The sword of supervision hangs in the air, where will anonymous coins go?
At the beginning of June, we pointed out that there are three major events that affect the trend of digital currencies in June.
1. Release of Libra’s white paper;
2. FATF’s regulatory opinions on cryptocurrencies;
3. The regulation of cryptocurrencies by the G20 meeting.
At present, Libra has been identified as a stable currency and does not have the value of price speculation. The purpose is to enter the field of cross-border payment. The release of Libra has aroused the attention of the global Internet technology industry on digital currency. Of course, the focus of everyone's discussion is still the attitude of various countries' policy supervision towards Libra.
Regarding the second incident, the FATF official website released "Risk-Based Perspective: Guidelines for Regulating Digital Assets and Digital Asset Service Providers", which explains the application of anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing requirements to virtual assets and virtual asset service providers. And requires countries to assess and mitigate risks related to virtual assets, financial activities and providers; license or register suppliers, and accept the supervision or supervision of national authorities. It also noted that virtual asset service providers are subject to FATF-related measures applicable to financial institutions.
On June 28-29, the G20 meeting was held in Osaka, Japan, during which world leaders and policymakers held talks. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres mentioned in a manuscript to the Nikkei News: The digital economy will become one of the main topics of the upcoming G20 summit in Osaka.
For many currency holders, the government's unclear attitude is undoubtedly the biggest uncertain time bomb. Not long ago, the rumor that "the maximum sentence for currency speculation in India is 10 years" caused panic in the currency circle, and was later clarified as a misinterpretation. However, China's September 4th regulation and India's central bank ban have caused huge fluctuations in currency prices.
Therefore, many people interpreted that in the early morning of the 28th, when BTC accelerated to 14,000 US dollars, the 23% plunge was the panic selling caused by the market’s uncertainty about the G20 meeting. After all, BTC has risen for almost a month. close to 80%.
In fact, the issues of G20 mainly focus on the lack of consensus on global cryptocurrency regulation. In general, FATF recognizes the financial attributes and financial risks of cryptocurrencies, but governments will not tolerate cryptocurrencies being used for illegal activities (money laundering). In terms of government regulation, one size fits all is not desirable, and it is inevitable to formulate reasonable regulatory policies.
It is worth noting that before the meeting, everyone believed that the consensus on anti-money laundering, no matter what the attitude is towards BTC, it is very clear that it must be negative for anonymous coins. However, the market’s response to this is that anonymous coins have soared. The anonymous coins Grin and Beam of the MimbleWimble protocol have increased by 5 times and 6 times respectively, and the slightly weaker ZEC and XMR have also increased by 70% and 50%.
When it comes to anonymous coins, the first thing that comes to mind is the older generation of privacy coins: XMR. The biggest technological breakthrough of XMR back then was the ring signature. "Ring signature", as explained on Monero's official website, "uses your account key and some public keys (also called outputs) extracted from the blockchain using a triangular distribution method.
Past outputs can be used multiple times over time, forming possible signature participants. In a 'ring' of possible signers, all members are equal and valid. It is impossible for outside observers to tell which of the possible signers in the signature group belong to your account. Therefore, ring signatures ensure that transaction outputs are untraceable. "
Later, after the zero-knowledge proof was proposed, the anonymous currency was further developed, and ZEC appeared. Inspired by how money laundering pools work, ZEC provides anonymity by creating a mixing service called zerocoin. Essentially, it pools a bunch of token transactions and mixes them up so it's hard to see where a person is going or coming from before making a transaction.
The Zerocoin system implements Tumbler at the protocol level, and there is no need to trust a third party at all. It is generally believed that Tumbler at the protocol level is better than ring signatures, but the biggest disadvantage lies in the increased amount of calculation. The anonymous coin rookie SERO also uses zero-knowledge proof.
With the shortcomings of various protocols exposed, senior cryptographers jointly created the Mimblewimble (MW) protocol. MinbleWimble, is to change this Bitcoin model by creating a multi-signature for all inputs and outputs. The parties involved in the transaction create a public multi-signature key that can verify the transaction record.
There are no addresses in this system because the two parties involved in the transaction share what is known as"double blind factor", only the two parties know that they are conducting a transaction. This ensures the privacy of the network. MW has achieved confidential transactions, no address, super scalable, and various teams have stepped up the development of MW anonymous coins, thus giving birth to this year's MW twin stars: Grin and Beam, but Grin is an inflationary model, and Beam is a deflationary model.
We found a picture on the Internet, which compared the details of each anonymous coin in detail.
It has to be admitted that the emergence of anonymous coins is driven by the application level, and the demand for private transaction transmission has spawned various technological innovations of anonymous coins. Therefore, a complete ban is impossible. But from the opposite point of view, the anonymous attribute also means that the suppression of supervision and public opinion will always exist. Underground circulation.
Generally speaking, the technology itself is neutral. The future of anonymous coins cannot be too brilliant, nor can it end in depression. The biggest possibility is to continue to move forward with heavy burdens.
