which is a dupe of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39026970 .. seems like the dupe detector is taking the day off (although 4 points/0 comments, 6 points/3 comments, 18 points/17 comments isn't much engagement)
this looks like it is print publicity for a new book.. the 2013 slides for "Men with No Name" had five other UC San Diego researchers, not just this one person.
I first learned about Bitcoin in a Podcast in ca 2011.
They described Bitcoin as pseudonymous (not anonym) and how all transactions are public for anyone to be seen.
This is a recent article, but it's talking about the bitcoin craze in the early 2010s.
> Having set down those words, and blowing a gaping hole in the myth of Bitcoin’s inherent untraceability, Meiklejohn, Savage, and her other adviser Geoffrey Voelker started brainstorming a clever title.
I was never involved with any cryptocurrency, so probably don't remember very well, but was bitcoin ever considered anonymous with its public transaction ledger? Or it's obvious here only retroactively, and at the time nobody knew it?
I'll continue to stay away from it. I had figured when I can walk into most grocery stories and buy some freshly baked bread or potatoes with bitcoin I might finally give it a try.
I am a big fan & advocate for Bitcoin and don't know anyone in the space who claims Bitcoin is anonymous. In fact everyone talks about how it's not and ways to fix that.
17 comments
[ 296 ms ] story [ 1295 ms ] threadWeird to continue "busting" that myth in 2013.
> Having set down those words, and blowing a gaping hole in the myth of Bitcoin’s inherent untraceability, Meiklejohn, Savage, and her other adviser Geoffrey Voelker started brainstorming a clever title.
I was never involved with any cryptocurrency, so probably don't remember very well, but was bitcoin ever considered anonymous with its public transaction ledger? Or it's obvious here only retroactively, and at the time nobody knew it?