You're missing the point. It doesn't matter what the technology can do. There is a system that currently exists, and that system will protect itself through regulation. Cryptocurrencies will come within the fold or they will be outlawed. It is irrelevant what is technologically feasible. Governments and state actors don't exist in stasis, any advance in technology will be met with an appropriate response even if that response is "banks are not allowed to accept any funds that have any connection to X cryptocurrency." If that doesn't work, the response will be "banks are not allowed to accept any funds without perfect knowledge of the two parties transacting and where the cash is coming from." What bank would possibly risk going against the government? Even the well-known money laundering banks balk in the face of government scrutiny. What company would possibly risk losing their relationship with their bank?
Cryptocurrency fanatics think that they can digitally outcompete physical reality. They cannot. The governments of the world are the Borg - you will be assimilated.
I am a person with nuanced thoughts and opinions, unique and diverse from the rest of the world.
>cryptocurrency
Let's not confuse zk proofs with cryptocurrency. Powerful, non-cryptocurrency systems that use zk proofs are coming. Alone their power is something we must reconcile, even before combined with distributed, autonomous systems.
And that's my point. ZK proofs are astoundingly powerful. Our societies and governments should be getting ready to deal with them.
>protect itself through regulation
Yes, this is a tool of the state. But it's just that, a tool. People have tools too.
The assertion of absolute state control is contrary to the state loosing the Crypto Wars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crypto_Wars). The Crypto Wars were one of the first examples establishing the limits of state power in the face of the Internet. This is before other global projects like BitTorrent or Gnutella.
The world is wide and I suspect the future is going to be weird.
The problem with this sort of reasoning is that it conflates an e.mail or a downloaded movie (or a bag of cocaine) with a cryptocurrency or token. E.mails/movies/dope etc are all basically consumer goods. Read the e.mail, wipe it. Put the coke up your nose, watch the movie.
It only has to go as far as the person you are sending it to, and it's journey is finished, and it's value is realised. Crypto is entirely different in that it has no value unless you can sell it on to another person. That final step is it's weak point.
PGP had no economic value when published in defiance of the State Department. Why publish PGP when the personal incentives seemed to far out way the consequences? Phil Zimmerman still lives overseas.
That's my point. You can ignore economics entirely and zk proofs are still going to radically transform our societies and IT systems, long before considering their impact to the cryptocurrency industry.
Cryptocurrency fanatics think that they can digitally outcompete physical reality. They cannot. The governments of the world are the Borg - you will be assimilated.