Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by coolspot 1581 days ago
You thought this through too well. Probably should be traced back, put in a list and investigated just for this comment.
2 comments

And what would they find?

The hardest investigation to defend against is the rubber hose investigation. Gotta give them what they want, without them even suspecting you could be that mysterious founder. The only way people suspect you’re someone is if your k is small, eg how many people could be Satoshi?

If you’re efficient, you can retire the mysterious founder identity and simply have multiple “early adopter” addresses that generated rewards early, among actual adopters. Make an exit from your projects as early as you can after they gain momentum with the wider crowd.

There is no way to stop people from starting open source projects, accruing the early rewards and then selling those rewards to others in a decentralized exchange or async OTC deal. If every country worldwide ever closes down all such anonymous mechanisms (maybe by 2050) and makes register in order to sell your rewards, you simply sell your private keys to the wallet in an async OTC deal. The buyer will have to trust that you won’t move the money after they register the address and before they move it.

Don't worry, we're all on the list already.
Kind of makes the concept of lists pointless, doesn't it?
~150 people commented on this post is manageable number. Narrow it down by sophistication in the topic.
Maybe I already did this and maybe I didn’t. Maybe it’s all armchair theorizing. Then again…

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wUJccK4lV74

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SYZqC7EGMfM

To not share how you secure anonymity is to rely on security by obscurity. Now I think it’s better to lay out the playbook using Kerchkoff’s principle so k will become far larger than 150. Remember… to improve anonymity, at some point you have to publish your private keys. And where better than Hacker News?

The playbook is yours. Improve it!

Step 1: try to break it. Post how you’d defeat the anonymization scheme. The threat model is that you’re all state level actors combined. I’d love to see what you come up with.

> I’d love to see what you come up with.

Nice try, Feds! :P

It does indeed. Dragnet surveillance is dumb and expensive.