I think eg if you read the original zercoin paper and I said similar things on bitcointalk that anonymity is the ideal building block. What you can build with it is many permutations of desired and useful privacy levels. It doesnt have to be full payee & payer anonymous just because the building block supports that. And there are many reasons in the real world that you dont get that privacy in practice. IP logging, IP geolocation, physical shipping address, knowledge of you by the person you are paying/receiving from, privacy mistakes etc.
Agree, but the protocol must support those levels of anonymity.
Kind of odd if you are sitting on the holygrail crypto and not publishing for some kind of ethical considerations?
I didn't say it was the holygrail. It has advantages over the other protocols (uses old more proven crypto) and some disadvantages.
The greater disadvantage is that it was not widely reviewed.
But ethic was not the only reason, the other reason is that I don't like writing proofs of any crypto I do.
Ok. I'll reconsider.
ps Personally I think gambling has far more ethical worries than users being able to transact privately with something approaching the analogous already existing levels of privacy in other systems. For some people gambling becomes a near ruining addiction.
The levels of online poker gambling addiction are far lower than the levels of real-word casino addictions. Also the software I developing has all kinds of controls against problem gambling (but of course, you can recompile it and remove all those checks, since it will be open sourced).
Best regards,
Sergio.