Hacker News Reader

Comment by gasull | Hacker News Reader

> there will be a major "bazaar" going on underground

I thought most people here had heard of The Silk Road onion service: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_%28marketplace%29

> An online bank could very well operate in the anonymous network because the traffic is already cryptographically signed, and users can enjoy strong authentication if they wish to or remain a pair of anonymous public/private keys.

Or you can use bitcoins to accomplish the same and you don't even need banks.

As William Gibson said, "The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed".

View on HN

The Silk Road will be a tiny tiny spot of activity if every startup is forced to the alternative network. If the "open" internet is based on who can pay the most to get a competitive quality of service, anything competing with existing products will be pushed out of that market.

Bitcoin and the silk road are not the future, but prototypes of it. It will be interesting to see if they become more than that, but they are showing the way forward if society continues to go down the directions currently being perused.

Or you can use bitcoins to accomplish the same and you don't even need banks.

The longer this fiction persists, the less chance a fundamentally decentralized crypto currency will take hold. Trusted 3rd parties will always be necessary, and that's not a de facto bad thing.

Why is this a "fiction" and why do you need banks? Why do you dismiss Bitcoin? Please explain.

He's not dismissing Bitcoin, but the idea that through Bitcoin you can "remain a pair of anonymous public/private keys". This is explained here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Anonymity (and yes, I know that the technology can theoretically support this, it just doesn't in its current incarnation).

You can be anonymous if you use Tor with Bitcoin. The problem is that you need to buy bitcoins first, what usually isn't anonymous, but you might be able to buy them anonymously over the counter.

I'm not dismissing that either. I love Bitcoin, and I believe in its abilities. That's why it's really annoying when those with certain philosophies try to ascribe them to Bitcoin.

BTC can work without trusted 3rd parties, and transactions can be performed in a completely anonymous way. Not every transaction requires or even benefits from these qualities, however. For Joe User's grandma to use BTC, there are going to need to be trusted 3rd parties (e.g. banks) to manage the minutia of transacting. These 3rd parties will make things simple for grandma, and ensure that she doesn't get screwed.

Your anonymity is compromised if/when you use "trusted 3rd parties (e.g. banks)." In order to not get shut down by governments, they must comply with applicable laws, which include identifying your identity in some way. (At least as far as I know).

Ah, my bad. You were calling something a fiction and I assumed it was the "you can use bitcoins to accomplish this [in the context, performing transactions while remaining an anonymous pair of encryption keys, which you can't right now]", when you probably were referring to the "you don't even need banks" part.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com