The Evolution not-a-whitepaper is anti-privacy?

camosoul

camosoul

Well-known member
https://www.dash.org/binaries/evo/DashPaper-v13-v1.pdf

I've got a few concerns regarding the socialization concepts laid out...

Association with usernames. Email addresses. Feedback!

Weren't we supposed to have privacy? I don't want this shit documented! I don't want to "sign up." I want to be faceless. I don't want it to be possible for the other party to prove that they gave me money. This deanonymizes it and gives anyone I transact with the power to distribute information. No! Bad! Pretty much all social media and networking is about creating, documenting, and manipulating associations, not preventing the same, duh...

The only reason that feedback works on forums like eBay and Amazon, is because the feedback is moderated and bullshit removed. Feedback abuse by competitors and people who are just plain too stupid to correctly use the product or understand the service offered. "Wow, this guy has the best dope!" is a feedback comment we don't need, especially when it's just a jerk trying to incriminate or bring down scrutiny upon a vendor who has nothing at all to do with contraband. Feedback abuse and manipulation would make feedback systems meaningless without the moderation capacity, which this won't have. Why even bother having it when it'll instantly become a bunch of trolling, spam, slander, and lies that gets ignored anyway? Digital Cash? I don't see my Dollar Bills granting the power to slander, timing analyze, or fraudulently incriminate the vendors I spend it with, or vice-versa. This notion really puts a ton of value back into fiat...

Didn't we have a conversation about not letting DASH get off track? Focus on being a currency, not a fully integrated marketplace? The MARKETPLACE is where reputation systems belong, not in the money itself.

Person A is now identified as John Doe. Person B is now identified as Jane Smith. We no longer have nameless and faceless Person A sending duffs to nameless and faceless Person B. This makes timing analysis possible. Mix it afterwards, irrelevant. We now know that Person A is not Person A. It's John Doe. When Jane Smith sent duffs to John Doe, she stared at the memory pool and lock records. That TX is deanonymized, and she's keeping a record of it in the cloud or some other completely insecure method because Jane Smith is an iPhone derpette... Jane Smith is so stupid, that she gets her dick caught in the ceiling fan while trying to make a peanut butter sandwich. She doesn't even have a dick, but now that's bad feedback for John Doe, what a loser he is, lets never do business with him... John Doe didn't even sell her the bread, peanut butter, or the knife. He sold her a car. And she crashed it. It's all John Doe's fault. Fuck him! What a jerk he is! Selling cars that crash, and make you castrate yourself while making a peanut butter sandwich 2 months later! Totally nonsensical, unrelated, zero-connection bullshit now results in a permanent record of name, transaction, product, and "opinion." It's all Bush's fault, ban the guns! DASH will help you! Because it's all about privacy, and by privacy, I mean tell everybody everything always, especially if it's not even true and makes no sense...

Fiat Converters. Add together the above... Guvthug regulation doesn't just go away... These people have identities which are not being protected from persecution. Not a democrat? IRS gonna git you! Support Separation of Money and State? FINCEN gonna git you! If you don't protect these people from the persecution of corrupt governments, they're going to comply and document you to save their own asses. Or just plain not do it.

It's like we're pissing all over the very reason that DASH exists and in some counts defies it's own name...

http://dapi/dash/org <-- that looks pretty damned centralized to me....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I felt the same way the first time I read it. However, there are two things that this will still enable. First is that funds will still be untraceable, except to each particular merchant, etc... , who could post the information, but that will still be the only information known, and won't link other purchases and transactions to you.

The second is that Evan said we could pay anonymously by paying to the payee to their next address in line.

You won't be limited to a single account. You can make as many as you need. You can have a merchant or buyer account that you take care of so your ratings are good, and ones you keep entirely to yourself, not published in any way shape or form.

And with everything encrypted and distributed among the masternode network, it should be pretty much impossible for anyone to paste together. Certainly no less safe than things are today.

Maybe we still need to allow the use of addresses?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It took a while to filter that down to the meaning but I guess what you're saying is all this users and groups shit in linux is a waste of time, windows 98 is just fine so don't screw around with all that extra shit when all folks want to do is boot up and run stuff. Being able to remotely create and use a wallet on a p2p network impresses the hell out of me but if it wasn't built with that basic users and groups type stuff then it'd have to be tacked on sometime later and that didn't work out too well for microsoft. You might not need it for plain and simple digital cash but there's no point crippling advanced features by leaving it out and there's nothing in there expecting a passport number and life history, any random username is fine.

The dapi/dash.org bit looks dodgy but so did the reference node and they look like the same kind of thing to me, a stepping stone for an evolving system. Same as the creation of 5 new addresses for a newly bookmarked contact, HD wallets can do that kind of thing on the fly but we don't have HD wallets yet so that'll do the job for now. The usernames worry me a bit, anything legible will be soon be gone so it'll be the same kind of bob_6343623523 stuff we see everywhere and someone's bound to think it's the ideal way of doing all the KYC crap but let 'em, there's nothing forcing that BS onto the system so anyone insisting on it will be loosing a hell of a lot of business.
 
Nah, Stan, I think he has valid concerns. I do think Evan has a handle on how to keep ratings relevant, though, I can't remember... :p

I'm pretty sure we will find a way to satisfy the issues, and I think that's why Evan is asking for input.

In fact, guys, lets go to the technology section and talk about this in the "Social Wallet" section. It needs everyone willing to, to run through all the implications, which there are many. We need to make sure it's built so as to honor privacy.
 
stan.distortion said:
It took a while to filter that down to the meaning but I guess what you're saying is all this users and groups shit in linux is a waste of time, windows 98 is just fine so don't screw around with all that extra shit when all folks want to do is boot up and run stuff. Being able to remotely create and use a wallet on a p2p network impresses the hell out of me but if it wasn't built with that basic users and groups type stuff then it'd have to be tacked on sometime later and that didn't work out too well for microsoft. You might not need it for plain and simple digital cash but there's no point crippling advanced features by leaving it out and there's nothing in there expecting a passport number and life history, any random username is fine.

The dapi/dash.org bit looks dodgy but so did the reference node and they look like the same kind of thing to me, a stepping stone for an evolving system. Same as the creation of 5 new addresses for a newly bookmarked contact, HD wallets can do that kind of thing on the fly but we don't have HD wallets yet so that'll do the job for now. The usernames worry me a bit, anything legible will be soon be gone so it'll be the same kind of bob_6343623523 stuff we see everywhere and someone's bound to think it's the ideal way of doing all the KYC crap but let 'em, there's nothing forcing that BS onto the system so anyone insisting on it will be loosing a hell of a lot of business.
Click to expand...
You're describing something very different from what I read... And I read it 4 times to be sure.

By tying addresses to names and identities, we've back-door eliminated the very privacy that DASH was supposed to be giving us. I could just as well use the fiat systems in place. So, where's the motivation to use DASH in that condition? "Meet the old money, just like the new money."

I liked most everything else tho... I don't want my money tracked and associated. Period. Ever. I like that Xvwr6b47n45wnbu3h5nb7n4w7b5b36 doesn't have my name on it. That's the whole point, right? I don't have my name on any of the $20 bills in my wallet. And none of those $20 bills can tell anybody they used to be mine once they're gone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also, spam wallet creation to fill up the DashDrive?

Doing too much that a currency shouldn't do.

Iris.

You use money in a forum of commerce. Money is not, and should not, become the forum of commerce.

DASH should take care of itself, not babysit.
 
I would definitely include a way for a user to manually request personal/transactional data be dumped and overwritten across the network.. Even if the network is using that data for transaction verifications, allow the data to be wiped after so many blocks (or so much time). All companies, hackers, governments and technologically savvy parties are taking a strong interest in encryption and new data retrieval methods. The longer data is available the likelihood of a parties abilitiy to crack or decrypt that information greatly increases.... son.

I do think this is a bold but could be amazing step into crypto 2.1 if all concerns are properly addressed and implementation goes well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top