j"1LAnZuoQdcKCkpDBKQMCgziGMoPC4VQUckM#<div class="post">I don't know, I personally find it rather disconcerting if users in the chain can be identified. For example, it wouldn't be enough for me to simply get bitcoins at an exchange, send them to a random address, and then use them from that point on. Your identity would still be linked. However, given the public nature of the transactions, I'm not sure if there is any way around this.<br/><br/>I agree with you though, the software needs to be usable with a well-designed UI, and it needs to be robust. Bitcoin needs a full security audit to see how robust it is to different kinds of attacks, and what is compromised.<br/><br/><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=241.msg2042#msg2042">Quote from: amallama on July 07, 2010, 10:56:35 PM</a></div><div class="quote"><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=241.msg2038#msg2038">Quote from: NewLibertyStandard on July 07, 2010, 08:26:06 PM</a></div><div class="quote">*Strong<br/><br/><div class="quoteheader"><a href="https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=241.msg2034#msg2034">Quote from: amallama on July 07, 2010, 07:28:05 PM</a></div><div class="quote">Anonymity is not a feature that most users need.<br/></div></div><br/>That's my Steve Jobsian statement of the day <img alt="Wink" border="0" src="/static/img/emoticons/wink.gif"/> <br/><br/>I'm not saying that it's not something worth working on, but we shouldn't prioritize anonymity features ahead of basic functionality, ease-of-use, and driving adoption. There can always be a special implementation (maybe a separate client even) down the road that takes care of all of the features for ensuring anonymity. As Gavin implied, many anonymity features would come at cost to users who don't need them.<br/></div></div> text/html
https://whatsonchain.com/tx/68c9a666fcec19eef1b08f434d89e13d8fa2f5da0d28891740679b8fbc2ab78e