>"They aren't"

Then why are you always talking about blinded paths as a privacy improvement?

>"That is good practice because it's an on-chain transaction, and good privacy on-chain involves coinjoining. It has nothing to do with supposedly exposing yourself via your invoice, which is not a thing. You invented it. Or heard it from someone misinformed."

You're putting words in my mouth. Show me where I said "exposing yourself via your invoice". As for the rest 👇

"On-Chain Footprint: Opening and closing LN channels necessitate on-chain transactions that are publicly visible and analysable. This creates a "digital fingerprint" that may be used to link on-chain and LN activity....

Public Channel Announcements: Most LN nodes publicly announce their channels to facilitate routing, including the channel's funding transaction. This can link a user's LN node with their on-chain activity....

Invoice Data & Receiver Privacy: LN invoices contain the receiver's public key, and invoices using unannounced channels also include routing hints exposing channel details. This significantly compromises receiver privacy."

"In the Channel Coinjoins chapter we look into the on-chain connection to Lightning, where channel opens and channel closes can harm the privacy of a Lightning node."

"Funding and channel close transactions can be used to link UTXOs to lighting nodes. Not even private channels are protected from this leakage, as sometimes they can publish information on-chain that reveals that the transaction was related to lightning network activity."

https://massmux.org/p/lightning-network-privacy-pros-and

https://lightningprivacy.com/en/introduction

https://www.voltage.cloud/blog/lightning-network-privacy-explainer