Cryptocurrency: The Anonymity Manifesto, Destigmatization Of Privacy Inevitable, DERO

[grarpamp]

https://dero.io/  DERO


https://thecryptoanalyst.medium.com/the-anonymity-manifesto-c854f1d2686d

The Anonymity Manifesto

Our laws and their application are the result of the asymmetric
balance between those who know everything and about whom nothing is
known, and those about whom everything is known but who know nothing;
between those who avert crises and eliminate market risk bit by bit,
and those who live in permanent crisis and whose freedom and privacy
is lost bit by bit; between those who can’t fall, and those who can’t
but crawl.

Today’s biggest democracies run on deep deficits. A high deficit means
that a government spends a lot more than what it collects from tax
payers. Governments today no longer work for tax payers. Governments
work for Central Banks and those that pull the strings of CBs. Taxes
are a deliberate tool of financial and political oppression. 80% of
the total dollars in circulation have been printed in the last 2
years. Financial incentives have been subverted. The mission of
governments has become to serve the interests of the too big to fail
that advocate money printing, government’s real source of funding. The
mission of governments is no longer to serve the real economy, to
protect free choice and free market forces. The masses are treated as
sheep that are too small to succeed and with expendable freedoms and
rights. Uncertainty is a source of risk for the haves and a source of
opportunity for the have nots. Uncertainty has been declared public
enemy #1. Risk and opportunity, the wheels of wealth redistribution,
have been officially declared outlaws. Free choice, the mother of risk
and opportunity, has been sacrificed in the name of the common good.
Mass surveillance has been unleashed. Violence and censorship are used
to discourage dissent and free choice. The rich get richer, despite
becoming more complacent. The poor get poorer, despite working harder.
To stop the rot, we must rebalance what has been allowed to get
extremely off balance. We need to enforce anonymity. Anonymity is the
only fortress that can keep surveillance hungry and risk adverse too
big to fail entities and their tentacles outside the realm of free
choice and free market forces.

We declare Anonymity an inalienable human right and a multiplier of
other rights. We denounce the right to privacy as a trojan horse for
mass surveillance and the police state. We denounce pseudo-anonymity
as a trojan horse for mass surveillance and the police state. Every
human being has a right to full anonymity, not one inch less.

We declare that all human beings are born free, equal and are endowed
with reason and conscience. Every human being has a right to
participate in societal, commercial and political processes
anonymously. Every human being has a right to exercise anonymously
their freedom of thought, freedom of opinion and expression, freedom
of speech, right to education, right to work, right to religion, right
to own things. Every man and woman has the right to participate in the
democratic processes of their country anonymously.

Without anonymity individuals will be subjected to inhuman or
degrading treatment, torture or discrimination over their opinions or
reasoned conclusions. Without anonymity, men and women are subjected
to arbitrary interference with their privacy, family, home or
correspondence, or to attacks upon their honour and reputation.
Without anonymity, courts and legality are used to make such
interferences and attacks tolerable. Without anonymity, people are
arbitrarily deprived of their property, arbitrarily subjected to
arrest, detention or exile. That should not happen to human beings. We
can’t afford, for the sake of our lives and everything we want out of
the sweetness and decency of this world, to let that occur.

We now have the ability to fight.




https://thecryptoanalyst.medium.com/why-i-believe-the-destigmatization-of-anonymity-not-pseudo-anonymity-is-inevitable-privacy-coins-ceacb0ecef66

Why I believe the destigmatization of anonymity (not pseudo-anonymity)
is inevitable, privacy coins will stop being a “shady” niche and the
only 100% anonymous L1 out there DERO is primed to outperform

The notion of privacy today presumes a right that can be denied the
moment an individual becomes a person of interest. Any individual can
become/is a person of interest for commercial, political or personal
reasons. Online we can become persons of interest to advertisers
looking to target a specific demographic depending on where we live,
what apps we use, what keywords we search for. If one surfs the web
from France they are likely to get ads in French, if we speak with a
friend about dog food Google will probably start showing dog related
ads. In other cases we become persons of interest to governments
depending on our political or religious beliefs, participation in
certain events (ie protests), or based on other ad hoc criteria.
Today, banks and other financial institutions are used by criminals to
launder their ill-gotten gains. $800bn-$2tn are laundered globally
through them. Banking institutions are preferred money laundering
tools for criminals because they offer a variety of financial
services, including foreign exchange, deposits, cash transfers, and
loans. Source
We are all persons of interest for a company, a government, or another
individual.

A free society is built on the right to choose, meaning when presented
with two options A and D we should be free to choose what we believe
is best for us in that specific moment in time. We should be free to
decide without being subjected to any intimate forms of psychological
manipulation that leverage our private information.

When, because of a possible choice, we become a person of interest to
another individual with similar resources to ours, the chances of our
privacy being invaded are low. For example, the odds that our
neighbour can close our bank account, or get us fired, are low.
However, if on the other side of this equation we have major forces
such as speculative markets, governments, corporations, or a powerful
individual who would benefit from the majority of us choosing
D(isadvantageous) even if for most of us individually it would be more
reasonable/beneficial to choose A, our freedom to choose
A(dvantageous) becomes a risk for them. It is in such instances that
our privacy is most likely to be violated.

Forcing us to choose D is not possible in a free society. But upon
assessing such risk (ie: our likelihood of opting for A over D) our
counter party can set up other risk mitigation processes to try to
seamlessly interfere with our free will. Powerful and resourceful
enterprises will mine as much information as possible (if this is not
already available) in order to repackage option D to make it more
appealing in our eyes. To minimise the odds of materialisation of such
risk for them, we individuals are targeted with ads, PR campaigns,
financial incentives, intimidation campaigns, threats and so on that
are meant to interfere with our judgement and change the optics of
option D to make it appear more convenient for us than option A.
A decision making tree in our private space: our dilemma is private,
and at each step we decide based on what we think is best for us in
that specific moment in time. Every individual is ultimately rewarded
depending on their final choices, with an outcome that can vary from
>>A (much better compared to the outcome of choosing A and stopping
there) to >>D (much worse compared to the outcome of choosing of D and
stopping there)
Our freedom to choose can be translated into (market, political) risk
for other prominent entities.

In more extreme scenarios where option A, which our judgement tells us
is the best choice for us at a specific point in time, constitutes an
existential threat for a big company, financial organisation,
political class, or a billionaire/powerful individual, then the
incentive to invade our privacy to try and condition us will be even
higher. What follows, when this is allowed to happen systemically, is
the elimination of market or other forms of risk/uncertainty for
certain categories of market participants (powerful or resourceful or
both) at the expense of the free will of most individuals.

The practice of risk/uncertainty management is ultimately what drives
prominent entities to invade individuals’ privacy to try and condition
the choices of individuals and decrease uncertainty over the outcome.
For example, when an Android phone catches a user talking about dog
food the information is fed into a database where it is used by
corporates or ad buyers to minimise the risk that we may choose to buy
dog food from a competitor of theirs. To mitigate this risk they start
sending us ads to make sure our chances of choosing some local or
small or emerging brand over them are as low as possible.
When our dilemma affects larger organizations or powerful individuals,
it is likely that our privacy is invaded. Our decision tree is then
contaminated by “the eye”, that creates incentives for us to NOT go
through our inner evaluation process. “The eye” in this decision chart
stands for regulations, bureaucracy, fines, guilt, threats, PR
campaigns against our most advantageous choice etc. The invasion of
our privacy allows these larger organizations engaging in risk
assessment or risk management to boost the odds of a >>D outcome for
the decision maker (worst possible outcome for the problem solver,
best possible outcome for counterparty’s risk manager aka “the eye” )

Going back to our initial example, when despite conditioning, a
considerable group of people opts for A regardless, the organizations
hurt by such decision may then engage in even more aggressive forms of
risk management. The scope of risk management now would be to make
sure the unfavourable outcome leads to as few negative repercussions
as possible for them. An overt example of this scenario was the recent
case of Canadian truckers, whose privacy was violated to backtrack
their data in order to identify them and their affiliations and use
this information to make it as painful/inconvenient as possible to
exercise their right to protest against what they believed to be an
unjust policy.
Anonymity stonewalls data backtracking

One way to see anonymity is as the abolishment of big databases. In a
world where anonymity is a right, it would no longer be possible for
an entity to backtrack our personal and financial records starting
from a choice we made or that we could make (A vs D). It wouldn’t be
possible to identify us, contact our employer, get us fired, close our
twitter account, shut down our bank account just because, for example,
we expressed dissent on social media over a government policy or,
generally speaking, because we opted for A instead of D. Commercially,
it wouldn’t be possible for resourceful players to outcompete smaller
companies and slash their growth prospects by buying access into big
databases or decompiling what is supposed to be private information to
target huge populations of prospective buyers. The lack of such big
databases would lead to more segmentation, which means more risk for
big players but also more opportunities for smaller players. Lack of
anonymity, on the other hand, leads to a landscape with perennial
market/commercial/political leaders that are impossible to dethrone
because of their ability to compile and access huge databases to
maintain market share by interfering with personal decision trees like
those illustrated above to enforce or incentivise outcomes favourable
to them.
Why pseudo-anonymity (BTC) doesn’t work

The pseudo-anonymity argument of open blockchains like BTC stands on
the ostensible argument that in an open blockchain everything is
public to everyone, huge and small, and that by enforcing transparency
for everyone we can monitor each other to prevent fraud, corruption,
abuse of power etc. Matter of factly however, when 2 entities e and E,
where the resourcefulness of E is much higher than that of e (such as
a government/billionaire versus a middle class individual) use the
same blockchain to operate then E’s activity alone will be private in
practice, while enabling E to keep e under total surveillance. Because
although blockchains like BTC are open and record transactions from
everyone indiscriminately, the process of extracting/decompiling
information (via on-chain analysis) is an expensive one that most
cannot afford. In any case where there is an asymmetry in
resourcefulness, open blockchains facilitate the status quo by
enabling the most resourceful players to interfere with the free will
of the least resourceful ones. It is for this reason that recently
Snowden speaking of btc noted that BTC is really just private to the
public, but it’s public to the prominent, shall we say.
Privacy coins and DERO (encryption, obfuscation, ZK proofs, TEE)

Privacy coins are a whole category of blockchains that attempt to
tackle the privacy and surveillance issue. The benefits of anonymity
would be felt by the least resourceful individuals in the first place
and create more opportunities for everyone. The only ones that stand
to lose are few too big to fail players whose survival depends on
individual decisions being artificially the same en masse rather than
having a normal distribution. Anonymity leads to a freer world, more
efficient/meritocratic markets and increased social mobility.

The most popular privacy coin is certainly Monero. Monero, like
bitcoin, has a blockchain that contrary to bitcoin’s blockchain is
obfuscated. In BTC the entire blockchain is public (addresses,
transactions). Obfuscation is an algorithm that converts sensible data
into some unreadable form. The problem with obfuscation, when compared
to encryption (used by DERO), is that because of the nature of the
algorithm used, we can’t be sure nobody is actually reading the
original obfuscated data. In fact, to decrypt the data one doesn’t
need to have the private key but it will suffice to only reverse
engineer the algorithm used for obfuscation. There is currently a
bounty for cracking Monero’s algorithm for this reason, because it is
possible to reverse engineer it. And of course we can’t be sure nobody
has already done it just because the bounty hasn’t been claimed yet.
Contrary to other pow privacy coins like Monero, DERO cannot be 51% attacked

While obfuscation provides a higher degree of privacy compared to open
blockchains like BTC, it is still not 100% private because there is no
way to know for sure that nobody has already cracked the algorithm and
that chain analysis isn’t possible. Zero knowledge proofs, on the
other hand, like those employed by ZEC, are algorithms where the
sender of a transaction only proves that something has happened
without specifying what specifically. When a party decides to opt for
this then the transaction data is hidden. However, the privacy
function here is not by default and only a fraction of the blockchain
is obfuscated. As result of this, the chain analysis surface is still
huge enough to allow resourceful players to de-anonymize any
obfuscated data on the blockchain through on-chain analysis. Moreover,
contrary to ZK proofs, DERO uses homomorphic encryption (HE) which is
the only algorithm that allows to change data without having to
decrypt them first. Changing data in practical terms means performing
actions such as sending a payment. Thanks to HE, on DERO these can be
done without having to reveal/share one’s address.

Other coins like Secret use TEE (Trusted Environment Encryption), an
Intel tech. For scaling Secret uses POS where only 50 nodes are
allowed (in total!). Therefore here we really do have a central point
of failure in encryption (the Intel dependency since we have to trust
Intel’s black box), as well as in architecture (since the network can
only have 50 nodes).
DERO versus other smart contract platforms such as ETH and ADA

The reason why I’m bullish on DERO is that DERO is a blockchain with
smart contract capabilities (L1) that uses homomorphic encryption.
This means that the entire blockchain is encrypted, no data is ever
decrypted, all operations and smart contracts are executed on
encrypted data. Addresses, transactions, balances are all encrypted
and are never decrypted. So when a transaction is authorised the
network never sees the payer’s or payee’s address. Payer and payee
don’t see each other addresses either because all verification is done
via encrypted data, not on naked addresses. There is zero surface for
on-chain analysis on Dero.
DERO mining: POW, no 51% attacks, decentralized mining

The mining algorithm of DERO is AstroBW, this is an egalitarian
ASIC/FPGA/GPU resistant algorithm to maximise decentralisation. DERO’s
mining is designed in such a way that on one hand there is no
incentive for miners to collude with each other to form big mining
pools and on the other it guarantees that even very low hashrate
miners get some reward (and actually with a better hash to watt ratio
than high end gpu miners). The reason why pools are not feasible is
that miners work concurrently, they can’t share the work across the
network. Mining here is a bit like pregnancy, where even if you bring
many pregnant women in the same room, it will still take 9 months for
the baby as they can’t expedite each other’s pregnancy. Because of
this, since one can mine even with a mobile phone, and due to the lack
of incentives for miners to group in large databases, it is
effectively impossible for a hostile government to ban DERO mining.

As mentioned earlier, DERO is also immune to 51% attacks. The unit of
computation in DERO is not the entire block, but every single
transaction. As result, contrary to traditional blockchains such as
BTC and Monero, where there is a competition over which block is seen
first, in DERO all blocks/transactions are accepted, even the double
spend ones. However 1) these cannot invalidate other transactions (as
it would happen in BTC where it could invalidate an entire block) and
2) double spends are subsequently filtered out and ignored by the
network.
Conclusion

I believe that as the implications of anonymity will become a subject
of public debate, it is a matter of time before the public perception
of anonymity changes from something shady associated with cyber crime
to something revolutionary and self empowering that leads to fairer
markets and societies. I’m bullish on DERO because as this occurs,
fully anonymous coins will no longer be a shady niche but will slowly
go mainstream. In these circumstances, DERO’s tech, which allows not
only for a private cryptocurrency but also for private smart contracts
(100% anonymous DEXes, NFTs, stablecoins, dapps), is primed to
outperform.

NB: This is not financial advice. I hold $DERO