This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/nanocurrency by /u/St0uty on 2025-05-09 08:42:02+00:00.
I'm aware that nano deliberately is not focusing on privacy elements due to regulatory hurdles however I can't actually think of any sound arguments as to why a cryptocurrency should have monero levels of privacy outside of engaging with crime. The full transparency of payments seems like a compelling feature rather than a bug, especially for audits.
Only arguments I can think of:
- Not wanting people to see your full balance upon every transaction (can be avoided fairly easily already via setting up a new wallet and moving around a bit between exchanges)
- Tainted money/fungibility (already occurs with online fiat payments and probably a good thing, e.g. if someone stole your nano you would want exchanges to freeze it)
- Crime? (I guess this could become a more broad topic if you disagree with your government's criminal definitions but once again circumvention isn’t possible with existing digital payments)
Is the pro-privacy side inadvertently (or deliberately) facilitating the criminal underworld “just because”?