WagonBurner

Not only that, but they will allow the really bright ones do all the work and set up the system, then come in a buy them out, or own them, or a mysterious air plane crash. I will take fbi coverups for 2,000 Alex.

obvious_throwaway1

I would be extremely surprised if this had any merit. The technicals simply aren't there, unless all the speculation about CIA technology being 10+ years ahead of everything public is actually real and they've unlocked some kind of super quantum computing, because the blockchain's base algorithm is quantum resistant by design due to the sheer extreme exponential numbers involved in the block solution equation.

Mathematically I just don't see it. Not saying it's impossible, just that there really is no legitimate evidence it's possible. Catch 22 I guess.

Seems more like doom porn.

allahead

I think the argument is that the globalists will create their own block chain while making the others illegal and removing the possibility of anonymity. It's not necessary for them to take over Bitcoin or others directly, they will leverage the tech into their own product.

obvious_throwaway1

With the way the ecosystem works, I cannot possibly see this being accomplished. The same people who use alternatives today would use alternatives tomorrow, and there will always be a way to exchange within the ecosystem because profit drives everything in modern society and this service would still be technically possible and thus someone would pay for the service so it would always be profitable.

That's my argument.

obvious_throwaway1

I find it incredibly amusing when someone who does not understand something technical decides to try and play pretend because of an article on the internet.

Your article is stupid. The reasons are simple. You literally cannot track Bitcoin at all unless the person using it has very little technical competency at all - for the simple fact that if I use a Bitcoin wallet as it's designed to be used, then every single transaction I make is using a new public key pair.

To make a very simple non-technical analogy here to demonstrate why you are wrong , it's like if you had a credit card (for the sake of argument, eliminate the bank from the equation and just go from you->other party) and every single time you made a purchase you had the ability to change your full credit card number - so if you buy from Walmart every day of the week, Walmart would not have the ability to connect Monday's purchase to Tuesday's purchase because they do not have your private key to make the connection between the two as a single source. Now - for this analogy, lets assume everyone has the ability to do this, but 99% of the people are too lazy to use it properly to protect themselves and instead simply use the same number for convenience . Just because most people make poor choices and have poor understanding of privacy and security which would allow this IRS software to work to begin with does not mean all people do.

Granted, "little technical capacity" does in fact apply to most people - but you demonstrate that you do not even understand how the blockchain works if you think this article has any technical merit.

If I am ignorant, please illustrate how. So far you've shown yourself to be pretty ignorant of crypto , giving your opinion of me absolutely zero weight or merit. Have you ever used a full wallet, ever? Seriously - the IRS can monitor the blockchain all it wants but anyone who uses it properly will never be "tracked" as you and your nonsense source claim.

Feel free to prove me wrong. Otherwise you just look like an idiot.

WagonBurner

Showing up at the carbon food bank with Bitcoin number in hand should cure all your wonders. Hunger will change a attitude problem real fast. They would track you by cornering the market; and if you change your number, we know where you live, the color of your kids eyes, your wifes dress size, etc. etc.

dothestonk

How do you transfer funds from one wallet address to another to enable spending from a new wallet address, and where is the record of each of those wallet-to-wallet address transactions stored, immutably and forever?

By algorithmically tracing the blockchain and netting out all transactions (BTC blockchain is zero sum), full traceability and auditability becomes possible.

Identity tagging on the Tx timeline can happen at any point via enrichment from any other intersecting data source... and there are so many to choose from.

In that respect it's no different to Facebook generating 'ghost' profiles for real people tagged by other users, waiting for the day they finally sign up so all that juicy preloaded network graph data that was hibernating can finally be applied to their 'new' account, ready for harvesting.

DANKGHIDORAH

Walmart can prove it was you because they have cameras and the times of transactions. Everything you do can be tracked, and everything is.

obvious_throwaway1

Complete horseshit because in this analogy Walmart would be using software to monitor transactions, not CCTV to visually identify you with some make believe China level bullshit.

The software would hit a brick wall when you used different numbers. It's really that simple and I can't help you further if you lack the technical aptitude to understand these most basic things, especially since I haven't even begun to cover more complex things like mixing - or even simple things like just trading crypto for cash in real life.

Here, let me help illustrate why you are wrong further, because you obviously don't have the technical chops to get this without ELI5 level explanations: https://coinsutra.com/anonymous-bitcoin-transactions/

Maybe you'll see I'm trying to help you see through bullshit articles like this.

DANKGHIDORAH

Nowhere in that article does it state you should use a machine that isn't compromised through Talpiot. Try again.

obvious_throwaway1

So your argument is that every computer on the planet is compromised? C'mon man, lets be real here - just because most of the world doesn't understand security or hardening and has shitty practices doesn't mean everyone does.

I guess if you actually believe that we've got nothing else to say, because I'm sitting in a room with no less than three airgapped systems with multiple layers of 64-bit entropy encryption on the drives and partitions that I can use to fuckin' generate a new inbound and/or outbund key and literally print the motherfucker on a piece of paper to use for a transaction.

Please try to convince me how that could be broken without breaking my kneecaps to torture some passwords out of me. I really am all ears.

DANKGHIDORAH

I hope you only interact with people as secure as you, then.

obvious_throwaway1

It wouldn't matter because I never use the same key twice. Don't you get it?

DANKGHIDORAH

Sure, I also get that you physically are tracked everywhere you go, so you can buy whatever you want as secretly as you want, but it doesn't matter unless you matter.

obvious_throwaway1

We finally have something we can agree on.

My argument from the beginning was that these types of things are done with algo's and algo's can be tricked far too easily, and it's sad that most people don't even try.

No shit that when the microscope comes out you're fucked, we don't have Globalist Jew money to Mossad infiltrate the CIA and spy on everyone like they do.

DANKGHIDORAH

That's why I don't bother. Unless I'm going out of my way to disguise my entire identity, it defeats the purpose of anonymizing my transactions. Privacy doesn't exist anymore, even if you do manage to somehow disappear at some point, you'd have to fake your death and live a very strange life. The data vacuum you would create in the process would be a trail in its own way.

I'm also a fucking orphan in a poor town, so what the fuck do I even care.

NoRoyalty

Just throwing it out there. Food for thought.

obvious_throwaway1

Nothing wrong with food for thought, but without evidence or at least a reasonably technically-sound argument then it's extremely hard to take the thoughts seriously.

NoRoyalty

I think the author makes a case. You are free to disagree. I didn't post this to argue about it. I consider it a PSA.