Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Merits 25 from 8 users
Re: Could Bitcoin's transparency be its downfall?
by
garlonicon
on 29/05/2022, 19:52:34 UTC
⭐ Merited by Welsh (6) ,BlackHatCoiner (6) ,NotATether (3) ,dkbit98 (3) ,ranochigo (2) ,ETFbitcoin (2) ,elliottflz65 (2) ,DdmrDdmr (1)
1. It is technically possible to hide things. Monero can do this, their features can be implemented by Bitcoin if needed.
2. People can mix coins. When more and more coins are mixed, then censors have to reject all coins (or accept all coins, in the same way as they accept cash).
3. Taproot can hide the number of participants. You never know, how many users are behind a Taproot address.
4. If Taproot will be banned, then we could use homomorphic encryption on verified public keys and do the same thing, by using more complicated math, but it could still work.
5. Lightning Network can mix coins by default. Many clients will give you different coins, when you close your channel, and will leave your previous channels as opened (for example Phoenix wallet).
6. If censorship will be common, then "validation as a service" will be created. You will pay someone for doing validation on your behalf, in the same way as people use fake IDs or SIM cards registered to someone else. It would be even easier than with physical items, because it can be done remotely, just by writing some software and using maths.
7. If nodes will be banned, then we will start connecting outside TCP/IP. Bitcoin Core is trying to get there by supporting more and more protocols, see changelog of version 23.0.
8. There is more. We can invent new ways when needed, some people are working on that.

So, I think we know how to protect Bitcoin from censorship. My answer is just "we should write a better code".