Re:Libra still needs more baking
by brazzy on Sunday April 26, 2020 @01:09AM
(#22984647)
I'm fairly sure GP meant that Bitcoin itself is designe to be immune to legal interference. Individual users are not, although by employing a very strict security regime, they can in principle stay completely anonymous.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
> by employing a very strict security regime, they can in principle stay completely anonymous
Doesn't that necessarily require avoiding legitimate financial institutions at all costs?
You can interact with legitimate financial institutions in the normal way under your public identity. You've just got to make sure you don't share that identity with your bitcoin counterparties, which will limit your ability to exchange bitcoin for things of value such as fiat currency.
Bitcoin isn’t meant to interface with existing financial institutions.
Re:Libra still needs more baking
by fidelramos on Sunday April 26, 2020 @04:39AM
(#22985602)
Correct. It's actually in the first line of the Bitcoin whitepaper's abstract:
> A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.
Sure, but effectively 100% of the world's economy takes place via fiat currencies. One could remain anonymous by accumulating a bunch of cash (or gold, or some commodity, etc) and never spending it as well.