š
Original date posted:2012-12-03
š Original message:On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Mike Hearn <mike at plan99.net> wrote:
> Second thing, it's best to carefully separate "anonymity" from
> "privacy". Privacy is supposed to be a feature of the system (it says
> so in Satoshis paper) because people demand it. If I loan a tenner to
> my friend and he is able to find out what I earned last month, then
> that trade was neither anonymous nor private. In this case I want
> privacy but anonymity isn't useful. Mixing up anonymity with privacy
> is not only a public relations problem, but can lead to confusion from
> users when they, eg, try and buy Bitcoins from an exchange and are
> asked to provide ID proofs.
I would like to second this point...privacy is essential because the market
demands it. If Bitcoin doesn't do it well (and I would argue that it
doesn't today), then eventually a competitor to Bitcoin will do it better
and that would be the beginning of the end for Bitcoin. Debates about
whether it was or wasn't a core feature are pointless.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20121203/848f1e36/attachment.html>;
Stephen Pair [ARCHIVE] /
npub124ā¦x46aw
2023-06-07 10:44:48
in reply to nevent1qā¦d699
Author Public Key
npub124cdyp9a5ae4v5jpdp3m5yajd6qxtfzrcf5umnk7lqhgzp7ujwnswx46awPublished at
2023-06-07 10:44:48Event JSON
{
"id": "b71c15ec3389147016230fafc939d49a66970f3621e47dbffdb86b32e6bc684f",
"pubkey": "5570d204bda7735652416863ba13b26e8065a443c269cdcedef82e8107dc93a7",
"created_at": 1686134688,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e38e06cde7ee8f4b601cbd5e5a0ad7773352871f0487670ef1ae95a3f05e5aad",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"7bdd4edf5ebde4f7fb42ee8d0ff730067aa3aa7cc0a1608b7d59ffcfa09b5bf5",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f2c95df3766562e3b96b79a0254881c59e8639f23987846961cf55412a77f6f2"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2012-12-03\nš Original message:On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Mike Hearn \u003cmike at plan99.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Second thing, it's best to carefully separate \"anonymity\" from\n\u003e \"privacy\". Privacy is supposed to be a feature of the system (it says\n\u003e so in Satoshis paper) because people demand it. If I loan a tenner to\n\u003e my friend and he is able to find out what I earned last month, then\n\u003e that trade was neither anonymous nor private. In this case I want\n\u003e privacy but anonymity isn't useful. Mixing up anonymity with privacy\n\u003e is not only a public relations problem, but can lead to confusion from\n\u003e users when they, eg, try and buy Bitcoins from an exchange and are\n\u003e asked to provide ID proofs.\n\n\nI would like to second this point...privacy is essential because the market\ndemands it. If Bitcoin doesn't do it well (and I would argue that it\ndoesn't today), then eventually a competitor to Bitcoin will do it better\nand that would be the beginning of the end for Bitcoin. Debates about\nwhether it was or wasn't a core feature are pointless.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20121203/848f1e36/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "971bed1357438f75f111f05657fed881a6d4e060e66ddb9156bb35437b0473604b9e2055d633d760711f64c7cca6608db5fc048ab20b62350269a212864050e4"
}