Renaming PrivateSend Discussion - In response to the 2020 Q4 Conference Call

Since regulators mostly seem to have difficulty with the private part of PrivateSend, why not simply rename it to PrivacySend ?
Privacy is a basic human right, is different from anonymity and should not be confused that easily with other meanings in other languages.
 
I actually agree with Taos idea that he began this conversation with.

To throw my own out there I think co-opting th language of web browsing will come in handy here.

Sending Incognito is something that everyone will see and immeadiatly understand due to its use in Chrome and other web browsers.

It also describes what privatesend is doing very well, it will protect your payment from someone looking through your history but it doesn't mean you have complete anonymity.
 
-crypto said:
I liked the suggestion on Reddit of making a personal account within the wallet. The act of moving coins to that account would mix them. Sending from the personal account would essentially be a "private send" without raising red flags. Not my idea, just a suggestion that I read and thought was good.

My hope is that we can incentivize the act of mixing to provide an alternative path to earning rewards in the form of interest on the unspent coins being mixed. The interest could be derived from a % of the MN and Mining rewards, or from unallocated proposal Dash instead of burning it.
Click to expand...

That's a fantastic idea!

One of my banks for instance had these savings targets you can set. They call them Spaces. You can make and delete them at random. You can give them a name like Car/Groceries/shoppingmoney or whatever and add pretty logo/picture. You put money in them as a sort of subaccount.

Translated to dash that could a main stash of public Dash and Spaces. Each of these spaces can be public or private(mixed).

With each payment you make you can select from which space you want to pay defeating the need for a specific name of any button, just pay.

Even a mix button is not needed anymore as making a Space personal it gets mixed automatically.

But this is future material and not a solution for the actual question.
 
Last edited:
TaoOfSatoshi said:
Please consider this a thread to discuss options when it comes to the renaming of PrivateSend.

I will reiterate my longstanding position on this. Since PS doesn't adequately represent the action of Dash Mixing, it only serves to confuse newcomers, IMO. This is my solution. The action of mixing should be aptly named, and sending becomes just sending from a mixed or non-mixed Dash balance.

Example: User receives 20 DASH. User would like to anonymize 10 DASH, and leave the other 10 DASH alone.

- User selects "MIX DASH" for the action of mixing.
- Resulting mixing session results in balances of 10 MIXED DASH and 10 DASH.
- No more PrivateSend tab, unify both sends into a SEND tab.
- Upon the action of sending, users simply select (using a checkbox) to send from their MIXED DASH or their DASH balance.
- If they don't select a checkbox, or both, the program will not continue until only one is selected.

This will take away the "in your face" promotion of the private send function as it will simply be referred to as "Mixing", and reduces it in the sending tab to a simple check box. The functionality would stay, but the problem that the regulator sees with the "PrivateSend" naming and promotion would disappear.

I welcome other viewpoints, feedback and thoughts. Let's start this conversation.
Click to expand...
I also opted for 1 single tab a long time ago when I was reviewing the core wallet. With both buttons in it. To add to Tao his idea I would remove the term mixing all together and ask the user to 'personalize' the coins. Then in that one send tab you can choose from public/non-personalized or personalized
 
How about renaming PrivateSend to PrivacyProtect ?
Goes well with InstantSend.

Would be easy to make a icon for it, something like this :

Tv0Rlqk.jpg
 
Last edited:
[Deleted comment -- I had not seen the Q4 quarterly call for context.] Only power users are going to use the QT wallet anyway. I am curious what DCG's plans are regarding PS and the upcoming DashPay wallet.
 
Last edited:
There may be a way down the line to simply turn on "privacy" and let the software do the rest in the background. All the details would be hidden and the software would tell you what percent of your funds was available for sending at any given time.
 
Geert said:
IMHO what we have now in terms of nomenclature is optimal. There is no way to improve it. Mixing means mixing and PrivateSend means sending funds privately. Only power users are going to use the QT wallet anyway.

I am curious what DCG's plans are regarding PS and the upcoming DashPay wallet.
Click to expand...

If only power users are going to use the QT Wallet then we should name give the feature a name that doesn't draw the attention of regulators. I think a separate "Personal" account within the wallet that automixes the coins is the way to go. That personal account could also generate interest because it adds mixed coins to the pool and strengthens the feature. The interest generated could be derived from the MN and Mined earned income, or could come from the funds that aren't used / currently burned when not allocated for proposals.
 
Dash is an open source project, and private transactions is one of its features. It's not possible to "hide" it from regulators. You will only succeed in confusing users.
 
Last edited:
-crypto said:
If only power users are going to use the QT Wallet then we should name give the feature a name that doesn't draw the attention of regulators. I think a separate "Personal" account within the wallet that automixes the coins is the way to go. That personal account could also generate interest because it adds mixed coins to the pool and strengthens the feature. The interest generated could be derived from the MN and Mined earned income, or could come from the funds that aren't used / currently burned when not allocated for proposals.
Click to expand...


Mixing is now available thru Electrum Dash and should be available on Dashpay thru them, I don't think PS is just for power users,
all users that don't like being snooped on will want it available.

I don't need websites seeing what I am buying so Google can serve up more ads.
 
AgnewPickens said:
Mixing is now available thru Electrum Dash and should be available on Dashpay thru them, I don't think PS is just for power users,
all users that don't like being snooped on will want it available.

I don't need websites seeing what I am buying so Google can serve up more ads.
Click to expand...

I agree. I'm suggesting that we make it even easier by doing it with a "personal account" in the wallet that automatically mixes the coins. The coins in the "personal account" could also act like a savings account and earn interest for their inclusion in the "coinjoin" pool.

I would like to lose branding that includes "Private" because it's a red flag for regulators. I would also like to make Dash earnings more accessible to everyone and I think that the act of providing coins to be mixed has a value that should be compensated.
 
Coin mixing is a service of the network, and like all services there needs to be a cost associated with it. We can't pay people to mix. If the cost of mixing is zero or negative we open the door to DOS/spam attacks.
 
Btw, I think the coin mixing should be reworked as a wallet plugin i.e. let the end user decide if they want it or not. It would also allow for the plugin to be maintained by someone else other than DCG.

Use WebAssembly for wallet plugins, this might encourage cross chain development with projects like beam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kot
-crypto said:
I liked the suggestion on Reddit of making a personal account within the wallet. The act of moving coins to that account would mix them. Sending from the personal account would essentially be a "private send" without raising red flags. Not my idea, just a suggestion that I read and thought was good.

My hope is that we can incentivize the act of mixing to provide an alternative path to earning rewards in the form of interest on the unspent coins being mixed. The interest could be derived from a % of the MN and Mining rewards, or from unallocated proposal Dash instead of burning it.
Click to expand...

Both of these ideas I like. One of the visions of DashPay was to have a Cash account (automatic mixing) and a Savings account (regular unmixed dash).

I also like the idea of paying rewards to those who mix. Right now there is a time cost and a slight random fee for those who mix coins. It would be good to rebalance the incentives and offset the time cost with some rewards, and get more people mixing. I've thought about how to test-run how rewards might affect how many people mix their coins. I was thinking a small reward every block which would go to a random address that participated in mixing in that block. If no mixing happens in the block the reward is never created, or something. This would spread the incentive across all hours of the day to help even out mixing liquidity. The reward could be pre-denominated in the denomination which earned the reward, so the reward would also go into the mixing queue. Not sure how that would work exactly but that was my first thoughts. It might even only cost a few % of the block reward for these mixing incentives.

But not sure how a wallet would handle a PS address which, after the reward, would have 2x a denomination instead of just 1x.
 
Public balance and Cash Balance
Make Cash

and just Send
In Send modal have an option to:
Use cash balance (more private)

We are digital cash, it’s the most innocuous and descriptive term.
1. Everyone knows what cash is and has used it.
2. Instead of comparing ourselves to BTC, let’s compare ourselves to Fiat. They can’t judge us for being like cash!
 
Eventually IMHO PrivateSend will be something handled in the background, the same way that InstantSend is no longer something the end user needs to be concerned with.

Inventing less descriptive names for "PrivateSend" and "Mixing" is not the way to go IMHO.
 
Late to the discussion on this... we are honestly just leaning toward unbranding it altogether, at least until we can conduct a proper assessment of the best terminology that will not cause confusion to the average user... and wouldn't cause some of the issues that I've read about in this thread (like if we called it ProtectSend it implies normal transactions are at risk). By unbranding we just call it "CoinJoin" and can provide an info link for users unfamiliar with the term.

This provides us with time to properly assess the best possible brand ... or whether a brand is even required. As pointed out, full node QT wallets are primarily for power users, so the branding shouldn't matter that much until we add CoinJoin to DashPay wallets. DashPay itself is an enhancement of our existing wallets, and the addition of CoinJoin (and associated feature branding) would be most useful when CoinJoin is added to the mainstream-consumer oriented DashPay wallet.
 
so what is it called and where is the documentation on how to freakin use privatesend or protectsend or just "dashsend" whatever the heck you wanna call it. Very poor management and leadership here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top