Cryptocurrency: Coin Privacy and Scaling (re: DHS Tracks Monero)
On 9/10/20, jamesd@echeque.com <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:
On 2020-09-10 12:37, grarpamp wrote:
So why should the underlying ZKP / Homomorphic tech behind Zcash not be promoted?
Maybe it should be. But I would first have to understand it better.
But what is killing bitcoin is its success - it is running headlong into the scaling law problems that I predicted in the beginning.
True. Tx bloat of physical blockchain was easy to predict back then from simple math alone. Bitcoin-BTC has since moved from "retail level tx" to "store of value" due solely to its limiting physics, not the propaganda from its dev and pump dragon maxi circle, which was a beg for continued relavance up against competition, and a ploy by GovCorp to take over with CBDC's. A future optimized coin will temporarily take over both roles by scaling 10x-1000x the txrate BTC can handle. At which point it too encounters its own physical limits forcing you out to different coins for different things, until your computer and network can't handle your routine needs for the bunch. Legacy coinspace is nowhere near that optimized yet, it hasn't even optimized BTC for txrate yet (though BCH etc are working on optimization within the legacy Satoshi model coins). Suffice it that BTC can't even handle 50M-1B users in "store of value" mode... it chokes and dies around rougly 18M users when usage is say restricted to even just the single use case of sending a monthly paycheck from those users employers out to the users.
There can only be one.
There is more than one Fiat. There will be more than one Coin. Maybe around 2-5 for monetary purposes, another 3-10 for application purposes. None of todays popular coins are likely to be among the above future sets.
One currency will rule the world. For it to be a privacy protecting cryptocurrency, it has to scale, and Zcash does not scale. Neither does bitcoin, but it scales a lot better than Zcash.
Neither Bitcoin-BTC nor Zcash-ZEC nor Monero-XMR "scale". Nor can any cryptocurrency that has not yet evolved past, and has no roadmap to evolve past, the legacy concept of storing its entire blockchain forever because its retarded legacy database model requires it. The notion that you just keep filling out central datacentres, layers of privacy risk SPV, and central Lightning, etc is ridiculous and are base model approaches taken way too soon before having done enough new research into developing new non-chain models. Fully distributed decentralized uncensorable mineable privacy coins *can* be built without needing to store a blockchain forever. And if it's not distributed uncensorable permissionless unblockable mineable and privacy etc, there's zero point in doing it because in the end it will be no better than Fiat / CBDC.
Any crypto currency must start with a plan for world conquest.
Scaling bloat from O(tx) *must* evolve down to O(utxo) before that can happen. ZKP, Homomorphic, etc probably hold some potential application there for operating privately, upon consensus over, and to synchronize deltas to, that much smaller database. Nor are you going to ever create anything interesting and competitive herein by using the legacy teams, groupthink, self interest, and corruption around todays popular coins. They must all be discarded. A new set and family of anarcho cypherpunks must arise to do the task.
On 9/10/20, jamesd@echeque.com <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:
There can only be one.
On 2020-09-11 14:54, grarpamp wrote:
There is more than one Fiat.
Not really. The US dollar is supreme, and if it falls, something else will be supreme. China may replace the US dollar, but it has not yet.
The notion that you just keep filling out central datacentres, layers of privacy risk SPV, and central Lightning, etc is ridiculous
The lightning network could in principle solve both scaling problems and privacy problems, but you will have to design your crypto currency around its lightning network, rather than trying to fit the lightning network to existing bitcoin. The lightning people have a forked bitcoin, but I think their fork sucks and their network sucks. But I don't think it has to suck. Maybe they will get it right eventually. Satoshi proved that it is important to get something out there that sort of works, even if it has known flaws. Easy to criticize the existing lightning network - and easy to criticize bitcoin itself, but bitcoin changed the game forever. Scaling is the problem that needs to be fixed. We want a coin that is scalable and private. A lightning network that did not require trust, or even identification, of entities performing correspondence bank like functions, would provide privacy as well as scaling. We would get darknet entities performing bank like functions.
participants (2)
-
grarpamp -
jamesd＠echeque.com