User talk:Wuerzele2

Curbing anonymity
Hi, I want to discuss an aspect of bitcoin anonymity. Systems with non-public ledgers can be both non-anonymous, and privacy-preserving at the same time. (Note that there is a "Right to financial privacy act" guaranteeing financial privacy.) In case of bitcoin the situation is different: since all transactions are public, anonymity is the only means to preserve financial privacy. Everybody knowing the identity of bitcoin owners also knows the transactions they made. Seen from this angle, anonymity of owners is necessary, if the right to financial privacy shall be exercised. This aspect is mentioned in several sources, the question is whether it should be discussed in the article. It is worth mentioning that if regulators succeed to curb anonymity (and therefore, financial privacy) of bitcoin owners in a substantial way, bitcoin ceases to be viable as a currency, and the only remedy would be to upgrade the system to present a higher level of privacy. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 21:48, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Ladislav, thank you for educating me on a non-anonymous, and privacy-preserving capacity, an excellent point. Please add this. I think it should go onto the virtual currency page. Of course it belongs on the bitcoin page just as well, but I started writing about virtual currency regulation there and kept the details on the virtual currency page. To keep the ever-swelling bitcoin page in bounds one could point to "further details see the virtual currency page".--Wuerzele2 (talk) 08:19, 9 October 2014 (UTC)