Call it a demo of our micro-payment service? Try paying with the Taler wallet, the gratis demo currency "KUDOS" will work. Plus, we had a real problem with DDoS from bots given that generating the cgit is expensive. Now, https://git.taler.net/ (static version) has no paywall, and git:// is also completely gratis.
There is no backdoor. There may be bugs (point those out, we'll fix!), and there is the very clear and documented statement that the receiver of funds is subject to legitimization based on the legal requirements under which the exchange operates. That is not a backdoor. Backdoor implies secrecy, we have no secrets other than our private keys. ;-)
If you don't like the word backdoor, use a different one. It doesn't change the point I'm making. In any case, backdoor does not necessarily mean it's secret. There are known backdoors and there are secret backdoors. This is a known backdoor.
The privacy properties for P2P transfers between consumers are identical to those with merchants: the exchange can require the receiver to provide information about themselves, but the payer remains anonymous just like for purchases at a merchant. And yes, it involves spending (burning, if you prefer) the old tokens (we prefer digital coins) and issuing (blindly signing) fresh coins. Afterwards, the fresh digital coins are indistinguishable from those issued during a regular withdrawal from a bank account.
Would it be technically possible to transfer tokens to another user directly, without an exchange acting as an intermediate?
My assumption is that this is possible but not supported by default, since there’s no way to guarantee (without using an exchange) that the giver has really deleted the tokens they sent to the receiver, and will not spend them before the receiver can (which would render the receiver’s copy of the tokens unusable).
But assuming someone implements this in software, would it be possible to make direct transfers like this while relying entirely on trust? Or are the tokens somehow tied to the wallet that has first received them?
You can backup tokens and restore them to another wallet (and we are in the process of making that easier). We call that sharing, and it is not a transaction as it is simply granting access to the same money to both wallets.
No, the "coins" (as we call them) are not tied to the wallet - if you trust the sender to delete them after you received them, then you can use them from your wallet as if you withdrew them, or got them via the standard P2P send protocol.
Right, because you can issue coins as a "purchase" of the coins being transferred. That makes sense, but still doesn't address the concerns around the system being designed to support negative interest rates and withdrawal rate limits.
On your point #2, just a small hint: At https://taler-ops.ch/ we legally operate GNU Taler in Switzerland already. Now, Switzerland is a bit easier (lower capital requirements, no DORA), but actually quite similar in terms of KYC/AML as FATF provides a common reference frame.
The other half of the usual story is that: the user gets confused by all the possibilities and non-cohesive implementations of the FLOSS version and just pays some US startup which offers a single straightforward package.
I would expect that, just like other cryptocurrency, "cloud wallets" will manage the tokens themselves for most people, who will gladly give up decentralization for the tiniest bit of convenience
Which is still better than the status quo where only licensed banks can hold digital money for you. I'm fine with everyone having the choice of custodian as long as I can implement a wallet from the open specifications myself.
Licensed banks aren't getting pillaged by cyber criminals though, I'm tech literate and mindful of my security and yet my 3 bitcoins were stolen from Mt Gox. People buy hardware ledgers to create a higher sense of security then those get hacked. The money in my bank so far has never been touched without me having to think about it at all.
Presumably you would keep most of your money in a licensed bank and only a small fraction as cash: either in a digital wallet on your phone or a leather wallet in your pocket.
Being able to complete small purchases P2P offline without needing the whole MC/Visa/Square/Stripe stack would be fantastic.
Fantastic, yes. Unfortunately the 3 needed/wanted properties offline, anonymous, and secure cannot be achieved simultaneously.
MC/Visa work offline and secure, but not anonymous.
Taler is anonymous (payer) and secure, but not offline. At least the payer needs to be online to prevent double-spending.
"It's maybe private in that the Vintner does not need to know who you are, but you can bet the control freak tyrants in the government will know that you bought that wine." -- actually no. Because the digital cash you "extracted" from the exchange was blindly signed, the exchange/central bank would NOT learn that you bought wine. Only that someone (anyone who previously withdrew a sufficient amount of digital cash) bought wine. Please do read up on cryptography, how to do this is known since 1989.
It's not the primary path you should be thinking about. It has been revealed in many cases, situations, and through many different methods that the primary path is effectively neutralized by circumventing it altogether, well before 1989 too.
It's never the primary battlefront that is really important, it's always the flanks my friend.
reply