In discussing privacy (Wright, 2008, p. 6), I discussed the need to limit access to financial information and only have exchanges conducted using the parties involved. Unfortunately, BTC Core and other broken copies of my software have ignored this. So, when you have an exchange of data between Alice and Bob and the index of that data restored on the Blockchain, you have my invention.
Alternatively, when you have communications between Alice, who sends to an intermediary such as a node operator giving out all her information and removing the privacy of her exchange with Bob, you don’t have any of the fundamental privacy aspects of bitcoin. In particular, the use of addresses, as we see commonly employed, was noted to be a backup methodology and not the primary way of distributing information across bitcoin. In fact, the methodology was to be depreciated over time.
When Alice and Bob communicate, they can send invoices and complex information around their contract negotiations that never need to be restricted to the Blockchain. This information can be hashed in the hash of the information and authenticate the documentation around the exchange. As Alice and Bob have done this directly, no record of the communication needs to be placed on the Blockchain outside of the final transaction that acts as an index to all communications that have occurred.
So, while the public sees the ticker tape summary, Alice and Bob completely understand the exchange and what has been bought and sold. If Alice wants to lodge records with the tax office for an expense, this can be validated against the sale done with Bob. While the nodes see the transaction record that Bob has indexed for everyone to check if needed, they receive no information concerning the exchange between Bob and Alice. Further, Bob can verify Alice’s identity, and Alice can verify Bob’s.
This is the nature of decentralisation that everyone seems to be missing. I did not state in my whitepaper that there is no identity. Rather, I explicitly state (Wright, 2008, p. 6) that the new privacy model firewalls identities. The distinction between how bitcoin works and the traditional privacy model involving trusted third parties is that small casual transactions can be done that do not require any public exchange of information concerning identity. This does not mean identity doesn’t exist. As stated, identity remains between the individuals engaged in the trade.
Wright, C. S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3440802
CSW
Jun 13, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1655122243478809?thread_ts=1655122243.478809&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4671
Alternatively, when you have communications between Alice, who sends to an intermediary such as a node operator giving out all her information and removing the privacy of her exchange with Bob, you don’t have any of the fundamental privacy aspects of bitcoin. In particular, the use of addresses, as we see commonly employed, was noted to be a backup methodology and not the primary way of distributing information across bitcoin. In fact, the methodology was to be depreciated over time.
When Alice and Bob communicate, they can send invoices and complex information around their contract negotiations that never need to be restricted to the Blockchain. This information can be hashed in the hash of the information and authenticate the documentation around the exchange. As Alice and Bob have done this directly, no record of the communication needs to be placed on the Blockchain outside of the final transaction that acts as an index to all communications that have occurred.
So, while the public sees the ticker tape summary, Alice and Bob completely understand the exchange and what has been bought and sold. If Alice wants to lodge records with the tax office for an expense, this can be validated against the sale done with Bob. While the nodes see the transaction record that Bob has indexed for everyone to check if needed, they receive no information concerning the exchange between Bob and Alice. Further, Bob can verify Alice’s identity, and Alice can verify Bob’s.
This is the nature of decentralisation that everyone seems to be missing. I did not state in my whitepaper that there is no identity. Rather, I explicitly state (Wright, 2008, p. 6) that the new privacy model firewalls identities. The distinction between how bitcoin works and the traditional privacy model involving trusted third parties is that small casual transactions can be done that do not require any public exchange of information concerning identity. This does not mean identity doesn’t exist. As stated, identity remains between the individuals engaged in the trade.
Wright, C. S. (2008). Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3440802
CSW
Jun 13, 2022
https://metanet-icu.slack.com/archives/C5131HKFX/p1655122243478809?thread_ts=1655122243.478809&cid=C5131HKFX
https://t.me/CSW_Slack/4671
Comments
Be the first to add a comment
Log in to comment