Replying to Avatar ᴛʜᴇ ᴅᴇᴀᴛʜ ᴏꜰ ᴍʟᴇᴋᴜ

lightning's problem is its brittle network topology

the use of onions was specifically about reducing the chances of an attacker knowing the whole path, but for practical reasons the endpoints are not anonymised from each other

also, it's not a sect if you are chasing after the real thing, all cults are about a false goal, that is promoted by a person or group

monero sacrifices supply rate guarantees to get its anonymity and this is not anacceptable trade off

the fixed supply is far more important than the anonymity
Avatar
Saberhagen The Nameless 1y ago

"this is not an acceptable trade off"

*for you*

I always find this argument kind of funny. Other critical components of Bitcoin rely on cryptographic assumptions that would be catastrophic if wrong and you trust those. I never see you talk about those.

What about the downsides of having a transparent chain?

-Surveillance

-Non-fungibility

-Targeted mining censorship

You keeping up with the Roman Sterlingov case?

A common theme from many great minds that paved the way for the creation of Bitcoin placed ***great*** emphasized on "privacy", "anonymity", and "untraceability". Many Bitcoiners now ignore, don't know about it, or treat it as a side issue. They weren't arguing about "fixed supply" or NGU.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.