By the way, Binance has its own ZEC token in the Binance Smart Chain. I was having fun with swaps in Brave just yesterday.
Token Contract Address: 0x1Ba42e5193dfA8B03D15dd1B86a3113bbBEF8Eeb
I won’t say I’m a fan of the idea but at the very least it would be better than delisting if they left the ZEC withdrawals to the main network and the input via BEP-20.
Thus, ZEC can be deposited via swaps in, say, Brave, and withdrawn to the regular Zcash network.
This is much better than the ERC-20 option because transaction costs in BSC are incomparably cheaper. By an order of magnitude at least.
Additionally it incentivizes their own network and use of BNB, which should suit them.
During yesterday’s panic around OKX, Binance’s cold wallet was replenished by another >107 thousand. Are they really interested in delisting? @aquietinvestor
Accumulated over 1.3 million coins in a little over a year, but if you trust my words, I’ve seen this address replenished over the last 2 years and in 2 years that’s almost 2 million coins plus. Think about it.
for exchange: with a normal address or with a tt address returning funds would require an action / acknowledgment of ownership to return funds. If the funds are discovered to be from a criminal, it could mean the exchange is unable to move the coins or they have accepted stolen funds. with p2sh the sender can retreive their own coins.
For the user: It gives the ability to offer coins and get them back on your own without relying on the good intentions of the counterparty.
For the cryptoeconomics: p2sh, p2phk, and zpools are currently all valued the same. all coins are created equal. Having a set of coins stored in an address type that are “clean” creates a value discrepancy and distroys fungibility. Some part of coins can go to exchanges, some are forbidden. A subset of coins would be more valuable since they can be an exit ramp. Hard to say what premium this would attract, it would be non-zero though.
I will ask Binance about this address, though I’m not certain how much detail they’ll be willing to provide. I agree that it’s peculiar that it’s been removed from the confirmed assets page. I’ve always assumed that this is a commingled wallet for Binance customers, given that the balance seems too large to belong to a single individual or entity.
Proof-of-originating-shielded-address was one of the options that we proposed initially, but IIUC that was rejected on the grounds that Binance didn’t want to receive transfers at shielded addresses? That being said, at the time what was discussed was using the payment disclosure mechanism, which isn’t protocol-enforceable; another option that perhaps hasn’t been sufficiently discussed (but which might not fit in the required timeline) is a new shielded address type for the Orchard pool, and dedicated protocol support for “reply to source-of-funds”. What this would entail, loosely speaking, is that the spend part of the transaction format would be updated to contain space for source address information that is visible to the recipient, along with proofs that the funds being received are controlled by the owner of that source address.
We’ve wanted the “authenticated reply-to” feature for other purposes (mostly because using a text reply-to in the memo, as wallets sometimes do today, can lead to spoofing attacks) and so this sort of thing isn’t out of the question, but I don’t know whether this would satisfy Binance’s requirements and doubt it could fit in the timeline we have available. It might be something we want to do going forward anyway, though.
EDIT: there’s a piece that I’m not sure about here, which is how the protocol enforcement might work; we can provide transaction space for the proofs, but the source-of-funds proof would have to be linked into the verification of the spend proof in some fashion, and that’s something that the cryptographers will have to weigh in on as to whether it’s possible.
This sounds very similar to Firo’s Exchange Address proposal except that it isn’t enforced on consensus?
But can you elaborate on this:
Wallets that want to send to Binance also need to convert. At the same time, they must restrict the source of the funds to transparent. If a wallet doesn’t do that, these t2 addresses will look incorrect.
Hello, I am an outsider to this tribe but a web3 developer in the wider community.
My 2C is if governments want to take away privacy, nothing you do will make them happy, and in that sense, XMR is already standing tall to give them the .
Anyone doing privacy where it relates to money should be prepared for any compliance to utterly reject them and stick to what the point of BTC was about. Focus on DEX’s.
The project I represent, lumeweb.com, focuses on making web3 true such that access to all networks, including defi on the web, is absolute. So long-term access will exist for all ecosystems.
Giving in for adoption turns a cryptocurrency into the thing it is meant to replace and insults its users.
It is necessary to look for compromises everywhere and try to understand all aspects of the issue. All public developers in DeFi should understand this. The Tornado Cash example teaches that ignoring leads to bad consequences.
LOL, compromises to privacy… I get you are trying to be diplomatic… but there are no compromises to be made to privacy when you have it. That is the entire point of what we started. I will also assume if the tech existed to be private when Satoshi was designing things, BTC would have definitely been dark web money from the start even more than it was fear mongered a decade ago.
The TC is a prime example of a valid privacy effort made “evil” by the powers-that-be.
The result will be privacy on most chains, or chains becoming TradFi under the standard fearmongering to remove our civil rights.
While many lobbyists tell government chains are transparent, we are rapidly getting to privacy crypto with ZKP, which needs to be embraced.
Do you want to retain civil rights, which include privacy, or do you want to get rich? Civil rights mean zcash is a useful currency and does not listen to the government or any CEX to tell it how to operate. If you want number go up, do what they say, get wide adoption with a stamp of approval, and treat it as another asset inside TradFi.
.