For the money laundering and human trafficking that he specifically was not accused of?
Cryptocurrency is the enemy of privacy, and its use in this situation would increase the appearance of illegality, possibly opening up the accused to tax fraud allegations. Advocating for its use by people who can’t afford to lose thousands of dollars in a pyramid scheme is absurd.
GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 22 Aug 00:56
nextcollapse
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 01:08
nextcollapse
The word “investors” is the problem here.
The word is crypto"currency". The goal would be to completely replace traditional currency.
Your job pays you in crypto, you pay your electric bill in crypto, you pay your mortgage in crypto, you pay your car payment in crypto, you save in crypto, you buy your Starbucks in crypto. You sell your old game system for crypto, etc.
When you completely give up on the traditional system and value your life in crypto, your life gets better.
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 04:07
collapse
Hey, thanks for the read. That was actually very interesting.
I think a lot of the problems are the shifting of the meanings of words over time, in that words get used in different contexts, in different time periods. For example, socialism is commonly thought to be Marxist-Leninist states like the old Soviet Union, etc., when apparently that’s not what it meant at all.
On a personal level, I don’t know quite what the hell I am because I feel as though I could identify with some aspects of American libertarianism as well as anarchism and voluntarism and i like the NAP. i am absolutely opposed to war, see the right to bare arms as absolutely imparative, and hate fiat money because it gives one group of humans the means to destroy the lives of everyone else silently and without most people being able to identify the root of the problem.
I like Ayn Rands “Atlas Shrugged”, Alongside Night by, i’m going to butcher his name, J Neil Schulman, and some of Sek3.
I am in no way opposed to drugs, but think that individuals who choose to use hard drugs are only hurting themselves. Cocoa leaf tea is one thing. Cocaine is totally different, just because of how much stronger it is. Marijuana is fine because you’re not going to overdose and die from it, even if sometimes you might feel like you will.
With that said, what a person chooses to put in their body and enjoy is none of my fucking business. And I have no say over that, nor should I.
Another thing I found to be quite interesting was assassination politics and the assassination marketplace for those power hungry people who think they could lord it over everybody else wouldn’t be able to do so for very long.
Edit: a few of the people i have major respect for are Cody Wilson (liberator 3d pistol) J Stark (Fuck Gun Control (FGC) 9mm, murdered by german poliece RIP), Amir Takki (dark wallet) and Edward Snowden (NSA leaks)
Both the United States and the Soviet Union cracked down on organized labor. The corruption of the word ‘socialism’ was encouraged by both super-powers, one to falsely associate it with dictators and tyranny, and the other to claim its virtue for itself.
George Orwell wrote, “Rifles, muskets, long-bows, and hand grenades are inherently democratic weapons.” Anarchists generally don’t oppose safe recreational drug use, and see addiction not as a criminal act but instead a public health issue. Historically anarchists have flirted ideologically with assassination, but the modern consensus is that the means and the ends of revolution are too closely related to embrace political murder as a tenet.
It sounds like you’re interested in becoming more politically literate. One question to ponder is if it may be moral for people to conspire to assassinate tyrants, is it also moral for people to organize a labor union to prevent tyrants from paying them poverty wages?
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 14:38
collapse
Why organize a labor union to keep the tyrants from paying you poverty wages when you could just submit the name of the tyrant to the assassination market and let somebody take care of it?
The more unpopular you are as a human being, the shorter your expected lifespan, because the reward for you not existing would increase proportionally to how much of an asshole you were.
The next person knowing that the workers are why the last person was deposed would be a hell of a lot less likely to pay poverty wages and become unpopular since they have an incentive to live.
Personally, I’ve never followed or paid very much attention to politics as I see it as a pointless endeavor. The way our political systems are set up these days, they will get what they want and fuck what the people think.
I think there are a group of people that go into politics who are just pure evil and do so in order to have control over other people. I think there are some people who go into politics actually thinking they can change the system and have absolutely no idea that they don’t matter in the grand scheme of things.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts, absolutely.
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 15:27
collapse
I think scale is the problem.
With something like national politics, for example, the politicians can be thousands of miles away from you and really have no accountability to you as an individual.
In state politics, the politicians may be a hundred miles away or so, but that’s at least a doable trip, and you are able to make your voice heard better than you would if the politicians were a thousand miles away, because you can actually make that trip.
The mayor of your city and your city hall are probably only going to be about 20 or 30 miles away at the absolute maximum and you can very easily get to that local meeting point and make your voice heard on issues that affect you.
I’ve had the idea for a while that something like the United States is just too big to effectively work. Also, the smaller a country is, the less war making power it tends to have, so somewhere like the United States or Russia could wipe out the entire human population of the planet, whereas a place like Ethiopia could affect a war locally but would not be able to affect a war across the world.
How big would a country need to be before it is too big, and what mechanism or entity would effectively enforce it from reaching or exceeding that size?
Why organize a labor union to keep the tyrants from paying you poverty wages when you could just submit the name of the tyrant to the assassination market and let somebody take care of it?
The more unpopular you are as a human being, the shorter your expected lifespan, because the reward for you not existing would increase proportionally to how much of an asshole you were.
What are some ways that you can think of where a scheme like this could have undesirable results?
some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world
on 22 Aug 03:45
collapse
However you feel about crypto, its decentralized nature is counter to capitalism.
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 04:31
nextcollapse
For that so decentralized video, we are actually in agreement. That is absolutely not decentralized, as it is very easy for a government to knock on the door and tell them to do whatever they want, and if they want to continue to exist as a business, they must comply.
While Monero, for example, still uses proof of work, it is deliberately designed to work on general purpose CPUs, such as the ones you have in your phone, laptop, desktop, etc.
This completely murders the idea of a mining farm and completely murders the idea of being able to centralize in a place like that.
There’s not one or only a few doors to knock on. There’s thousands upon thousands of doors to knock on all across the world. And since it’s so distributed, there’s not jet engine level noise in one specific area harming the community like this.
This completely murders the idea of a mining farm and completely murders the idea of being able to centralize in a place like that.
Does it? Why wouldn’t there be economies of scale and advantages of locating near cheap electricity for Monero miners? Why are a million shelf-CPUs quieter to cool than the same computing power in ASICs?
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 04:54
collapse
It’s true that Monero miners would benefit from cheaper electricity. I think more than anything it has to do with the power efficiency. A big warehouse full of CPUs would not be any more efficient than Uncle Bob mining on his gaming PC in his bedroom.
As for the noise level, I don’t think cooling a million CPUs would be any quieter than cooling ASIC chips. I think it’s mainly the fact that it’s so distributed.
Uncle Bob might have one or two computers mining in his bedroom, which put off a little bit of noise, but nothing horrible. Where these companies have racks and racks of ASIC chips all in the same place, amplifying the noise upon each other.
Brazilian computer scientist Jorge Stolfi is one voice who has contended this. His view is based on the following observations:
Investors buy in the expectation of profits.
That expectation is sustained by the profits of those that cash out.
But there is no external source for those profits; they come entirely from new investments.
And the operators take away a large portion of the money.
All of this rings true true. But in calling bitcoin a Ponzi scheme, critics are arguably being too kind on two counts. First, bitcoin doesn’t have the same endgame as a Ponzi scheme. Second, it constitutes a deeply negative sum game from a broad social perspective.
I think what you, and the people you believed, are making one wrong fundamental assumption (and I read it as your main point), which is “to evalute crypto currency one must compare it against fiat money”.
GasMaskedLunatic@lemmy.dbzer0.com
on 22 Aug 04:42
nextcollapse
Well, if Lord Robert McCauley says it, it must be true. I am truly humbled by your superior intellect and ability to determine a currency from a Ponzi scheme by citing essays that have nothing to do with Monero. Goodbye.
AmbiguousProps@lemmy.today
on 22 Aug 18:42
collapse
Bitcoin = Monero in your mind. They aren’t the same, not even close.
Bitcoin = Monero in your mind. They aren’t the same, not even close.
LOL. I understand they are very different entities.
Bitcoin
Monero
Proof of work
Proof of work
Uses a blockchain ledger
Uses a blockchain ledger
Extremely volatile exchange rate
Extremely volatile exchange rate
Unregulated
Unregulated
Price easily manipulated by wealthy investors
Price easily manipulated by wealthy investors
"HODL" - unrealistic expectation that the endgame is general use as currency
"HODL" - unrealistic expectation that the endgame is general use as currency
Heavily driven by FOMO
Heavily driven by FOMO
Uses obscene amount of energy per coin
Aspires to use an obscene amount of energy per coin to prevent another 51% attack
Ledger has become so large it is unwieldy to store and transfer
Ledger 200+ GiB, constantly expanding
Represents an ecological catastrope
A currently smaller part of the ecological catastrope
Most popular currency used to facilitate human trafficking
Has features that should make it more attractive for use in human trafficking
Difficult and annoying to use
Even more difficult and annoying to use
Available on most cryptocurrency exchanges
Available on fewer exchanges
Claimed by early proponents that transactions were ‘anonymous’ but now frequently the subject of blockchain analysis
Proponents claim transactions to be anonymous
Pre-mining began January 2009
Pre-mining began April 2014
Advocates behave like people in an MLM cult
Advocates behave like people in an MLM cult
Represents the vain hope to individually escape catastrophe while the world burns by using theoretically clever but practically unworkable technological solutions that create further social problems, while the real, difficult though not intractable social problems of government abuse, economic instability, and authoritarianism continue to increase because resources for real social solutions are starved of resources
Represents the vain hope to individually escape catastrophe while the world burns by using theoretically clever but practically unworkable technological solutions that create further social problems, while the real, difficult though not intractable social problems of government abuse, economic instability, and authoritarianism continue to increase because resources for real social solutions are starved of resources
Representatives of two analytics firms and one exchange also noted that illicit actors use privacy coins less frequently, as they are more difficult to obtain and are supported by fewer exchanges compared to Bitcoin, making it difficult to convert funds to government-issued currency.
So whatever benefits Monero claims to have in protecting the privacy of illicit activities, the people who could face real time in jail don’t consider the benefits worth how extremely annoying it is to use.
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 01:02
nextcollapse
Monero is the best friend to privacy. Although I would agree that most crypto is definitely the enemy of privacy, Monero is specifically built to be the friend of privacy.
Monero is still built on the blockchain. Using Monero for privacy is like playing casino blackjack as a monetary investment because the odds are better than the lottery.
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
on 22 Aug 01:20
collapse
Yes, it is built on a blockchain. It’s a blockchain specifically designed to completely hide the sender of a transaction, the recipient of said transaction, and the amount of that transaction. And cannot be even broken with quantum computing.
Edit: I should stand corrected. Parts of it are already quantum proof. Other parts can still be unraveled with a quantum computer, but there is work already in progress to fix that for future transactions.
Yes. It is untraceable to the people who are harmed by it, yet traceable to the powerful actors from whom it claims to protect. Your claims that Monero is fit for opposing state-level actors originate from salespeople, not scientists.
You’re replying to my comment that Monero is a scam. Your assertion that I prove it is untraceable is a non sequitur.
You haven’t demonstrated that it’s a scam. A scam is something that doesn’t do what it says it does. You haven’t proven that. You’ve made assertions, you’ve made claims, you’ve been very emphatic, but you have not provided a demonstrated evidence
I think you’ve gotten lost in the weeds. I didn’t come here to drop my 0-day on Monero.
I don’t know or care what legally-actionable claims are written on the side of the tin cans of authentic Monero purchased directly from the Monero factory. It matters what hucksters, con-artists, and true believers who are selling it claim. And considering the level of bullshit that fills the cryptocurrency world, demanding some rando meet your standards of proof in exchange for internet points comes off a little unhinged.
The most recent true believer claim is that the solution to Hispanic immigrant day laborers having their wire transfers being surveilled by the government is that they start using Monero. The reason that’s an absurd statement is obvious to almost anyone who has experience with immigrant communities, cryptocurrency, and/or reality.
One of the true claims you can make about Monero is that it is not traceable by people on a day laborer’s income. These are the targets of scams facilitated by Monero and other cryptocurrencies. If you’re a wealthy person who preys on desperate people, I guess Monero does what it says on the tin. But if you’re trying to reliably send your wages to family in a place without reliable internet and secured computer endpoints and your English and computer literacy isn’t great, Monero is one of many ways you can lose your shirt.
Oh, I’m sorry if I was confusing in my writing, I’ll be clear:
Monero is the optimal choice for wire transfers because it maximizes privacy, prevents third parties from committing human rights violations, stops rent seeking, and gives financial autonomy to the downtrodden. It is the refuge of last resort in conflicts, humanitarian crisis, and the debanked.
I was curious what claims about Monero you thought specifically were defensible. Thanks for the clarification.
maximizes privacy
prevents third parties from committing human rights violations
stops rent seeking
financial autonomy to the downtrodden
refuge of last resort
How does Monero (1) maximize privacy between people who can’t spend crypto directly and need to convert it to and from their national currency? How do you think this scheme would work in a privacy preserving way? We’re talking about a non-tech savvy undocumented worker in the US playing the role of Alice, and Bob is his subsistence farmer wife in rural Mexico.
Please make a ask post in !monero@monero.town for the details
You have demonstrated yourself to not be a good faith conversationalist, and I don’t have the energy to engage with you at scale. However, I have faith the good people of lemmy will pitch in, especially the XMR community.
The only reason we are here is you have asserted Monero is a scam, we have since agreed that Monero does not have a known leak, so I’m no longer concerned about the “scam” aspect as far as leaks go and have no further interest in this discussion with you.
According to your definition, casinos and online gambling isn’t a scam, because what they do is well-defined. If I use ‘scam’ to mean a reliable way for the downtrodden to become even more downtrodden, or ‘bitcoin’ as a shorthand for cryptocurrency, telling me I’m wrong because you have a different definition of those words is not an impressive rhetorical feat. And you claim I’m the bad faith actor in this conversation.
And as soon as you were challenged about statements you made on-topic, you disappear. I welcome your retreat. I would choose not to have more conversations with people like you.
The only reason we are here is you have asserted Monero is a scam, we have since agreed that Monero does not have a known leak, so I’m no longer concerned about the “scam” aspect as far as leaks go and have no further interest in this discussion with you.
At least you admit implicitly that there is no known deanonymization attack on Monero.
There is very little overlap between respected cryptography researchers and bitcoin developers. The chain between theory to implementation to practice is difficult enough for state actors to handle reliably. The history of Enigma, Type B, JN-25, soviet one-time pads, and modern schemes like DES, 2-DES, FEAL, KASUMI, and BassOMatic, suggest not only that encryption isn’t a guarantee, but conspiracies to keep a scheme popular long after it has been broken are common and widely successful.
I don’t know a deanonymization attack on Monero. If that’s all it took to make you feel Monero is secure, you’re in for trouble. Encrypted or not, every transaction is immutably stored in the blockchain and replicated in millions of times to any bad actor who wants a copy. Even if there was no currently known deanonymization attack, that would not mean that a deanonymization attack is impossible for everyone and for all time.
Hey, you already took a bite at this apple! now you want to do it again? Why not just update your other post.
There is very little overlap between respected cryptography researchers and bitcoin developers.
Ok, and what does that have to do with Monero? Monero IS NOT BITCOIN
I don’t know a deanonymization attack on Monero.
Thank you for EXPLICTLY stating that. That is the only reason why half the people in this thread are responding you to. We don’t care if you like Monero, we just care if you knew about an attack that we didn’t know about.
Even if there was no currently known deanonymization attack, that would not mean that a deanonymization attack is impossible for everyone and for all time.
Hey! We finally agree on something. This goes into your threat model and use. Most people wont care if their remittances can be cracked 5-10 years into the future. If someone had a very sensitive threat model, they would have to be far more careful.
Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works
on 22 Aug 03:41
collapse
threaded - newest
And this is why you need Monero.
For the money laundering and human trafficking that he specifically was not accused of?
Cryptocurrency is the enemy of privacy, and its use in this situation would increase the appearance of illegality, possibly opening up the accused to tax fraud allegations. Advocating for its use by people who can’t afford to lose thousands of dollars in a pyramid scheme is absurd.
Calling Monero a pyramid scheme is absurd.
Really? Bitcoin: Worse Than a Ponzi
The word “investors” is the problem here.
The word is crypto"currency". The goal would be to completely replace traditional currency.
Your job pays you in crypto, you pay your electric bill in crypto, you pay your mortgage in crypto, you pay your car payment in crypto, you save in crypto, you buy your Starbucks in crypto. You sell your old game system for crypto, etc.
When you completely give up on the traditional system and value your life in crypto, your life gets better.
Cringe AF. Please stop abusing the anarchist symbol.
No, I don’t think I will, because I’m not abusing it. I am a crypto anarchist.
I believe in rules without rulers and voluntary human association. Governments are illegitimate due to the use of force.
Anarchism and capitalism are mutually exclusive.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-capitalism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_and_capitalism
Hey, thanks for the read. That was actually very interesting.
I think a lot of the problems are the shifting of the meanings of words over time, in that words get used in different contexts, in different time periods. For example, socialism is commonly thought to be Marxist-Leninist states like the old Soviet Union, etc., when apparently that’s not what it meant at all.
On a personal level, I don’t know quite what the hell I am because I feel as though I could identify with some aspects of American libertarianism as well as anarchism and voluntarism and i like the NAP. i am absolutely opposed to war, see the right to bare arms as absolutely imparative, and hate fiat money because it gives one group of humans the means to destroy the lives of everyone else silently and without most people being able to identify the root of the problem.
I like Ayn Rands “Atlas Shrugged”, Alongside Night by, i’m going to butcher his name, J Neil Schulman, and some of Sek3.
I am in no way opposed to drugs, but think that individuals who choose to use hard drugs are only hurting themselves. Cocoa leaf tea is one thing. Cocaine is totally different, just because of how much stronger it is. Marijuana is fine because you’re not going to overdose and die from it, even if sometimes you might feel like you will.
With that said, what a person chooses to put in their body and enjoy is none of my fucking business. And I have no say over that, nor should I.
Another thing I found to be quite interesting was assassination politics and the assassination marketplace for those power hungry people who think they could lord it over everybody else wouldn’t be able to do so for very long.
Edit: a few of the people i have major respect for are Cody Wilson (liberator 3d pistol) J Stark (Fuck Gun Control (FGC) 9mm, murdered by german poliece RIP), Amir Takki (dark wallet) and Edward Snowden (NSA leaks)
Both the United States and the Soviet Union cracked down on organized labor. The corruption of the word ‘socialism’ was encouraged by both super-powers, one to falsely associate it with dictators and tyranny, and the other to claim its virtue for itself.
George Orwell wrote, “Rifles, muskets, long-bows, and hand grenades are inherently democratic weapons.” Anarchists generally don’t oppose safe recreational drug use, and see addiction not as a criminal act but instead a public health issue. Historically anarchists have flirted ideologically with assassination, but the modern consensus is that the means and the ends of revolution are too closely related to embrace political murder as a tenet.
It sounds like you’re interested in becoming more politically literate. One question to ponder is if it may be moral for people to conspire to assassinate tyrants, is it also moral for people to organize a labor union to prevent tyrants from paying them poverty wages?
Why organize a labor union to keep the tyrants from paying you poverty wages when you could just submit the name of the tyrant to the assassination market and let somebody take care of it?
The more unpopular you are as a human being, the shorter your expected lifespan, because the reward for you not existing would increase proportionally to how much of an asshole you were.
The next person knowing that the workers are why the last person was deposed would be a hell of a lot less likely to pay poverty wages and become unpopular since they have an incentive to live.
Personally, I’ve never followed or paid very much attention to politics as I see it as a pointless endeavor. The way our political systems are set up these days, they will get what they want and fuck what the people think.
I think there are a group of people that go into politics who are just pure evil and do so in order to have control over other people. I think there are some people who go into politics actually thinking they can change the system and have absolutely no idea that they don’t matter in the grand scheme of things.
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts, absolutely.
What is Politics, and Why Should Anyone Give a $#&%?
I think scale is the problem.
With something like national politics, for example, the politicians can be thousands of miles away from you and really have no accountability to you as an individual.
In state politics, the politicians may be a hundred miles away or so, but that’s at least a doable trip, and you are able to make your voice heard better than you would if the politicians were a thousand miles away, because you can actually make that trip.
The mayor of your city and your city hall are probably only going to be about 20 or 30 miles away at the absolute maximum and you can very easily get to that local meeting point and make your voice heard on issues that affect you.
I’ve had the idea for a while that something like the United States is just too big to effectively work. Also, the smaller a country is, the less war making power it tends to have, so somewhere like the United States or Russia could wipe out the entire human population of the planet, whereas a place like Ethiopia could affect a war locally but would not be able to affect a war across the world.
How big would a country need to be before it is too big, and what mechanism or entity would effectively enforce it from reaching or exceeding that size?
What are some ways that you can think of where a scheme like this could have undesirable results?
However you feel about crypto, its decentralized nature is counter to capitalism.
So decentralized! Capitalism is over!
For that so decentralized video, we are actually in agreement. That is absolutely not decentralized, as it is very easy for a government to knock on the door and tell them to do whatever they want, and if they want to continue to exist as a business, they must comply.
While Monero, for example, still uses proof of work, it is deliberately designed to work on general purpose CPUs, such as the ones you have in your phone, laptop, desktop, etc.
This completely murders the idea of a mining farm and completely murders the idea of being able to centralize in a place like that.
There’s not one or only a few doors to knock on. There’s thousands upon thousands of doors to knock on all across the world. And since it’s so distributed, there’s not jet engine level noise in one specific area harming the community like this.
Does it? Why wouldn’t there be economies of scale and advantages of locating near cheap electricity for Monero miners? Why are a million shelf-CPUs quieter to cool than the same computing power in ASICs?
It’s true that Monero miners would benefit from cheaper electricity. I think more than anything it has to do with the power efficiency. A big warehouse full of CPUs would not be any more efficient than Uncle Bob mining on his gaming PC in his bedroom.
As for the noise level, I don’t think cooling a million CPUs would be any quieter than cooling ASIC chips. I think it’s mainly the fact that it’s so distributed.
Uncle Bob might have one or two computers mining in his bedroom, which put off a little bit of noise, but nothing horrible. Where these companies have racks and racks of ASIC chips all in the same place, amplifying the noise upon each other.
.
It’s interesting you confused an article about the Trump-loving capitalist dictator of El Salvador with one about Venezuela.
Okay buddy. Whatever you say.
Why bitcoin is worse than a Madoff-style Ponzi scheme by Robert McCauley
I think what you, and the people you believed, are making one wrong fundamental assumption (and I read it as your main point), which is “to evalute crypto currency one must compare it against fiat money”.
Well, if Lord Robert McCauley says it, it must be true. I am truly humbled by your superior intellect and ability to determine a currency from a Ponzi scheme by citing essays that have nothing to do with Monero. Goodbye.
Bitcoin = Monero in your mind. They aren’t the same, not even close.
LOL. I understand they are very different entities.
One of the hilarious details I discovered while researching this is that according to the US Government Accountability Office report “Use of Online Marketplaces and Virtual Currencies in Drug and Human Trafficking” in 2022,
So whatever benefits Monero claims to have in protecting the privacy of illicit activities, the people who could face real time in jail don’t consider the benefits worth how extremely annoying it is to use.
That isn’t monero
Monero is the best friend to privacy. Although I would agree that most crypto is definitely the enemy of privacy, Monero is specifically built to be the friend of privacy.
Monero is still built on the blockchain. Using Monero for privacy is like playing casino blackjack as a monetary investment because the odds are better than the lottery.
Yes, it is built on a blockchain. It’s a blockchain specifically designed to completely hide the sender of a transaction, the recipient of said transaction, and the amount of that transaction. And cannot be even broken with quantum computing.
Edit: I should stand corrected. Parts of it are already quantum proof. Other parts can still be unraveled with a quantum computer, but there is work already in progress to fix that for future transactions.
Cryptocurrency whitepapers are the source of all truth.
Cryptography (math) papers, are, in fact, the source of all truth.
If you don’t like crypto it’s okay, but don’t spread undocumented fear.
Maybe that’s why there so little overlap between respected cryptography researchers and crypto developers?
If you like tipping sex workers online it’s okay, but don’t spread a documented scam.
Sources please showing monero is traceable
The important thing about any cryptocurrency scam is that it can’t effectively be traced by the victims.
Meanwhile, you have only whitepapers on your side. No peer-reviewed journal has ever asserted Monero is untraceable. Meanwhile, there are some very smart people with a strong incentive to both test the ad-copy and while not breaking the illusion. Why are you so confident?
Now your talking out of both sides of a issue, it’s problem is that it isn’t traceable but also that it’s too traceable?
Yes. It is untraceable to the people who are harmed by it, yet traceable to the powerful actors from whom it claims to protect. Your claims that Monero is fit for opposing state-level actors originate from salespeople, not scientists.
You’re replying to my comment that Monero is a scam. Your assertion that I prove it is untraceable is a non sequitur.
You haven’t demonstrated that it’s a scam. A scam is something that doesn’t do what it says it does. You haven’t proven that. You’ve made assertions, you’ve made claims, you’ve been very emphatic, but you have not provided a demonstrated evidence
I think you’ve gotten lost in the weeds. I didn’t come here to drop my 0-day on Monero.
I don’t know or care what legally-actionable claims are written on the side of the tin cans of authentic Monero purchased directly from the Monero factory. It matters what hucksters, con-artists, and true believers who are selling it claim. And considering the level of bullshit that fills the cryptocurrency world, demanding some rando meet your standards of proof in exchange for internet points comes off a little unhinged.
The most recent true believer claim is that the solution to Hispanic immigrant day laborers having their wire transfers being surveilled by the government is that they start using Monero. The reason that’s an absurd statement is obvious to almost anyone who has experience with immigrant communities, cryptocurrency, and/or reality.
One of the true claims you can make about Monero is that it is not traceable by people on a day laborer’s income. These are the targets of scams facilitated by Monero and other cryptocurrencies. If you’re a wealthy person who preys on desperate people, I guess Monero does what it says on the tin. But if you’re trying to reliably send your wages to family in a place without reliable internet and secured computer endpoints and your English and computer literacy isn’t great, Monero is one of many ways you can lose your shirt.
Ok, so your screed against Monero is from the paper of “Trust me bro - A occasionally updated substack blog fueled by stale coffee and depression”
At least you admit implicitly that there is no known deanonymization attack on Monero.
I also appreciate your implicit admission that using Monero in place of wire transfers by immigrants is so stupid as to be not worth defending.
Oh, I’m sorry if I was confusing in my writing, I’ll be clear:
Monero is the optimal choice for wire transfers because it maximizes privacy, prevents third parties from committing human rights violations, stops rent seeking, and gives financial autonomy to the downtrodden. It is the refuge of last resort in conflicts, humanitarian crisis, and the debanked.
Access to the money you earned is a human right.
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/implicit
Just to clear that up for you.
I was curious what claims about Monero you thought specifically were defensible. Thanks for the clarification.
How does Monero (1) maximize privacy between people who can’t spend crypto directly and need to convert it to and from their national currency? How do you think this scheme would work in a privacy preserving way? We’re talking about a non-tech savvy undocumented worker in the US playing the role of Alice, and Bob is his subsistence farmer wife in rural Mexico.
Please make a ask post in !monero@monero.town for the details
You have demonstrated yourself to not be a good faith conversationalist, and I don’t have the energy to engage with you at scale. However, I have faith the good people of lemmy will pitch in, especially the XMR community.
The only reason we are here is you have asserted Monero is a scam, we have since agreed that Monero does not have a known leak, so I’m no longer concerned about the “scam” aspect as far as leaks go and have no further interest in this discussion with you.
According to your definition, casinos and online gambling isn’t a scam, because what they do is well-defined. If I use ‘scam’ to mean a reliable way for the downtrodden to become even more downtrodden, or ‘bitcoin’ as a shorthand for cryptocurrency, telling me I’m wrong because you have a different definition of those words is not an impressive rhetorical feat. And you claim I’m the bad faith actor in this conversation.
And as soon as you were challenged about statements you made on-topic, you disappear. I welcome your retreat. I would choose not to have more conversations with people like you.
Man, OP is some kinda non-sequitur savant. You were more than fair in your attempts to engage with his disjointed and ephemeral “arguments”
OP’s IQ in the negative
Holy shit, your replies made me lose brain cells.
There is very little overlap between respected cryptography researchers and bitcoin developers. The chain between theory to implementation to practice is difficult enough for state actors to handle reliably. The history of Enigma, Type B, JN-25, soviet one-time pads, and modern schemes like DES, 2-DES, FEAL, KASUMI, and BassOMatic, suggest not only that encryption isn’t a guarantee, but conspiracies to keep a scheme popular long after it has been broken are common and widely successful.
I don’t know a deanonymization attack on Monero. If that’s all it took to make you feel Monero is secure, you’re in for trouble. Encrypted or not, every transaction is immutably stored in the blockchain and replicated in millions of times to any bad actor who wants a copy. Even if there was no currently known deanonymization attack, that would not mean that a deanonymization attack is impossible for everyone and for all time.
Hey, you already took a bite at this apple! now you want to do it again? Why not just update your other post.
Ok, and what does that have to do with Monero? Monero IS NOT BITCOIN
Thank you for EXPLICTLY stating that. That is the only reason why half the people in this thread are responding you to. We don’t care if you like Monero, we just care if you knew about an attack that we didn’t know about.
Hey! We finally agree on something. This goes into your threat model and use. Most people wont care if their remittances can be cracked 5-10 years into the future. If someone had a very sensitive threat model, they would have to be far more careful.
Are you actually this stupid or are you high.