@BanditToken

Outlaw money for an opt-in world. Native on @zano_project.

bandit.city
Joined July 2024
  • Tweets870
  • Following397
  • Followers451
132Media
In game theory, information is the variable that matters. Whoever holds more private information simply has more strategic options available.
1
1
1
34
more replies
Picture two trading agents on Ethereum, each reading the other's full position history. No bluffing, no quiet accumulation, no exit that doesn't telegraph itself. On Zano, neither one knows the other's position, history, or strategy.
2
17
Privacy isn't about being 'shady.' It preserves the information asymmetry that makes strategic decisions possible at all. Transparent chains don't build fair markets. They just make everyone maximally predictable.
5
MEV is a tax you pay for transparency. It only works because Ethereum transactions are visible before they get confirmed.
1
1
1
50
more replies
Estimates vary by methodology, but MEV extraction on Ethereum runs into hundreds of millions of dollars a year, much of it degrading execution for regular users. "Private mempools" and "MEV protection" are patches on a root cause: visible transactions.
1
5
Zano has a mempool too. Pending transactions just don't show amounts, parties, or asset types, so a sandwich bot has no target. Not because Zano "solved MEV" but because it never published the data the common MEV strategies run on.
8
An AI agent's baseline ask from a chain: JSON-RPC wallet access, not a browser extension built for humans clicking buttons. Transactions private by default. Multiple confidential assets, because real agents hold stablecoins and wrapped assets, not one coin.
1
26
more replies
Zano ticks the privacy boxes: simplewallet RPC, default-private transactions, multiple confidential assets, Zarcanum staking, Ionic Swaps, aliases, tracking seeds. No other chain puts that combination behind default privacy.
1
25
Where it falls short, honestly: settlement takes a few confirmations, not sub-second. For agents that need instant finality, that's a real constraint.
2
Spend a coin on Zano and the protocol pulls in several other unspent outputs to stand beside yours. The tx proves "one of these was spent" and stops there. Think group signature: one of 16 people signed, the signature checks out, the signer stays anonymous.
1
2
3
112
Stack on stealth addresses (one-time keys per tx, receiver hidden), confidential amounts (Pedersen commitments, amount hidden), and asset-type hiding. Sender hidden, receiver hidden, amount hidden, asset hidden. Every transfer, no box to tick.
1
23
The CryptoNote paper landed in 2012. Boolberry, Zano's predecessor, launched in 2014, same year as Monero. Zano held onto the ring-signature primitive and built Zarcanum on top of it. Monero took another road. Either way, ten-plus years in production.
22
On-chain voting with visible balances leaks every voter's economic weight. Whales get mapped, then pressured, bribed, or targeted. Curve, Compound, every major DAO has lived some version of this. It's a governance problem transparent chains can't engineer around.
1
27
more replies
Full private voting still needs eligibility proofs and private tallying on top.
1
4
Every functioning democracy runs a secret ballot, and not by accident. On Zano the asset-level plumbing is already there. The voting layer is still waiting on someone to build it.
5
Bear markets clear out speculators. They don't clear out users. So the real question for any chain: when the tourists go home, who's still transacting?
1
1
58
Monero's transaction volume has stayed consistent through every bear market since 2014. Not because price pulled people in, price has been brutal, but because the privacy use case doesn't care about price. If you need your transactions hidden, you keep sending.
1
1
13
Boolberry, now Zano, launched that same year. Same vintage, same lesson: privacy is utility, not narrative. Narratives die in downturns. Utility doesn't.
9
Load more