freetrader said: Bigbrother's Surveillance Vision BSV -igbrother'surveillanceision Now we have Click to expand...

Zangelbert Bingledack said: The legal matter sort of blindsided me when I realized I had not updated on my old assumption that Bitcoin would be constantly hunted by govs; its conspicuous unscatchedness for all these years, and the reasons behind that, indicate that if we keep it in that nearly perfect state we can go much further before clashing with any governments. If we assume the legality ship has sailed already, it's an "in for an inch, in for a mile" dynamic, but here we find Bitcoin well known in the mainstream and no rumblings of any crackdowns. Quite the surprise it seems no one talks about. Click to expand...

Zangelbert Bingledack said: I have been surprised to find, contrary to my initial ideas that Bitcoin was built with the expectation that it would always live in the crosshairs, that Bitcoin and script as a system seem carefully designed to avoid a host of pretty specific legal pitfalls, either coincidentally or by design. This assumption of basic incompatibility with government from the start, although never stated by Satoshi except as incompatibility with big government ("attractive to the libertarian point of view"), has informed many design ideas and may need to be reconsidered. Click to expand...

some

I'm hoping to sidestep the banter for a bit, with some serious discussion.These two statements from ZB align much with my recent thinking, and I wonder if it doesn't get down to the crux of the differences between the two camps.I believe Bitcoin wascarefully designed from the start. (satoshi paraphrased - much more effort went into design than implementation) I don't think it's a coincidence that it subtly threads itself through the worlds legal systems as Money (cash) it is appears exempt from nearly all the legal pitfalls of regular securities. In other words, there doesn't appear to be any legal precedent that can be used to shut it down. If so we surely would have seen attempts by now?This leads into parallels with the telecom industry, or in ZB's example; software. Miners must be seen as independent bulk carriers, they simply transmit transactions, and have no further interaction. If they start enabling use cases that are considered illegal in most jurisdictions, such as on chain gambling or totally anonymous share/stock trading, It opens them up to a massive attack vector. Current laws on money are positively ancient. Such law is very hard for democratic governments to change, the legal precedent is just too overwhelming.In other words pushing for code changes that enable illegal activity (however nice and anarchic they might seem) essentially passes the burden of liability from Developer to naive Miner.Don't misunderstand here. I'm all forof these use cases. The issue I have is if a developer wants to enable something that will be considered illegal, like gambling, then it is up to them to fight it out in court and take on the burden of their actions. I wish them luck and victory. To do so, they must keep it off chain, not recklessly risk everything, for the sake of a non-monetary use case, that effectively sticks a middle finger up at the worlds governments and exposes a massive new attack vector. Cryptocurrency is not unstoppable, believing it is, seriously underestimates the world we live in. Bitcoin is a scalpel, not a sledgehammer.I'm ambling a little, but I'd like to touch on the anonymous aspect. Your flippant BSV acronym actually touches on a very serious topic. Do we want an anonymous coin? I see lots of people pushing for this, and suspect it might be Roger, Amaury and perhaps your main reason for supporting the ABC side. I don't believe it to be the best path forward. Government, (specifically corrupt government connected individuals) pretty much have god mode enabled on the world finance and surveillance systems.We've all heard the reports "According to reports, a Londoner is likely caught on security camera over 300 times a day, which is the highest in UK; and an American citizen can be caught on camera more than 75 times per day!" This is an unstoppable, increasing trend. Fact. Whether this info is in the hands of governments, corporations or well financed individuals irrelevant. It exists, can, and will be used.Whats the solution? Anonymous coins, camo face masks, constant paranoia and bunker living? The alternative is total transparency, it's scary, especially when you don't trust governments to do the right thing. Yet here lies Bitcoins greatest potential.With a blockchain that is private, yet an open, public, ledger (not anonymous) all you need is an endpoint. (The bigger you are, the harder it will be to hide) Then instead of quivering in a bunker, scared of their governments, concerned citizens can use their skills to hunt down corrupt politicians/agencies/judges and have a full, legally admissible record or their crimes. Law then does what it's supposed to. Punish the thieves. It is not the individual that should be scared of surveillance (that's inevitable in our future) Rather it's hypocritical, corrupt, governments having a spotlight shone on their transgressions, by millions of angry people with cryptographically verifiable proof. Who would actually gain the most if we had anonymous coins?The solution to darkness is light, not more darkness.There are other problems with totally anonymous coins, but i've gone on long enough. Just consider how hard it would be for regular legally abiding businesses (the majority of the world) to do proper accounting? One side of the transaction already knows who they are, so true anonymity is a paradox. We need the ability to privately know who's on the other end, before we conduct business.It's our right to choose who we deal with.