Thank you. TLDR, need to read it completely later.
So how do i have to understand that? You have a wallet or a website you interact with, it displays you the ecash string, it has to have the ability to log that string. I dont say it does but you have the ability to create the client in that way that it can log it, no?
Also really funny for me ( from the faq):
CAUTION: Choose mints where you trust or know and trust the operator. Use small amounts or immediately redeem tokens or swap tokens to your own mint.
Who the fuck says openly: "Hi, i am Joe Schmock, i am your friendly ecash operator running this Mint, i live in 123 Retardvillage. If you want to arrest me, just come by, i have not learned anything from the Tornado cash lawsuit. Apart from that, use my tokens so you can buy drugs anonymously online. Love to you all. "
Am i getting something completely wrong here or are they delusional?
No, you're not delusional, it is definitely a concern. Users will be more willing to trust known mint runners with a good reputation, but that makes the mints easier targets for the state. Anon mint runners would be harder to find, but easier for them to rugpull users without consequence.
The arguments I hear are that federated mints would at least make it harder to rug users, ability to quickly spin up/move mints to better jurisdictions, and to only keep spending cash on it them - not large amounts you can't afford to lose.
Even though I think the strong privacy/offchain/instant aspects of ecash is cool the major problem I have a hard time getting past is reintroducing trusted intermediates again when the whole point of Bitcoin was to remove them
Totally, trusting a FEDerated mint is like trusting the FED. There are also a bunch of people i dont know who say they only have my wellbeing in mind and i should trust them. Where is the difference?
I have read the page you sent me and i have played around with ecash, what i do not understand at all - you get a string from a mint, send it to somebody else and he goes to the mint and pastes that string into a textarea on the mints website.
So the mint can log the ip of who gets the string and the ip of who redeems the string and where is the great privacy in that?
Also the faq you sent me did not answer this question to me.
Why not have both parties connect using TOR?
Sure you can do that. But the more hoops you need to jump through in order to get privacy, the more points of failure you have and the more likely it is that you make a mistake over time.
And having to trust a third party for privacy is a mistake in the first place IMO.
There are few privacy enabling tools that actually work that don't need TOR to function. Monero is probably the only one I am aware of because of dandelion.
FYI Dandelion only protects you from other nodes that are communicating and only if you are running your own node. It doesn't protect you from your ISP. So, you still need Tor/Proxies/VPNs/Mixnets to protect you from your ISP and/or if you're using a remote node
So it doesn't use encryption to relay the transaction until the dandelion decides to make it public?
So this is how I understand it. Hopefully I can explain it correctly.
Everything is still encrypted like normal of course. Dandelion only protects you from malicious nodes on the network knowing what node broadcasted a transaction.
But your ISP would still know you were the one who broadcasted a transaction (they still wouldn't be able to see amounts/receivers). Does that make sense?
Damn. Is there a way to get monero running in start9? We need that.
Not sure, but all you have to do to protect yourself from your ISP is use Tor or at least a good VPN. But even if you didn't, all they would know is you used Monero. They wouldn't know how much Monero you sent or who received it.
Oddbean new post about login | logout