And in fact they did just this when their vaults started bleeding money on an unfavourable position (JellyJelly). They handed out a closed source binary and the validators ran it immediately, closing out the market at an arbitrary price.
Hyperliquid being on chain in the traditional sense is fiction. You have a closed source piece of software run by closely controlled "validators" with additionally centralised components.
I think you would be surprised just how close to this depth of field look you can get with phone cameras these days. Its mostly digitally enhanced but it takes a real good eye to tell the difference.
It doesn't by itself, but it's a much better start. You can simply match up addresses with activity from other digital systems. That link is present in a global, transparent, up to the minute, cheap to ingest data source (the blockchain).
Comparing that to any other payment system (or combination of) where there is due process in collecting this information (hopefully accurate and valid) you're going to have a much easier time developing tools to detect and alert with Bitcoin.
So you need is a financial institution to give you unrestricted access to their records. And it can't be just any financial institution, it has to be the one used by the person you are targeting. And you don't know what financial institution that is because you are still trying to identify who the address belongs to. So really all you need is unrestricted access to many financial institutions' records.
Gameboy is really slow when compared to modern hardware. One ECDSA signature that takes around 100ms on Trezor (32-bit CPU @ 120 MHz) would take around a minute on GameBoy (8-bit CPU @ ~4 MHz.
If we're talking about GameBoy Advance (32-bit CPU @ 25 MHz) - this more plausible but still 5 times slower than Trezor.
I think waiting a full minute is a perfectly justifiable trade-off for a dystopian future that at least forces people to have an iconic '80's handheld strapped to their hip. If we're headed toward a dystopia, we can at least try to set the stage for a certain standard of aesthetics.
A cryptocurrency is generally more easily spendable in an open market. The sell potential that a founder has with 75% of the supply is massive.
If I created a coin today and sold 1% of the supply to you alone, on what basis would you want to store any value in that currency? Given constant buy demand, The currency's market value is defined by what I do. This is why organic price discovery for a currency is important.
I can't remember the last time I could use paper cash. Beyond your daily groceries, everything is usually exclusively paid for digitally.
Surveillance on daily spends is not valuable. What's valuable is things connected to your identity, specifically associations with other individuals and companies.
Transacting the coin itself rarely has any energy footprint. It's the security of the network that requires the mining and that is very separate to signal using it.
Unless the idea is that by using another coin, they don't add to the security requirements. That's a dubious line of thinking.
