You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Does Freedom Require Radical Transparency or Radical Privacy?
@dan: I'm not sure if you'll see this, but I hope so. I did a post 8 months ago I think you may enjoy: Privacy, Identity, and Human Flourishing.
You're right on point with this post, and it's why I've worked hard to control my identity online and be as public and transparent as possible. If the government comes after me to make me an example to bring fear to others, I'll already control the narrative because my integrity and character have been on open display for all to see.
Sorry Luke, this was a reply to Dan but I wanted it to be at same level as yours but clicked wrong. Started to edit but decided to stop and add this sentence instead.
I have to chime in here. First, I've been discussing the issue and apparent contradiction between privacy and a public-ledger blockchains for years, but Dan apparently didn't see the contradiction back then. He was happy to implement "Stealth" in the BitShares ecosystem irrespective of this "radical transparency" idea he now appear to be endorsing.
Perhaps he'd like to demonstrate his belief in his claim by starting with himself? I won't hold my breath to see that.
I am not in total disagreement with your premise, however from a practical perspective what you haven't provided is a way to get from our conflicted, transparent+private way of life to where everything and everyone operates transparently. Great risk exists for our society if everyone except governments tried to be totally transparent. Don't you think governments would just love that?
Your first method to resist you stated involve the very antithesis of your premise, we resist through stronger privacy. What? I know you believed that or you wouldn't have attempted to create stealth. I don't believe you would implement something that is contrary to the principles you espouse just for a paycheck or personal gain. I hope I am not wrong in that belief.
I don't have an answer to the dilemma here , but I also don't think dropping all shields and being a total open book to the tyranny imposed by a psychopathic, power hungry, secret-driven leadership regime is a prudent course of action. Sounds like you don't believe that would destroy or harm many lives by feeding them to the arbitrary decrees of such corrupt leaders? Are you really that naive?
Although I don't believe this about you, your adversaries that believe the Larimers are scammers will use this article to paint you in a bad light, that you're only saying this to facilitate faster gov compliance and mainstream adoption of crypto by the masses. I still believe you want to see mainstream adoption, but not at the expense of individual freedom. I believe a policy of total financial transparency in the face of out-of-control powers that [shouldn't] be would be detrimental to the cause of freedom.