qqii

Although I'm glad it is up, it was sadly only restored after the tweets became popular.

The "review" that claimed it still violated policy: https://twitter.com/Twotafkap/status/1443099098438045697/pho...

If I've understood this right, the biggest problems are outlined in the section titled "TPM PCR Brittleness". I'm not convinced that any three of the proposed solutions are good.

You're correct, from the original article he links the token website, and the contract address. As you can see there's basically no liquidity at all, as the last transaction was 2 days ago: https://bscscan.com/token/0xcf0a8ef5ae54b15588b337454c71bb4c...

Linux does right? I believe this is how android works but you can set something up manually by creating a seperate user and changing the permissions on the browser cache/data folder, then run the browser as one user and yt-dlp as a seperate one.

There might be a more modern and streamlined solution for Linux, but in Windows land they also introduced Controlled Folder Access into defender.

The primary citation can be found at [0], but the article includes some more background, and emphasises the author's response - admitting that the data was probably tampered with.

[0]: https://datacolada.org/98

[when used in advertisements]

Commonly referred to as the "Gell-Mann Amnesia effect".

False positives (this program could access these file locations) seems like a reasonable tradeoff.

Can they? First they'd have to never have accepted contributions, then if they ran an updated version on their server wouldn't they be in vialation of AGPL (not providing end users, in this case specifically those who use Signal an updated codebase).

I clearly misunderstood you but can you explain how you've come to that conclusion?

I'm trusting their whitepaper but it looks to me that fog provides similar security guarentees between MyMonero (shared view key) and other light wallets (computation on device).

I don't see how the privacy could be any worse than MyMonero even if SGX was compromised.

We've also seen the 4 year moving average monotonically increase.

The registration is the easy part.

Explaining federation (it's just like email, but we put the @ at the front and a : between uncertain nods) and key management, especially with multiple devices is the hard part.

> It might be addressed with something like Stellar USDC but I really don't know enough about the MobileCoin design to know if it is possible on the MobileCoin network.

This would involve a significant overhaul. Unless they partner with a stablecoin provider they'd have to create a stablecoin bridge from another network. Keeping it stable would require an unbridging mechanism. Trusting the stablecoin and providing stable native currency rates is another matter.

If you look at their forum you can find more about their beta client.

The signal app acts as a light wallet. Right now it generates keys and encrypts then with your signal pin. You can also restore them from the recovery phrase.

The term non-custodial means that Signal never has access to your keys and cannot send funds on your behalf.

I'm neutral to cryptocurrency so I share similar sentiments. Apart from the lack of addressing MobileCoin and Moxie's relationship and funding, MobileCoin's distributution and SGX I think the article has done a good job addressing people's concerns. Most don't support the premise and that's that.

> dismissing a lot of real concerns by characterizing them as just saying "cryptocurrency is the worst"

Their list or requirements seems to dismiss most if not all cryptocurrencies.

> They also don't really answer the regulatory question.

The FBI is probably more likely and even so Exchanges would be a bigger target. So far we've seen no indication that cryptocurrency wallets, not unlike tor or torrent clients being banned. So far exchanges have given mixed signals about if Monero will be banned so this is the most likely issue to watch out for.

I think if they develop something similar to fog, Grin might fit.

This is false, their privacy is similar to Monero (RingCT). SGX is only an added level of privacy.

Taxable events occur off platform at the exchange. As long as you're in crypto only gift allowance applies.

> Moxie appears to (currently) have a "name your price" reputation

Do you have any source for this?

In short it's a a hard problem and area of active research.

Stablecoin mechanisms have tradeoffs whether that's being on a public blockchain, a centralised party, collateral risk or lack of privacy. Monero is the current gold standard when it comes to privacy but trades off speed (confirmation blocks), mobile friendliness and a volatile price. On the other end of the spectrum Tether is very stable but is produced by a centralised entity and is on a public blockchain.

From Moxie's 2017 interview (https://www.wired.com/story/mobilecoin-cryptocurrency/) we can safely assume that their list of requirements existed from the start (MobileCoin didn't have much to show at this point). Since then it's been public knowledge and since the market cap of MobileCoin is dictated by the market so I'm not sure about your penny stock comment, it seems more sensible to direct criticism at their lack of distribution transparency.

If this was a public rollout I'd be more inclined to agree but as a opt in beta for a limited number of users who explicitly opted in to provide feedback this is less of an issue.

The future volatility of MobileCoin is to be seen. Past performance is not indicative of future performance and whatnot.

Wether they should have used a test net, MobileCoin should have only released a limited portion of the coins or whatnot is another question entirely.

Perhaps you'd be interested in TUSD on SCRT[0] (or any bridged stablecoin) that can be wrapped in SNIP-20[1]. As far as I know this is as private as you'll get when it comes to a stablecoin.

Partisia[2] (currently in beta) and Tari[3] could provide something similar.

[0] https://scrt.network/blog/secret-network-ecosystem-update-ja...

[1] https://github.com/SecretFoundation/SNIPs/blob/master/SNIP-2...

[2] https://partisiablockchain.com/#/

[3] https://www.tari.com/

Volatility doesn't have to be an issue with a cryptocurrency tokens either, there are plenty of stablecoins backed by currencies and plenty of algorithmic stablecoins backed by other cryptocurrencies. At the moment the majority of these exist in public blockchains.

There are plenty of models that facilitate the same privacy guarentees for stablecoins.

Although the relationship isn't clear and not clarified I find the article does a good job at addressing why they chose MobileCoin - the list of requirements.

The article directly addresses this with it's list of requirements. Perhaps another privacy coin like Grin would be a better suggestion that at least fits most of their requirements.

There's a difference between how many Mobile Coin premined (all of them) and how many they currently own, aren't available for sale and was sold for partners at what price.

Unfortunately their CEO has made no comment about this distribution or why they chose this as their coin distribution strategy. The topic is nuanced but it is very suspect they didn't select a more fair strategy.

A private currency still provides added privacy guarentees even assuming the steps you've outlined. Private payments would also be useful in a number of countries outside of the West.

Currency volatility is obviously unsolved but remains an area of active research - Algorithmic stablecoins like Dai and MakerDAO are obvious candidates but live on the public Ethereum blockchain. Private smart contacts chains like SCRT exists but are mostly under explored. Most privacy cryptocurrencies also have secondary OTC, P2P or will have atomic swaps.

This is all to say that a privacy preserving stable cryptocurrency is possible.

Bad guys use WhatsApp to communicate but that's not given it a bad image, in fact just the opposite. When it was revealed that WhatsApp encryption was used by terrorists in the UK and the government wanted a backdoor the image improved as more people learnt about it and learnt that it works.

This is an often said criticism but the reality is that the mobile app ecosystem fundimentally breaks this principle.

When was the last time you saw an mobile app taking advantage of another one apart from tre camera? The only and most common time Android apps communicate is with Google Play Services.

Context switching on mobile or GUIs in general also don't follow this principle. Modern GUIs integrate plenty of things (file explorer, image editor, basic camera, etc) becuase mobile package management doesn't resolve dependancies automatically or allow for a great deal of UI customisation. Especially in a messaging client imagine not being able to send photos, videos, audio, or files!c

GUIs are here to stay so until we figure out a composable and we'll adopted GUI solution "doing one thing well" is not really an option.

Right, and signal has a good track record balancing privacy and usability for it's default settings.