Or, people will flood out to someone who hasn't been hit by that "contagion", because the entire point is to have unregulated money.
Or, people will flood out to someone who hasn't been hit by that "contagion", because the entire point is to have unregulated money.
[Edited for some horrible mobile autocorrect attrocities]
For example: https://crypto.stanford.edu/timings/paper.pdf is for zcash and monero
It’s possible that someone comes up with a robust mechanism but if you interact with any other coin (crypto or fiat) it can expose additional side channels that are impossible to close.
Crypto is easy to make both transparent and regular.
In the few cases I’ve seen someone expend effort on it, it was trivial. Most people have terrible opsec. Even if you do, if you transact with someone who doesn’t (or who will deanonymise you for shockingly-trivial compensation), you’re partly compromised.
It's true that people sometimes get caught via chainalysis/etc., but I think there is a lot of sampling bias here. Someone who isn't an idiot and washes their funds through dodgy asian exchanges/privacy coins is probably quite safe, even compared to using cash.
Demonstrably untrue. Also, many people using crypto are unknowingly commiting crimes. They're not the smartest bunch. Between taxes and reporting requirements, you can usually nail a crypto user with less than $1k PI time.
For some vanishingly small percentage of crypto-faithful, maybe. For the vast majority, the point is to turn (regulated) fiat money into more (regulated) fiat money. Or lose it all trying.
Great reference, I found it at: https://ens-paris-saclay.fr/sites/default/files/Laboratoires...
Reading it right now.
TLDR there is always a throat to choke in meatspace.
Most private crypto coins are private by declaration rather than robust mathematical proofs (often because proving the absence of side channels is very difficult)