If only maxis were so demanding when it comes to auditing the gettxsetoutinfo function.... đ„
It is good to be intellectually consistent.
It is not plausible to suggest zero knowledge proofs are unreliable because "they are younger"
They've been around since the 80s and are well understood.
People have been talking about adding them to bitcoin since forever. I'm not aware of *anyone* who is opposed because they're skeptical of their mathematical properties.
Here Hal discussing them back in the day.
Ill see if I can find a braindead explanation of rangeproofs or Pedersen commitments.
In the meantime here's the wikipedia on commitment schemes.
Give a simpler explanation. If you want people to adopt monero or if you want bitcoin to add this to the base layer, youâre going to have to convince the nodes in a simpler way. https://video.nostr.build/95ccace291ed11b0cfa946bd3b4d6cd1ec8d33c9b38417f442ccad19110f5c46.mp4
Actual personal responsibility and self sovereignty requires effort.
He is precisely correct.
A monero transaction must prove no its inputs and output equal zero to meet consensus agreements.
We can prove that without knowing the amounts involved because of zero knowledge proofs.
This isn't rocket science,you are already trusting more complicated maths using bitcoin.
Yall are incorrect that there is significantly more trust than you already put in bitcoin.
Range proofs have been around for a looong time and are well understood.
you audit the gettxoutsetinfo code yourself?
or do you *trust* the community to do it for you?
For one, Im willing to bet you have NEVER personally verified the BTC supply and just trust someone elses code to do it
And two, it's possible to mathematically prove that something is so, WITHOUT actually revealing what the factors are.
Like we can prove that the sum of the inputs and outputs of a tx are zero. Without showing the amounts.
In other words
yall are morons who don't understand you are ALREADY trusting cryptographic primitives and you dont need to be able to sum the utxo set on a napkin to have supply assurances.
Snowden is absolutely correct.
There are some Proof of Reserve schemes that people have been kicking around for a while. That would be hard proof that the mint has the BTC (or whatever).
Also Calle has this Proof of Liabilities scheme.
https://gist.github.com/callebtc/ed5228d1d8cbaade0104db5d1cf63939
Ideas... none of them are implemented anywhere yet as far as I know.
Protocol level privacy is the only solution.
This is true.
Except the part about social shaming.
Shame is good aktcually.
Isn't ecash the synthetic bitcoin that is used to suppress the price forever?
they just have to spin up the most credible mint and normies will go for it.
particularly since non credible mints will rug people.
You're promoting beta software and untried tech as privacy solutions.
LN privacy is a complicated issue and when you say "I use LN privately all the time"
you're obviously full of shit.
"privacy is coming" is the cope.
Ive been having these arguments for over 7 yrs and its always "privacy is coming."
There is nothing that comes close to monero privacy guarantees and that's a fact.
furthermore, if you do NOT have protocol level privacy there will ALWAYS be centralization/custodial tradeoffs.
There is no Zerolink CJ operational st the moment.
JM cjs have been unwound and wasabi sucks.
So no, there isnt a good CJ option atm.
Receiver privacy on LN is non existent and even sender privacy is subjective since LN can be highly centrlaized.
"proxy node" isnt a thing.
iow, there arent any tools on bitcoin that obfuscate the sender, receiver and amount.
agree with no-KYC though.
no KYC only đ
You need to make an coherent argument for a solution.
Are you trying to make a case for Mutiny being private LN payments?
Are you saying enuts is not custodial?
Do you know the point you are trying to make?
Atomic swaps are a thing. So no there is no risk.
And its nice to theorize about how great ecash will be when its not battle-tested.
As it stands, you have to immediately swap out to you own mint or to LN becasue we cant trust the mints.
All of your "solutions" have considerably more friction that just having a stack of monero you use for private payments.