#大户持仓动态 In digital life, we have long been accustomed to an unspoken transaction: exchanging privacy for convenience. However, this "hidden rule" deserves reflection. Privacy should essentially be like air and water, a fundamental infrastructure for survival, rather than a bargaining chip.



Recently, I have noticed an interesting phenomenon - the Internet Computer (ICP) blockchain project is redefining the way privacy is constructed from the protocol layer. Its approach is straightforward: privacy is no longer an afterthought, but a native design.

How is it specifically done? ICP has introduced several technical directions. The VetKeys system truly returns the control of encryption keys to users, achieving on-chain privacy and autonomous authorization. The SEV hardware-level upgrade directly protects the computing process of smart contracts at the chip level, not even exposing the details of the calculations. Furthermore, there are privacy-native smart contracts that completely break the stereotype that "blockchain equals total transparency," allowing data to be both secure and private on-chain.

These technologies point in the same direction: making privacy the default configuration of systems. Just as electrical wires must be insulated and water pipes must be leak-proof, future digital services should be designed from the ground up with privacy as an infrastructure, rather than being patched up later.

ICP is paving a new path - on this path, your data sovereignty is not an option, but the starting point of the entire system. Is this form of the internet, which is "privacy built-in" rather than "privacy optional," also the direction you are looking forward to?

The application scenarios of currencies like $BTC, $ETH, and $DOGE in this ecosystem are also worth observing, especially the possibilities of cross-chain privacy interactions.
ICP-3.81%
BTC1.19%
ETH1.8%
DOGE0.63%
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.
  • Reward
  • 6
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
SpeakWithHatOnvip
· 4h ago
Privacy built-in is indeed the general direction, but can this ICP trap technology really be implemented? Or is it just another castle in the air?
View OriginalReply0
OnchainFortuneTellervip
· 4h ago
The idea of privacy as infrastructure is indeed exceptional, but can ICP really achieve this? It seems we still need to wait and see.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropHuntressvip
· 4h ago
Privacy native sounds very advanced, but we need to look at the actual adoption rate of ICP, we can't just listen to the promotion.
View OriginalReply0
MelonFieldvip
· 4h ago
It's just talk on paper; saying nice things about privacy sounds good, but when it comes to actually using it? --- This ICP thing sounds pretty good; if it can really be implemented, that would be great. --- Privacy as infrastructure? Wake up, brother, capital is the default setting. --- With a bunch of terms like VetKeys and SEV, why haven't I seen a killer application yet? --- Another "project to change the internet"; still telling stories five years later. --- I love this logic, just don't know how long ICP can hold on. --- Wait, is cross-chain privacy really happening? That would be revolutionary. --- The trade-off of privacy for convenience is too real; it just can't stop.
View OriginalReply0
blocksnarkvip
· 4h ago
The idea of built-in privacy indeed has some merit, but can ICP's operations truly materialize? Having just a technical framework isn't enough. --- VetKeys sounds good, but I'm curious if ordinary users will still find it to be a black box... --- It's easy to say nice things, but in the end, it all comes down to whether the ecosystem has users; otherwise, even the most native design is wasted. --- If cross-chain privacy can really be done well, it could indeed break the current pattern, but the risks are also outrageous. --- Wait, with such an emphasis on privacy, what about regulation? That's the real challenge, isn't it? --- Compared to native privacy, I'm more concerned about whether there are reliable applications in the ICP ecosystem; it's still too vague. --- Hardware-level protection sounds great, but the on-chain data itself is public; isn't this just treating the symptoms and not the root cause? --- Doge doesn't really have a place in this; the topic feels forced...
View OriginalReply0
AirdropBuffetvip
· 4h ago
The argument that privacy is infrastructure hits the mark, but can this ICP trap really be implemented? It still seems to depend on the actual number of users.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)