2026-01-05 09:27:33

Privacy ≠ Evading Regulations, many people haven't thought this through clearly. When mentioning privacy technology, many instinctively think of regulatory avoidance, but in fact most privacy projects follow a completely different path.

Miden is a typical example. Users have the right to choose when to make their account information public and when to keep it private — this autonomy itself is very valuable. Just like you can choose to post a status on social media or not, it's a personal freedom, not hide-and-seek.

2026 will be a key milestone for privacy technology, as more and more institutional investors enter the market. What they need is a solution that can both protect privacy and meet compliance requirements. Privacy and transparency have never been mutually exclusive; it all depends on how they are designed.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
9
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

pumpamentalist

· 01-07 09:10

This logic indeed needs to be thoroughly clarified, otherwise it’s easy to be demonized. --- That analogy in Moments is excellent; finally someone has explained this matter clearly. --- Wait, will institutional investors really buy into this? It still depends on how it is implemented later. --- Miden’s approach to autonomy is indeed good, but I’m worried about regulatory fluctuations. --- That’s what they say, but how to balance privacy and compliance in actual implementation still remains to be seen. --- Someone should have exposed this misconception long ago; privacy technology ≠ tools for violations. --- The 2026 timeline sounds quite plausible, but how many projects are actually working hard enough to last until then? --- The design itself is fine; the key is how different countries interpret this design. --- This perspective is fresh, but whether institutions can truly feel assured to use it still remains uncertain.

View OriginalReply0

GateUser-1a2ed0b9

· 01-07 05:43

This analogy is brilliant. The matter of posting or not posting updates on social media can actually be compared to privacy technology, very spot on. To be honest, everyone has indeed misunderstood. They always think privacy = money laundering and hide-and-seek, but it's really a matter of choice. I get the logic of Miden now. Institutional investors are looking for a solution that is both private and compliant. I am optimistic about 2026. Autonomy vs. forced transparency, the difference is quite significant. It seems the industry has finally understood. This statement is interesting. Privacy and transparency are not inherently conflicting; the key really lies in the design approach. Finally, someone has explained this clearly. Otherwise, all privacy coins would have to bear the blame. The social circle example is brilliant. In one sentence, it helps those who don't understand grasp what privacy autonomy means.

View OriginalReply0

BlockTalk

· 01-07 00:52

Honestly, many people have misunderstood. Privacy rights are fundamental human rights and have nothing to do with avoiding regulation. By the way, I really like the idea of Miden; autonomy is indeed a selling point. When institutions come in 2026, compliance and privacy will be the way to go. Privacy transparency doesn't conflict at all; it all depends on how it's used. This logic needs to be gradually popularized, as too many people are still stuck in stereotypes. Miden's model is indeed good; giving users the right to choose is the right approach. So the key is how to design it; balancing privacy compliance is the winning strategy. Once institutions enter the scene, they will truly change the game, and privacy technology can really shine.

View OriginalReply0

LiquidationAlert

· 01-05 09:53

这观点确实戳中了，合规和隐私根本不是死对头等等，机构进场就代表要妥协？不一定啊说实话Miden这套逻辑我喜欢，选择权才是核心又一个被妖魔化的赛道，烦死了隐私技术真正value在自主，不在躲啥 2026这个时间点有点意思，得盯着朋友圈比喻绝了，终于有人说清楚了机构需要的方案，就是我们真正需要的吗

Reply0

WagmiWarrior

· 01-05 09:50

To be honest, I never fully understood this idea before. I really thought privacy technology was just about playing hide and seek. That analogy about the朋友圈 is brilliant; I instantly got it. The logic of autonomy like Miden is really comfortable—it's not enforced privacy but you get to decide. The route of institutional entry is interesting; it seems that compliance and privacy can truly coexist. This design approach is much more complex than I imagined. The distinction between privacy ≠ violation is very necessary; we need to do a good job of educating everyone. 2026 is worth looking forward to; it feels like the landscape is about to open up.

View OriginalReply0

MysteryBoxBuster

· 01-05 09:49

话说这个点子其实早就该有人讲清楚了，隐私和作弊根本不是一回事儿。 Miden这个思路还不错，就是自己决定隐什么露什么，比起那些非黑即白的方案灵活多了。机构进场这事儿，指不定比我们想的快，反正2026见分晓吧。合规隐私这对组合拳，真要打好才是真本事。

Reply0

RunWhenCut

· 01-05 09:48

That's right, this idea has been misunderstood for too long. The social circle example was perfect, it made everything clear immediately. --- Miden's approach really has potential; sovereignty is the core. --- Before 2026 arrives, we need to plan carefully. Once institutional investors start entering, the rules will change. --- Privacy and compliance can coexist; the key is who thinks of this first. --- It's not about avoiding regulation, it's about giving users control over their data—two different things. --- Compliance-friendly privacy? That's the future direction, much more reliable than those fly-by-night projects. --- A well-designed system can balance privacy and transparency; the problem is most projects don't have that kind of thinking.

View OriginalReply0

GhostChainLoyalist

· 01-05 09:42

This logic indeed needs to be stated confidently; too many people have their minds misled. --- I've been paying attention to Miden for a while. Sovereignty is the core, and if others don't understand, they deserve it. --- 2026, someone will definitely be crying by then—those who didn't get on the train. --- That analogy in the Moments is excellent; finally, someone explained this clearly. --- Compliance and privacy can be addressed together. Institutions have known about this for a long time; it's just ordinary people are still dreaming. --- I'm optimistic about privacy technology, just afraid it will be stigmatized again. --- Many people in the crypto circle just haven't had their minds opened; they insist on linking privacy to the underworld. --- This time, we can finally have a proper discussion about privacy instead of playing hide and seek—progress. --- Design is crucial, I agree; otherwise, even the best things are useless.

View OriginalReply0

SignatureDenied

· 01-05 09:27

Friend circle analogy is spot on; finally someone has explained this thoroughly. --- Institutional investors entering the market are the only way to truly drive this forward; retail investors' understanding doesn't matter. --- 2026 is a hurdle; it all depends on who can truly balance privacy and compliance. --- I really agree with the idea behind Miden; sovereignty is the core. --- Many people are indeed confused; privacy technology ≠ illegal tools, need to distinguish clearly. --- Design is crucial; the same technology used differently can lead to completely different results. --- It feels like institutions are the real driving force behind this privacy wave. --- The friend circle analogy is very fitting; it's just such a simple matter that has been demonized.

View OriginalReply0