Cryptocurrency Mixnets Strong Privacy Quantum Blockchains
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608041/first-quantum-secured-blockchain-t...
Moscow has not been friendly towards non-Fiat cryptocurrency. The actual paper... Quantum-secured blockchain - Kiktenko https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09258 And the only cryptocurrencies people should trust will be the Distributed P2P Transaction Mineable AnonPriv Cryptocurrencies, aka not Fiat, else there's no point, just use GovCoin, BankCoin, or CorpCoin, they're all the same... ShitCoin.
This technology, if it exists, which I doubt, secures the channels through which crypto coins are sent
Considering end users won't be able to buy the quantum hardware, optical links, etc needed for the QKD anytime soon... privacy coins over Mix Darknets WiFi are for now at least reasonable channel security for some use cases. This paper blurbs Zcash and Loopix ... Extending the Anonymity of Zcash - Kappos, Piotrowska https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.07337 And note that software PQC for all the parts... secure keying, algos, passphrases, blockchain bits, etc, is also rolling.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography https://pqcrypto.org/ https://csrc.nist.gov/Projects/Post-Quantum-Cryptography infohash:B07C61F8452F23B9D9936551D1A6DE7CF61FDD9F infohash:3233EBD08587C5E8B806B2B5375BF4975E8A2519
Which messages are then added to the blockchain in the clear, for everyone to see, forever.
Which means it's no better than Fiat, thus pointless. At last survey long ago, afaik only the Zero Knowledge Proof ZKP family of coins, Zcash.io ZEC, Zencash ZEN, Zclassic ZCL, etc, had actually put the entire transaction behind strong cryptography... senders, receivers, amounts, change, etc. Monero XMR, the CoinJoin family, etc, are all doing other approaches. And there's no real reason to hold anything other than the UTXO database set. Lots of projects are working on distributed consensus state machines now... https://blog.acolyer.org/2019/03/08/a-generalised-solution-to-distributed-co... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19343398 With luck everything in cryptocurrency will be far more advanced, anon / private, scalable, and adopted by 2029. Someone really should maintain a list of cryptocurrency projects that are seriously working on these topics instead of being just another ICO, token, centralized censorable spyable Fiat, etc.
On Sunday, March 10, 2019, 1:13:56 AM PST, grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608041/first-quantum-secured-blockchain-t...
Moscow has not been friendly towards non-Fiat cryptocurrency.
The actual paper...
Quantum-secured blockchain - Kiktenko https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09258
And the only cryptocurrencies people should trust will be the Distributed P2P Transaction Mineable AnonPriv Cryptocurrencies, aka not Fiat, else there's no point, just use GovCoin, BankCoin, or CorpCoin, they're all the same... ShitCoin.
This technology, if it exists, which I doubt, secures the channels through which crypto coins are sent
Considering end users won't be able to buy the quantum hardware, optical links, etc needed for the QKD anytime soon... privacy coins over Mix Darknets WiFi are for now at least reasonable channel security for some use cases. This paper blurbs Zcash and Loopix ...
Most of you aren't old enough to remember that "time-shared" computers were all the rage in the 60's and even much of the 1970's. Individuals couldn't afford computers of their own. I once (1976, MIT, MITERS, the electronics club) used a PDP-7 computer, which I believe was sold for about $72,000 in 1964, which I suppose would be about $820,000 in 2019 dollars. In 1964, it was called a "personal computer" because it was considered small enough, and cheap enough, for individuals (well-connected individuals) to afford and operate.× Today, I believe that there are quantum computers that are net-accessable. In fact, for a few years I suspect that most quantum-computers will be accessed (if they are accessed at all) over the Internet. Like the big mainframes of the 1960's, few companies will have enough money to buy and maintain them onsite. Jim Bell
On Wed, 13 Mar 2019 06:58:41 +0000 (UTC) jim bell <jdb10987@yahoo.com> wrote:
Most of you aren't old enough to remember that "time-shared" computers were all the rage in the 60's and even much of the 1970's. Individuals couldn't afford computers of their own.
but then personal computers got cheaper and as a result computing power became more widely distributed. That of course didn't cause the collapse of western government-corporation totalitarianism but at least it was a development in a positive direction. BUT, that's not the whole story. As microelectronics became even more common, people started using retardphones, and now they are connected to a worldwide tracking/spying network AND the worldwide fucktard users store their data on a bunch of 'mainframes' onwed by their worst enemies : multinational govcorp.
Today, I believe that there are quantum computers that are net-accessable.
you mean, the nsa has a working computer? I
In fact, for a few years I suspect that most quantum-computers will be accessed (if they are accessed at all) over the Internet. Like the big mainframes of the 1960's, few companies will have enough money to buy and maintain them onsite.
"for a few years"? There's no working QC computer, not even the ones costing 10s of millions work. And yet you think in a "few years" there will be personal 'quantum' computers?
Jim Bell
participants (3)
-
grarpamp -
jim bell -
Punk