In order to make the most of Bitcoin’s inherent privacy features, we must be able to distinguish between real privacy and some persistent “red herrings.” In order to make the most of Bitcoin’s inherent privacy features, we must be able to distinguish between real privacy and some persistent “red herrings.”
It doesn’t matter which protocol you use: If the tools are inadequate, so is your privacy. Just as you can have a bitcoin wallet that is incompatible with CoinJoin and that forces address reuse, you can also have a monero wallet that leaks confidential information about amounts and always constructs “ring-signatures” between every single user and himself. If such a wallet is widespread, spy companies can assume such behavior as common and build de-anonymization heuristics.
Of course, altcoin proponents may just build and market tools that actually use the privacy features already present in their clone at the protocol level. But then again they would need just as much time, money and effort that is required for building and marketing tools that actually use the privacy features already present in Bitcoin at the protocol level.
I dont see how this is wrong. His point is that you can build a monero wallet that does not respect your privacy, just like you can build a bitcoin wallet that does respect your privacy.
I think its a point well made. Ultimitly the privacy of xmr relies on how its used.
Academic and intellectual honesty requires that you make fair comparisons.
Comparing the worst possible Monero wallet that would be technically compatible with the core protocol, to the best possible Bitcoin wallet using all the latest optional Bitcoin upgrades... Is dishonest. Most of his arguments involve some level of dishonesty like this.
He should compare the baseline Monero core wallet wallet, with the Bitcoin Core wallet. Or the best theoretical anonymity of the current Bitcoin protocol, with the best theortical use of the Monero protocol.
My reading suggests he is using a hypothetical comparison to illustrate the point. What matters is how most users actually interact with the protocal, not the baseline core wallet, or some best theoretical use case.
And that's fine to do merely for illustrative purposes, so long as afterward, you also accurately articulate a reasonable comparions between both protocols and environments, which he does not.
There is no good faith in his arguments. His sole goal is to attempt to discredit Monero, by hook or by crook
Yes, absolutely, Giacomo Zucco is an idiot. I remember a Twitter thread where FluffyPony had to detail how Monero works. Giacomo just did not know anything about how Monero works, but still he had a strong opinion why it couldn't. In the end he had to concede.
He calls himself a Bitcoin "maximalist", but in treality he is just to lazy and to narrow minded to look at anything else but Bitcoin. He also uses "maximalist" as an excuse to troll people for alleged fun.
Please dont confuse Giacomo with other Bitcoin proponents whose opinion I highly respect and who are capable of reasonable discussion.
You just picked out an even bigger douche than Giacomo. :) Basically anyone who goes on Tone Vays show pretty much share the same thinking. The magical crypto friends are bitcoin proponents but also hold monero with higher regard. Well, Ricardo is on there. He also made a show together with tone vays but I'm hoping that's just a one off thing.
Lol, nailed it. It's pretty safe estimation that 95% of people Tone has on his show (that isn't there to debate him), is a colossal narrow minded douche. Would make an exception for Willy Woo and Ugly Goat
Again, this is nonsense; it’s not true that a privacy feature can ever be “mandatory at the protocol level.”
Astonishing revelation. I woke up today and that was one of the first things I read. I am devastated. All those protocol-level Monero features: Just nonsense, my dear friends. Get over it and start to use Bitcoin instead.
His point seems to be that what matters is the actual application/wallet that users use. If the majority of users use a wallet that sends a record of every xmr transaction to a central authority then privacy at the protocal level does not matter much.
His article and suggestions are a pipedream. If privacy isn't mandatory, majority will not go through extra steps to use those privacy enhancing methods. The only way that people will use privacy is if they click send and everything is automated and it's private. But that's monero.
I muted him on Twitter a long time ago. The things he says is so hypocritical, always contradicting himself.
There are alot of bitcoin characters that came for the ethics, morals, etc.. but they stayed with bitcoin because they were so financially attached to it. If they got into Bitcoin in 2019 or 2020, they would probably call Bitcoin a shitcoin.
[referring to altcoins] it’s not true that a privacy feature can ever be “mandatory at the protocol level.”
As the history of Bitcoin teaches us, it’s mostly about tools: Even when the base protocol includes strong fungibility capabilities, if the most widespread tools don’t leverage them, then people will simply not use them. They’ll just resort to using whatever is easy and available, even if that mean adopting bad practices instead.
Regarding his first point, fiat gateways actually act like mixers for bitcoin. True, KYC removes pseudonymity to the exchange and law enforcement but besides that exchanges break the chain of transactions and make it easier to transact with others in general.
On this, I came to the conclusion that lots of BTC Maxi don't mention XMR by name because they actually know that XMR might just work (and be better) and be competing directly with BTC.
But yes, in fairness, they have a point on the BTC clones, as they call them, with some wanna be privacy (ZEC, DASH, whatever else fork): on those, anything good built on that that works would be gobbled up by BTC in long term.