20 analysis techniques to parse the transaction flow and track down =20 individual Bitcoin users."
Such a comparison was denied vociferously in bearer days. Blinded =20 transactions were the only way to do it, and the nymous architecture now =20 seen in BitCoin was considered evil because the issuer could supposedly =20 see "all". Worse than a private nymous system, this one is public?! What could be =20 easier to datamine than a public database? Give me a public database and a=20 handful of subpoenas, and this thing goes down. iang [1] Note confused terms there. BitCoin can be traced, but the holders =20 aren't identified. This is called "nymous" in the trade. In contrast, =20 bearer coins could not be traced, but typically the holders had identified=20 accounts. "Untraceable." One system achieves privacy through a perpetual=20 public key account mechanism, the other through an untraceable transfer=20 between known persons. You can take these axes and combine them to create=20 4 spaces if you desire... ----- End forwarded message ----- --=20 Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE --===============2329238788289795611==--