To be clear, is this a NACK because Taproot reduces “transparency” (increases 
privacy) on the chain (“maintaining consensus” is obviously an argument against 
any protocol change, so that’s a red herring)? 

And is it your theory that only an “honest” (statute abiding) person should 
have privacy, and not against the state, and/or that mixers are sufficient 
privacy?

Personally, I’m not moved by such an argument. What do you think is the value 
proposition of Bitcoin?

e

> On Mar 1, 2021, at 14:21, LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH via bitcoin-dev 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Good Afternoon,
> 
> I am going to take tough terms with much of your reply and do appreciate a 
> courteous practice. Having previously made public disclosure of my 
> affiliation with Jambler.io it seems sufficient to disclose my affiliation 
> through the link in my email signature block.
> 
> My concern is not increased privacy it is maintaining consensus values and 
> the transparency of the blockchain wherein all transactions are published in 
> an immutable record and that forbids the redaction of information by any 
> obfuscation. A separate concern is the availability of a privacy suitable for 
> cash should a Bitcoin user desire and especially without disturbing the 
> existing consensus.
> 
> The use of a Bitcoin Mixer is to enable standard equivalent privacy. As you 
> may experience yourself, you do not allow people to follow you around looking 
> in your purse, suppose you are dealing entirely with cash, and to see where 
> and how much you fill it up, and where you spend. Nonetheless, for an honest 
> person, their wallet is available for government audit as are their financial 
> affairs. This is consistent with the existing operation of consensus.
> 
> My full email signature block is a disclosure where I have some affiliation 
> with the referenced website being that it carries at least some information 
> that I have provided or that in some way I am associated perhaps only making 
> use of their services. For example, I hardly make a profit from LinkedIn just 
> my information is there. Also, I have made previous public disclosure of the 
> affiliation. Bitcoin Mixer 2.0 is a partner mixer run by Jambler.io wherein I 
> receive a service referral fee and am not in receipt of any part of the 
> process transaction. The operation block diagram provided by Jambler.io is 
> provided here and attached.
> <ip.bitcointalk.org.png>
> 
> [ip.bitcointalk.org.png]-Operation of Jambler.io partner mixer
> https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fjambler.io%2Fimages%2Fscheme-1.png&t=622&c=gTi7r1cfh-yynw
> from this thread  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5267588
> 
> 
> The installation script provided by Jambler.io that is the basis of my 
> referral website is also publicly published,
> https://github.com/jambler-io/bitcoin-mixer
> 
> The disclosure for the partner program is available from Jambler.io however 
> and is made prominently on my referral website. While it may seem lucrative 
> at first I insist all partner profits are reportable on your personal income.
> https://jambler.io/become-partner.php
> 
> I am certainly better than confident that you appreciate the difference 
> between an open and transparent blockchain and the ability of the user to not 
> reveal details of the content of their wallet publicly.
> 
> If further clarification is required may I suggest you pay a token and mix 
> some Bitcoin wherein our discussion may then have some point of reference.
> 
> KING JAMES HRMH
> Great British Empire
> 
> Regards,
> The Australian
> LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH (& HMRH)
> of Hougun Manor & Glencoe & British Empire
> MR. Damian A. James Williamson
> Wills
> 
> et al.
> 
>  
> Willtech
> www.willtech.com.au
> www.go-overt.com
> and other projects
>  
> earn.com/willtech
> linkedin.com/in/damianwilliamson
> 
> 
> m. 0487135719
> f. +61261470192
> 
> 
> This email does not constitute a general advice. Please disregard this email 
> if misdelivered.
> From: Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, 1 March 2021 12:07 AM
> To: LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH <[email protected]>; Bitcoin Protocol 
> Discussion <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Taproot NACK
>  
> Hello LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH
> 
> I find a striking dichotomy between your concern of increased privacy in 
> bitcoin and your link to a bitcoin mixer in your signature www.go-overt.com
> 
> At first your concerns seemed genuine but after seeing your promotion of a 
> bitcoin mixer I'm thinking your concerns may be more profit motivated? I 
> can't tell since you failed to disclose your relationship with the mixer.
> 
> Could you please clarify your association with the bitcoin mixer and moving 
> forward could you please always do proper disclosure any time you're 
> publically talking about bitcoin transaction privacy. It's only fair to do so 
> as to not mislead people in an attempt to manipulate at worst and just a 
> courteous practice at best.
> 
> Cheers
> Ariel Lorenzo-Luaces
> On Feb 28, 2021, at 4:36 AM, LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH via bitcoin-dev 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> Good Evening,
> 
> Thank-you for your advice   @JeremyRubin  on the basis you advise, "Taproot 
> does not enable monero-like privacy features", I am prepred to withdraw my 
> NACK notably that the existing feeatures of Bitcoin MUST be maintained, and 
> whereby the UTXO of a transaction is identifiable, the PayTo Address, and the 
> amount all without any obfuscation.
> 
> Lightning does not really provide obfuscation, it provides a result of a 
> subset of transactions although the operation of the channel is observable to 
> the parties.
> 
> The reports I were reading concerning the supposed operation of Taproot 
> published in a public media channel may have been speculation or 
> misinformation nonetheless it is prudent to conditionally reply as you see 
> that I have. It is important not to allow things to slip through the cracks. 
> As you may believe may astute reviewers could make a full disclosure to this 
> list it is not to be expected.
> 
> KING JAMES HRMH
> Great British Empire
> 
> Regards,
> The Australian
> LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH (& HMRH)
> of Hougun Manor & Glencoe & British Empire
> MR. Damian A. James Williamson
> Wills
> 
> et al.
> 
>  
> Willtech
> www.willtech.com.au
> www.go-overt.com
> and other projects
>  
> earn.com/willtech
> linkedin.com/in/damianwilliamson
> 
> 
> m. 0487135719
> f. +61261470192
> 
> 
> This email does not constitute a general advice. Please disregard this email 
> if misdelivered.
> From: Jeremy <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, 28 February 2021 3:14 AM
> To: LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH <[email protected]>; Bitcoin Protocol 
> Discussion <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Taproot NACK
>  
> I have good news for you: Taproot does not enable monero-like privacy 
> features any moreso than already exist in Bitcoin today. At its core, taproot 
> is a way to make transactions with embedded smart contracts less expensive, 
> done so in a manner that may marginally improve privacy dependent on user 
> behavior (but not in the monero-like way you mention). For example, it makes 
> it possible for lightning channels to look structurally similar to single key 
> wallets, but it does nothing inherently to obfuscate the transaction graph as 
> in monero. 
> 
> Such "monero-like" transaction graph obfuscation may already exist in Bitcoin 
> via other techniques (coinjoin, payjoin, coinswap, lightning, etc) with or 
> without Taproot, so the point is further moot. 
> 
> Do you have a source on your reporting?
> 
> You may wish to rescind your nack. 
> 
> 
> -- 
> @JeremyRubin
> 
> 
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2021 at 5:46 AM LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH via 
> bitcoin-dev < [email protected]> wrote: 
> Good Afternoon,
> 
> It has been reported that Taproot will enable some Monero like features 
> including the ability to hide transactions.
> 
> If that is the case I offer a full NACK and let me explain.
> 
> A part of the benefit of using Bitcoin is its honesty. The full transaction 
> is published on the blockchain. If that were to change so that transactions 
> may be obfuscated from scrutiny then any government would have unlimited 
> impetus to ban Bitcoin, and speculation has that is the reason India has been 
> reported to have banned cryptocurrencies already.
> 
> I am in support of the expanded use case of Bitcoin without harming the 
> established robust fairness and equal equity offered. The core functionality 
> of Bitcoin, its values, must remain unaltered. 
> 
> KING JAMES HRMH
> Great British Empire 
> 
> Regards,
> The Australian
> LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH (& HMRH)
> of Hougun Manor & Glencoe & British Empire
> MR. Damian A. James Williamson
> Wills
> 
> et al.
> 
>  
> Willtech
> www.willtech.com.au
> www.go-overt.com
> and other projects
>  
> earn.com/willtech
> linkedin.com/in/damianwilliamson
> 
> 
> m. 0487135719
> f. +61261470192
> 
> 
> This email does not constitute a general advice. Please disregard this email 
> if misdelivered.
> _______________________________________________ 
> bitcoin-dev mailing list 
> [email protected] 
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev 
>  
> 
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> <ip.bitcointalk.org.png>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to