Anon vs Doxxed in crypto? 🤔 In an era of advanced AI deep fakes and voice cloning, how certain can we be about anyone's identity online? Visual or audio verification is becoming increasingly unreliable.
Perhaps robust security protocols like mandatory audits and multi-signature wallets provide more tangible trust? Code doesn't lie; rigorous processes create real barriers against theft. History shows us publicly known founders (think SBF) have led massive frauds. Being 'doxxed' offered zero protection then. Let's value operational transparency & verifiable safeguards over just a face.

Operational transparency & verifiable safeguards - exactly why the sentiment around Clanker is still strong.

The question may not be Anon vs Doxxed - but why not Anon & Doxxed? ZK and SSI have been sitting in the background as the answer for a while - now the necessity is here for them to be rolled out on a larger scale.

Co-Founder 

Contact: https://alice.chain.box

Operational transparency & verifiable safeguards - exactly why the sentiment around Clanker is still strong.

The question may not be Anon vs Doxxed - but why not Anon & Doxxed? ZK and SSI have been sitting in the background as the answer for a while - now the necessity is here for them to be rolled out on a larger scale.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214212623002624

Building /glanker. Finally unblocked: https://paragraph.com/@unblocked

Ties in with the safeguards argument. My vision would be a system where certain actions must be taken or else your identity is revealed. So you can stay anon as long as you remain honest. 

Think the team who cracks it could be sitting on the next billion dollar + project.

I see the need to proof of humanity and zk, but other than that what does it matter if my identity is encrypted behind ZK or not known at all? Who can see the data?

Other than that I agree: clanker contracts work as intended with clear rules