public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
To: Stephen Pair <stephen@bitpay.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Chain dust mitigation: Demurrage based Chain Vacuuming
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 11:29:49 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALf2ePx95F68q4-5UPatRxMcKL7yAR1dtZY3UVcGuH1_hrWBnw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADb9v0+WiNiZcnLN-BUOKK6wwSYaV-y0zrVvrPcXMJAd89o3PQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2113 bytes --]

These are all valid points.  I hadn't really thought much about this point
until you all just brought it up.  The reason I so quickly spout off that
phrase, is that I endlessly get requests from Armory users to implement
more anonymity-based features.  When I say there are bigger priorities,
they suggest that "anonymity" is a core benefit of Bitcoin and I should be
supporting it.  I'm not against anonymity, and I most certainly favor
privacy, but my goal was to produce a versatile client, not one focused on
any one aspect -- there are plenty of people who use it for other reasons
than anonymity.

However, I do like Greg's comment about "attacks" against a
blind-dust-inclusion algorithm, and suggestion to maintain a clustering of
already-linked addresses.  That's not terribly difficult to do with the
transaction history in hand, and it could increase how often the logic
triggers.  I suppose these hardcore SD players probably have a lot of
one-satoshi outputs that could use vacuuming...




On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Stephen Pair <stephen@bitpay.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
>
>> Second thing, it's best to carefully separate "anonymity" from
>> "privacy". Privacy is supposed to be a feature of the system (it says
>> so in Satoshis paper) because people demand it. If I loan a tenner to
>> my friend and he is able to find out what I earned last month, then
>> that trade was neither anonymous nor private. In this case I want
>> privacy but anonymity isn't useful. Mixing up anonymity with privacy
>> is not only a public relations problem, but can lead to confusion from
>> users when they, eg, try and buy Bitcoins from an exchange and are
>> asked to provide ID proofs.
>
>
> I would like to second this point...privacy is essential because the
> market demands it.  If Bitcoin doesn't do it well (and I would argue that
> it doesn't today), then eventually a competitor to Bitcoin will do it
> better and that would be the beginning of the end for Bitcoin.  Debates
> about whether it was or wasn't a core feature are pointless.
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2852 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2012-12-03 16:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-03 11:19 [Bitcoin-development] Chain dust mitigation: Demurrage based Chain Vacuuming Michael Gronager
2012-12-03 12:05 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-12-03 12:24   ` Michael Gronager
2012-12-03 12:33     ` Pieter Wuille
2012-12-03 15:02     ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-12-03 15:17       ` Alan Reiner
2012-12-03 15:30         ` Mike Hearn
2012-12-03 16:18           ` Stephen Pair
2012-12-03 16:29             ` Alan Reiner [this message]
2012-12-03 19:50               ` Andreas Petersson
2012-12-03 20:14                 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-12-03 15:51         ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-12-03 12:40 ` Wladimir
2012-12-03 13:04   ` Michael Gronager
2012-12-03 15:00 ` Mike Hearn
2012-12-03 15:07   ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-12-03 15:09     ` Mike Hearn
2012-12-03 17:02 ` Mark Friedenbach
2012-12-04  9:54 ` Andy Parkins

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CALf2ePx95F68q4-5UPatRxMcKL7yAR1dtZY3UVcGuH1_hrWBnw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=etotheipi@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=stephen@bitpay.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox