There goes the theory that he was Satoshi—a view frequently discussed in #bitcoin circles.
You simply can’t design a system with supply auditability in mind without public disclosure of credits and debits. Unfortunately, many privacy-focused advocates tend to overlook this. The core problem being addressed here is the need for hard money as an alternative to the arbitrary inflation imposed by central banks. Frankly, privacy alone isn’t enough to solve this; supply auditability is essential.
Take this point to a Monero discussion, and hit a wall.....
That is the problem if you take that privacy matter to an extreme and make it your biggest selling point...
I have tried so many times but gave up.
Even the most basic discussion "you can't properly use absolute private money in current government regulated markets" without adding features that effectively make it resemble bitcoin 😇, is not possible.
Ok, have fun with your prefered solution and find out 🤷♂️
Bitcoin at it's core is black market digital money. Transactions on regulated markets aren't possible unless you're following the rules of a central authority which defeats the whole point. Any white market use is incidental and transient.
> The core problem being addressed here is the need for hard money as an alternative to the arbitrary inflation imposed by central banks.
This was the core issue that was addressed by Satoshi, evidenced by numerous posts of his.
Ok, I don't deny what Satoshi was attempting to solve. But what if the state says "You can't use Bitcoin on the white market anymore", or "you can use it only if you deposit it at our regulated custodians or use this inflation friendly fork that we control", or "you can use it but we're going to tax using and holding bitcoin to effectively be the same value lost as if it were being inflated"?
The only way to ultimately enforce what youre saying is through black markets
Agora all the way; I'd hate to see statism surviving another century.
