Coinjoins would never work if Bitcoin had mass adoption anyway. Samourai knew this, they explicitly didn't want Bitcoin adoption, just like the average corporate Bitcoiner also doesn't want adoption.
Discussion
So true.
True, good that they got rekt. Now we can have mass adoption 💪🚀 nothing can stop us
The anon set if CoinJoins is too small right now, so in order for then to really be useful, a lot more people would have to use them.
Yeah! But mr nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6 said that if bitcoin adoption was high (more people and more utxos) coinjoins wouldn't work. It seems to me the other way around
Why would they not work? Due to high fees? Or something else?
And so what is your solution? No adoption?
Privacy at layer 2 as long as privacy cannot be implemented at layer 1.
Average corporate cypherpunk would rather work on USD stablecoins than Bitcoin privacy
Totally agree, with 100 sat/vB rates most coinjoins are no longer profitable, adoption will bring high chain rates.
You can make a payment with one input and two outputs in a large coinjoin, don't use any extra blockspace, but get decent improvement of privacy.
Scarcity > Privacy in Money
Samourai ignored lightning completely too, while it would have been the best post mix tool they could have implemented.
Coinjoins have people spending millions of sats on privacy, and it would have been incentive alignment to see the sats you spend on privacy also open up useful channels afterwards.
If you believe coinjoins are too expensive to exist with mass adoption, then you also believe lightning will not exist, as there were much higher fees to coinjoin, and yet approximately 4000 more bitcoin was in unspent whirlpool than was on the Lightning network.
LN achieves a much higher degree of privacy for the cost
with bolt 12 and splicing widespread the problem about not enough space for channel transactions is starting to become a memory as well
Sort of agree, but that last part isn't so clear ... it's hard to get a reliable count of total funds in channels (and it will get harder), but it doesn't make sense really to compare with funds 'in whirlpool'. Coinjoins are not used for active spends, have no funds loss risk. It's reminiscent of how silicon valley guys laughed at LN because 'stablecoins have 100x TVL'. TVL doesn't apply because this is 'active', for spending, money. Heck, even Joinmarket had vastly more 'volume' than Samourai most years, but I'm not of the opinion that counting the number of bitcoin involved in coinjoins tells you that much.
Get 'em while you can!
Coinjoins and mass adoption are not mutually exclusive.
And what do we do now?🤔
Not true. Cross input signature aggregation makes coinjoining cheaper than a single party transaction. It's a soft fork that's activating in 2 weeks.
Say more!
What what ?
(It's not actually activating in two weeks, that's a meme)
😂
Wrong they had privacy as priority not mass adoption it's different