Proposed anonimity feature : The Dark Blockchain
-
It cannot be done too easily, as it requires a non-negligible amount of coding. I feel bad for cutting work out for other people, since my coding skills are limited to physical simulations in high-level languages. But I think we have to do it before we are forced to do it.
-
There might very well come the possibility that coins will be required to comply or die. Ok, whilst you can’t stop the network they could make it very difficult to develop anywhere other than a handful of countries. Perhaps the solution isn’t one of the other, perhaps it’s both. Perhaps individuals and businesses want anonymity and governments want compliance. I think panoramix is right, at very least they the legislation which is coming will want some sort of KYC, so perhaps the solution is a solution that offers bank like privacy rather than secretive anonymity. I would still like to see it built as a decentralised solution, but with everything compliant they are going to want some bricks and mortar to knock on when they get upset.
Personally I think It’s too big a compromise and it goes against the very ethos of the currency’s concept. But making he technology scary is going to drive it underground where the general public will also be fearful of using it.
-
MrWyrm, when I build a house, I do it under a conditional assumption that it won’t burn to the ground. It is good to keep the possibility of fire in mind, but the house is still built on an assumption it will stand. I have a feeling that coins are our last chance to avoid Sinicization of the Western civilization. Totalist enforcement of centralized banking should be viewed as a disaster that can happen. I am therefore working on an assumption that coins will survive, and the republican governments will survive, too. If we don’t establish a white subnet, governments will do it for us with much less efficiency and will have no qualms about extracting fat tax for their service. If we don’t tackle volatility, same might happen, or worse, we might completely fail to take off.
-
Does this service have to be FTC specific? Essentially it could just be an I’d lookup where you enter an address FTC,BTC or PXC and it will point to the owner if any.
-
Panoramix, thanks very much for your insight, you always give me things to ponder.
-
I’m not sure you could have it public facing. That’s the bit I can’t get my head around.
-
Does this service have to be FTC specific? Essentially it could just be an I’d lookup where you enter an address FTC,BTC or PXC and it will point to the owner if any.
It could be a third party service for any coin and i’m sure someone will come up with one over the coming months.
What we want to achieve with ftc though is full stack.
This means relying on as little 3rd parties as possible by decentralising as much as possible in the BC tech.
I was hoping for a simply way to authenticate a transaction using credentials for FB/Google. Within the wallet, when creating an address, you tie it to an online identity.
-
paypal completes it’s varification using a bank transfer. just a thought.
-
nah…
Social media is good…
Paypal are like… almost worse than the banks… I know google and FB are dataminers but yeah. paypal is used to help add additional verification to fb/google so i don’t think its needed.
We don’t need 100% corporate…
Just something to add an online identity… If we use a major network, then it adds to the security without forcing people to go all the way if they can’t or don’t want to.
Not sure if im making sense… but it could help with having twitter ftc wallets, FB ftc wallets and Google ftc wallets which would tie directly in with their respective tipbots.
I dont know if my crazy idea’s can be achieved with code but we need to think about making it seamless for use. Unless we don’t consider our selfs a currency and focus solely on building on the BC Tech. ie Link/Flux etc…
-
yeah thats a point although I think banks are not really the guys we want to be working with.
There is a UK service for validating identity. I think its something to do with the passport office.
It would be great if we could link our service into that and then the link would be in stone. A real person with a real address etc.
Not sure if this exists in other countries. Or for that matter if this service is open to the public (may have just been internal) its what the dvla uses I think.
-
-
You guys are amazing. I think that at the beginning, white subnet identities with only a very small amounts of coins would require but a simple unverified real name declaration. Later, the CIC could require higher level of identification.
-
Most members think the dark block chain is a good idea, if feasible.
It can be developed as an open source project, it doesn’t have to be implemented in Feathercoin. That can be discussed when applicable.
It is an area I thought might engender some co-operation coin wide.
I was thinking we could change the name to reduce the anon dark coin confusion.
“private block chain addresses”
-
Paypal are like… almost worse than the banks…
I meant like paypal does, not specifically using paypal. To verify your account, paypal deposit a small amount in your account and you verify the amounts thus proving you are the owner of the bank account and therefore a real person.
-
Most members think the dark block chain is a good idea, if feasible.
It can be developed as an open source project, it doesn’t have to be implemented in Feathercoin. That can be discussed when applicable.
It is an area I thought might engender some co-operation coin wide.
I was thinking we could change the name to reduce the anon dark coin confusion.
“private block chain addresses”
My only concern is that it builds in the ability to auto launder your coins.
Bush spoke of launching a new coin, a real testbed for ftc… Maybe we should consider launching a ftc clone when we fork so it can be used to test out both idea’s of light and dark / Coloured and Private. (which ever wording is more app)
Does your idea wrapper merely increase privacy?
-
Well.
I think we should develop both and launch them in a brand new NeoScrypt coin.
We can give all the adhd miners something real fresh to play with.
Maybe we could have this new test coin merge mined with ftc…?
Would that help in anyway.
Basicly I’m fully keen for both but they need to be tested out in the real world and see how they behave. Also see how the cryptosphere evolves as well.
-
I think that there are enough dark blockchains already available for those who want to use them. Wouldn’t the simplest solution be to simply recommend people who need integrated laundering to use DarkCoin, or Cryptcoin, or Cloakcoin instead of us? Or Razor, with its integrated Tor connection? They are the innovators. It is bad manners to simply take their innovations without so much as saying thanks. We would get flamed for this. It sounds harsh, but Feathercoin might be already desperately outdated and all these imitation efforts would make us only more ridiculous. We should maintain this dusty coin only as a museum exhibit and send the majority of the investors with real needs to the real innovators.
-
But jokes aside, there is no such thing as dark blockchain. I’ll be repeating myself for the third time to say that digital currency transactions must be published in order to prevent double-spending. Applying the software engineering principle of separation of concerns, laundering is a concern of a wallet. It has nothing to do with the blockchain whatsoever. We might therefore want a laundering wallet for FTC, just like there is dark wallet for bitcoin, and we might want to promote its use by showing that social benefits of increased privacy outweigh the social costs of increased privacy of evildoers.
-
Feathercoin is a development platform. It’s what we do. We have so much code that you can’t find anywhere else, or if you do, it’s everywhere cause we came up with it. ACP for one, we copped huge amounts of flaming for that but what happens, a number of coins implement it without saying anything.
We are not about what’s popular and what’s not. We do need to keep a number of things in mind though, keeping ftc legal is one of them.
I propose a new coin to develop onto before adopting the changes into ftc itself.
Let’s call it featherclone for namesake.
We make dark and light addresses on featherclone. When they’re done, we port over the light addresses feature, but withhold on the dark addresses until we feel safe that it won’t jeopardise ftc’s legality.
-
My only concern is that it builds in the ability to auto launder your coins.
Bush spoke of launching a new coin, a real testbed for ftc… Maybe we should consider launching a ftc clone when we fork so it can be used to test out both idea’s of light and dark / Coloured and Private. (which ever wording is more app)
Does your idea wrapper merely increase privacy?
The coins are just private, there is no money laundering involved.
Where as with other privacy / dark methods, coins are swapped between addresses to hide there origin, this does not happen with the “Private Addresses” (on the dark blockchain). The addresses and amounts are just encrypted and can be viewed if permission is given.
For instance, If being accused of money laundering is a concern, then we could use multi-sig technology so the owner of a coin address could release a “viewing address code”, which would let a 3rd party view the address transactions.
This could also be the way you make your address public. A vanity public viewing address could be the method of having open coins, for , say, charities who want full public auditing. Or semi private where you send an decoding address to the Tax office, or an auditor so they can view your books.
You can always send your coins to a new private address - once you have released a viewing address, to make them dark again.
