Fair enough. In my eyes your definition of "shitcoin" is fucking stupid.
This is why anime is so good
Is this a criticism of this one hypocritical man?
A criticism of VC's?
A criticism of libertarians?
Or a blend of all 3?
Considering you've leaned Democrat all your life I would assume you also like big government in various aspects of society and look down on libertarians.
The suggested solution where everyone consistently churns isn't a real solution. The fewer people use KYC'd services, the less powerful on chain analytics become.
Compared to Bitcoin's privacy model and the state of Bitcoin's privacy, this "doom" scenario is hyperbole. Amounts are still hidden. Receiver privacy is still fairly strong.
Why are coinjoins immune from this problem?
They don't list it because they calculate the misguided regulatory risk outweighs the benefit. I also think it's in their business model to curry favor with regulators and establish government enforced moats around their business, but that's a separate tangent.
Their calculation changes if demand for crypto as currency increases. Only at that point will the benefit clearly massively outweigh the cons.
Feels like we're going in circles at this point. I don't think we really disagree that much, just arguing to argue.
Sorry, but you’re wrong. They won’t go near it because regulators are telling them not to, and because of their own internal risk assessments. https://decrypt.co/36731/heres-why-coinbase-still-hasnt-listed-monero
You are right that nobody uses crypto as a currency tho.
Eh, I don't think this disproves my point. I'm well aware. I'm arguing that top down control is working here and will continue to work so long as people and businesses don't have significant demand for crypto as currency.
And if that demand comes to fruition, the benefits of privacy become exceedingly clear while the cons you mention of cons people benefiting will be clearly outweighed, the same as with knives.
I agree with this and the tweet above it. I responded in the wrong place. I agree governments tend to want total control over everything and anonymous money does not mesh with the current trajectory of most government agendas.
Doesn't make the claim that anonymous money is bad legitimate.
The reason for that is that crypto is primarily a vehicle for financial speculation today, not as a transactional currency. Exchanges primarily serve speculators. The reason crypto isn't used as a currency is because most people don't see a need for it. If the need for crypto as transactional currency comes to fruition, then that reality changes. People will demand privacy. People and businesses aren't going to want to use money that shares extensive information about themselves with everyone they transact with.
Meant to respond with this here
#[3]
"Knives shouldn't be allowed because people do bar things with them"
You clearly know nothing about running a business that wants to keep its customer data safe and out of the hands of competitors
Single click no thought necessary idiot proof solid privacy
It looks like Volcker had no effect on inflation from this chart
You suck Samourai's dick on twitter like 12 times a day lol