$CHZ
Cooling DownSnapshot Window: 2026-07-14 22:00 UTC · ← Back to Crypto Overview
Social Momentum Summary
Total Engagement - Comments: 0, Retweets: 0, Likes: 2, Impressions: 981
Verbatim Community Citations & Social Evidence 1 source posts analyzed
Do we focus on choice or direction? $ZEC [Spoken audio]: Should the transparency cache pool be phased out? My answer is yes. Why is that? Initially, I was in the camp of people who thought that for compliance reasons, for these exchange integrations, we need the transparent pool. Like this transparency is really used for those integrations, for institutions adopting Zcache, so we need to keep the transparent pool. Turns out it's not as easy because there's actually an outlier and the outlier is called Gemini. So Gemini is a crypto exchange based in New York. It's a bubble company and it's based in New York. So Gemini is probably in what is the toughest crypto jurisdiction legally speaking worldwide and in Gemini is the only crypto exchange that supports shielded Ccash transfers. So if Gemini can do it There's really no reason why Coinbase can't do it, or Binance can't do it. So the only reason why Binance and Coinbase and others are not doing it is because it takes engineering time, it takes work. And the shield pool, unlike the transparent pool, requires specific unique cryptography to Zcash itself, while the transparent pool is really just like bitcoin. As an exchange, you've already supported bitcoin, so it's really easy to just integrate Ccash as well on the transparent side, but the shielded side requires a lot of work and that's why historically the shielded side, especially because there was little demand for it, was not integrated into these exchanges. It's not for compliance reasons. This idea that an exchange can only support transparent transactions because somehow it's illegal to transact privately is completely mistaken. On a daily basis, Millions billions of people transact privately through cash actual tangible cash It's not a crime to transact privately and there's really no reason why an exchange cannot support shielded transactions If Gemini in New York as a public company can do it now the second argument There is really core to the transparent pull phase out is is quantum, right? So the Sheelet pool, by default, provides you a ton of protection just by virtue of it being private. Because if the information is not there, there's nothing that the quantum computer can really attack. In practice, there's still the soundness, but that's being fixed with tachyon. But by default, the Sheelet pool already provides you a lot of protection against quantum computers that the transparent one doesn't. So really, the question then is why would you use the transparent pool and it gets even worse because with the shillet pool you have all the compliance tools you really need to be able to live in a completely compliant way in the shillet pool so you have viewing keys for example so with viewing keys you can let a third party maybe the tax authority audit your transactions go through them without having any signer ability, right? So if the government can see your transactions, you can share your transactions with the government, they can see the incoming transactions, the outgoing transactions or both, but they cannot spend out of that wallet. And so you can securely share that viewing access to a third party, your accountant, maybe a lawyer or the government without enabling them to spend your money, essentially. So all the tools already there on the shillet pool side to make this work in a completely compliant way, so there's really no excuse for the likes of ledger, for the likes of exchanges, like coin-based binance to not support the shillet pool. This idea that compliance is the reason is completely mistaken, which I mean I did it, anyone else can as well.
