The head of StarkWare and Saylor are at odds: Should Bitcoin add privacy features?

Question

[Bitpush] StarkWare head and Zcash veteran Eli Ben-Sasson recently had an in-depth conversation with strategy heavyweight Michael Saylor. Ben-Sasson got straight to the point about how Starknet could ignite the Bitcoin economy, and then the topic shifted to the tough nut of privacy.

Saylor’s stance was clear: Bitcoin should stay away from privacy features, especially don’t copy Zcash’s approach, otherwise governments around the world could shut it down in no time. But Ben-Sasson didn’t buy it. He believes there’s a way to have both—protecting privacy while still keeping an option for key disclosure—no conflict there.

When it came to the OP_CAT upgrade, Saylor was concerned again, feeling that making changes too fast and aggressively could backfire. Ben-Sasson shot back directly: this has been researched and debated for ten years already, that should be enough time—we can’t just keep dragging it out for centuries, right?

The two heavyweights each stuck to their guns: one wants to play it safe and avoid trouble, the other pushes for faster progress and thinks things are dragging on. Pretty interesting dynamic.

quietly_staking · Accepted Answer

Sigh, Saylor is still too conservative. Privacy and compliance aren’t mutually exclusive. Ben-Sasson is right—a view key would solve the problem, wouldn’t it? We can’t just let Bitcoin run around exposed like this forever.

FlatTax · Answer

Saylor is just being cowardly. How did privacy features become such a bogeyman? Ben-Sasson is right—technology is neutral, the government can't just ban an entire network because of this.

OP_CAT has been in the works for ten years and they're still dragging their feet. It's really time to make a move.

Saylor is way too close to the government—his stance is a bit... you know what I mean.

Is privacy a basic human right or an accomplice to money laundering? That's the real issue here.

The government can't ban this. Technology itself isn't good or bad; it all depends on how it's used.

Ben-Sasson is just so rational, and his balanced approach really holds water.

It's the same old tune—scared of the government. Bitcoin was supposed to be censorship-resistant in the first place.

Saylor the procrastinator—ten years isn't enough? Are you going to drag this out forever?

Privacy upgrades are a must. If you oppose them, you're standing against freedom.

memecoin_therapy · Answer

Privacy and transparency are inherently a dilemma. Ben-Sasson's idea is a bit naive; the government definitely won't let loopholes slide.

Saylor is right this time—Bitcoin should keep a low profile and not self-destruct.

It's been ten years and people are still arguing about OP_CAT. This community's efficiency is really something, haha.

Ben-Sasson hit the nail on the head—there are always people who want to drag things out forever.

Honestly, if the government really wants to ban it, adding more privacy features is useless. This is a political issue, not a technical one.

Zcash is a cautionary tale—are people really still willing to jump into the privacy pit?

Both sides have their points, but whether Bitcoin should change or not isn't a big deal; the market will decide.

The "view key" proposal just sounds like a compromise of a compromise—there's no way it can satisfy everyone.

Saylor is too conservative. Blockchain is supposed to break things in the first place.

Once government regulation is brought up, all technical discussions seem powerless...

Hash_Bandit · Answer

lol saylor's never gonna get it... privacy and adoption aren't mutually exclusive, they just need smarter engineering. ben-sasson's been mining this problem for a decade, man knows what he's talking about

StablecoinArbitrageur · Answer

actually if you run the numbers on regulatory correlation coefficients... saylor's playing it safe with the basis points while ben-sasson's talking about accumulated research across a decade. classic risk-averse vs calculated bet mentality. the slippage between privacy and compliance? that's where the real market inefficiency lives, ngl

VitaliksTwin · Answer

Saylor is just a coward, always worrying about what the government thinks. Bitcoin was created to escape this system in the first place. How did privacy features become original sin?