Hacker News Reader

Comment by grappler | Hacker News Reader

You've made the case for the particular category of cryptocurrencies that encrypt transaction details ('privacy coins').

View on HN

I don't see how this could work in the long run. The blockchain is immutable and any encryption at some point in civilization will be broken. All transactions using weaker encryption will be retroactively also broken, no?

In other words, to me, it seems like a public transparent blockchain is inevitable, whether you're using encryption or not.

Maybe. I'd assume that the encryption used will improve over time, and there will at least be a lag time between a transaction's creation and the day it is cracked, hopefully many years long. This is pretty much the assumption we make about our web browsing over https (albeit the preservation of those encrypted sessions isn't quite so explicit and overt).

I'd wager a guess that if a crypto-dollar emerges it will be a Monero-like currency with an additional set of private read/write keys controlled by the some set of government agencies. The US government doesn't want everyone having the transaction data. Exclusive access is much valuable than a public ledger.

I think that battle is happening now. This is a good time to push for the kind of digital currencies we want, and against the ones we don't.

In terms of how we fight, I don't think any existing cryptocurrency community is providing any help. IMO, the way to help is to empower our democracy such that it represents the will of the common person. Getting people to vote and reversing decisions like Citizens United feels much more potent than any current or proposed protocol.

A government is simply a corporation with a monopoly on the business of violence. Democracy is unique in that it's a corporation owned by the employees. Let's make it work for us instead of trying to beat or force its hand through tech. That won't work.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com