e2
Wonteet Zebugs
e217899785048ee15da66ab1c4633b8679d141e96c526017d5e7b1991ce584b9
Freedom-loving Bitcoin and Nostr pleb. No bugs, no pods.

That reasoning should apply all the more to normal plebs, the ones who don't have unlimited-fiat-money-backed armed goons to protect them. KYC, doxxing, is the problem. I'll take measures to protect my privacy as well and I won't be doxxing myself to your agencies and your institutions. For my own safety and my family's safety.

#privacy #kyc

Could you mention the AI you used please?

I had that exact same experience asking some AI model about some Dune story plots. I know that book pretty well. The AI answer was pure BS, pure hallucination. But I don't remember which model I used at that time.

But I see that it's all very much model-dependent, and prompt-dependent.

What happened in the 51st State with the covid craziness :

"Corrupted by Fear: How the Charter was betrayed, and what Canadians can do about it"

https://www.amazon.ca/Corrupted-Fear-Charter-betrayed-Canadians/dp/B0DSZSTBLL

"As Canadians, we depend on our courts to protect us when the government violates our Charter rights and freedoms. After extensive Covid lockdowns and vaccine mandates, many are left wondering how such violations could go unchecked. How is it that we still don’t have clear explanations as to why judges preferred the evidence of the government over the evidence of citizens fighting for their Charter freedoms? All Canadians, regardless of their views on the pandemic, should be concerned about courts repeating media narratives in their judgments, seemingly turning a blind eye to the violations of human rights, and failing to consider the real harms suffered by people. What will be the next pretext that politicians use to violate human rights, and then use to justify the violation in court?

Corrupted by Fear reviews, through the eyes of constitutional lawyer John Carpay, the evidence before courts in Charter challenges to Covid lockdowns. Carpay explains how harsh measures that turned our world upside down were not subjected to proper scrutiny. He explores crucial lessons Canadians can learn from history, particularly the collapse of democracy and human rights into fascism in Europe in the 1930s. He concludes with an action plan that Canadians can use to resist and defeat future attacks by government against our rights and freedoms.

John Carpay is the Founder and President of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms. Born in the Netherlands, he grew up in British Columbia. Fluent in English, French, and Dutch, he earned his B.A. in Political Science at Laval University in Quebec City, and his LL.B. from the University of Calgary. John has devoted his legal career to defending the Charter rights and freedoms of Canadians, and has spent decades advocating for freedom in the courts of law and the court of public opinion."

https://www.jccf.ca/ :

"FROM COAST TO COAST

We Defend Freedom in Canada

We are a registered charity. Founded in 2010, we defend the constitutional freedoms of Canadians through litigation and education. "

Do you know of work (research) I could look at that might compare monero and lightning+cashu privacy?

Replying to Avatar Hanshan

lol

nostr:nprofile1qqszrqlfgavys8g0zf8mmy79dn92ghn723wwawx49py0nqjn7jtmjagpz4mhxue69uhkummnw3ezummcw3ezuer9wchszyrhwden5te0dehhxarj9ekk7mf0qy88wumn8ghj7mn0wvhxcmmv9uynmh4h and I have an ongoing discussion

he likes to call it "tracing" because saying

"the sender of a transaction knows the destination"

doesnt sound very impressive.

but that all that stupid "challenge" of his shows.

it isnt "tracing monero."

he just thinks its funny to make work for other people.

But that would mean that the CEX could see where the moneto went, no?

I mean that if you withdraw from an exchange through bitcoin on-chain (not through lightning or liquid), you'll have a UTXO (unspent transaction output) on the bitcoin blockchain, but what you then do with that UTXO will determine how much privacy you lose or regain.

You're right, that was a bad choice of words on my part. It comes from the heart. I like the guy.

I've seen him appearing frustrated with bitcoin for a long time and it's sad to me seeing a brother going in what I believe to be the wrong direction.

But it was a bad choice of words on my part.

I think it depends on how you use your onchain UTXOs afterwards. Are they coinjoined into lightning and then spent through cashu, liquid, etc.

But the number one low-hanging fruit for privacy, imho, is avoiding a centralized echange which requires KYC.

Then, the next low-hanging privacy fruit is what goes around any spend : using a pseudonym, private mailboxes, private email addresses, etc.

Multisig : that's debatable. I remember Francis Pouliot writing this a couple years ago, on twitter :

"Having a strong BIP39 passphrase and redundant backups is superior to a multisig for security, accesability and loss prevention. I can't imagine the stress of multisig as a personal solution. No wonder people pay 3rd parties to hold their multisig keys!"

Francis has been in bitcoin for a long while and has been involved in customer-facing businesses (btc businesses) for about as long (the Bitcoin Embassy in MTL and then bullbitcoin.com).

I remember even electrum (older version) messing up the multisig setup so badly that such that electrum couldn't access the funds put in that multisig. And electrum is a very OG project.

Bitcoin payments on Square terminals incoming in the second half of this year, or 2026 :

"May 27 2025, LAS VEGAS – Block, Inc. (NYSE: XYZ) today announced it will launch bitcoin payments on Square, [...] The roll out is anticipated to begin in the second half of 2025 and is expected to reach all eligible Square sellers in 2026, subject to applicable regulatory approvals."

https://block.xyz/inside/block-to-roll-out-bitcoin-payments-on-square

Replying to Avatar semisol

To start, as both disclosure and a background, I have signed a mutual NDA with a large company that makes SEs. This does *not* include a non-disparagement clause, and what is covered by NDA is technical documentation.

> Not to mention (well, I guess I'm mentioning) the risks of a supply chain attack for the secure elements.

This depends on the secure element. The company that I work with, and many other reputable vendors, have strong countermeasures against supply chain attacks:

- Each chip gets a unique key to identify it, that proves it is genuine

- Production of chips is tightly monitored

- Sensitive key material is stored in dedicated hardware only

and so on.

Cheap SEs, like the ATECC series, to my knowledge do not do this.

> And at this point, secure elements are securing crazy amounts of money. So the temptation must be off the scale.

It has always been, even before Bitcoin. Passports, credit cards, other digital signature systems, etc.

And yet, there are few attacks discovered in high-quality SEs. Almost none apply to real-world scenarios.

> Secure elements are closed-hardware

That is true. But the off-the-shelf MCUs are also closed hardware. Everything is closed hardware. Unfortunately, due to how the IC industry works, building a chip requires proprietary IP, and any company that gives it away is shooting themselves in the foot, really.

Economic incentives are very real, while the amount of protection open sourcing a SE is not. (how do you verify the chip you got equals the open source design?)

> Secure elements ... require NDAs

This will change.

My problem with the NDA being necessary to view the technical documentation is that they'll be even less eyes on the design. How many can double-check that there are no bugs.

It's true that for an off-the-shelf MCU, we're trusting the vendor. One of the things that I like about Jade is that since they're using off the shelf MCUs with open source software, we can DIY build one. Granted, probably not too many people do that.

Passports, credit cards, etc, and secure elements : there's no do-over in btc whereas it's not too hard to do a do-over in the fiat and KYC world.

Jade Plus also offer a stateless signer option (if you can trust that the hardware really doesn't keep anything when it shouldn't).

So overall, can I assume that you prefer the odds of a secure element being hacked compared to the odds of both a Jade being stolen and the oracle server being compromised?

nostr:nprofile1qqsxwkuyle67y94tj378gw8w2xw2wa6nwmwlqhddlwnz0z7sztsaw2qn2rdgc

You say that you tend to agree with the last paragraph of my reply. Should I then also infer that you don't agree with the second one where I compared favorably our different choices on bitcoin versus monero in terms of privacy?

I'm really asking, not trolling. I'm very much interested in privacy and I very much respect your opinions about privacy software.