since you still insist on these bullshit theatrics
i just dropped by to say that "rando on the internet cant trace a payment" is a fucking stupid test that doesn't prove anything about the privacy of a network.
have a nice day.
Discussion
Perhaps it says a lot then that "rando on the internet CAN trace a monero payment"
your semantic bullshit isn't impressive to anyone
the sender knowing the address isnt "tracing a monero payment"
Why is it okay for the sender to know the destination? Why not hide that information from the sender? Why needlessly make the recipient vulnerable?
nobody said any of that.
the sender knowing the destination of their payment is NOT "tracing"
Big problem with the monero community:
When a flaw like this is pointed out that exemplifies a huge hole in monero's vaunted receiver privacy, many monero bros play a semantic game and focus on whether it counts as tracing or not. Which, by the way: shiw me a definition of tracing where this doesn't count.
I'll refer you to Merriam Webster
def 2A
The commonly accepted definition in this context (payment tracing) Is "to follow or study out in detail or step by step"
Which is absolutely NOT what is happening here.
The sender has an address and a derived hash that appears on chain that are provably linked. There is no "study on detail" or working it out "step by step".
Ie, no "tracing."
if you tell me your address and I send you a letter, did I "trace you"?
ffs.
the sender knows where the payment goes. period. no tracing involved.
as you say, its not ideal.
But you don't mind making it *sound as if* "tracing" is happening now do you?
which is the point of using the words you do.
As if you could follow the trail of funds through the chain...
which you cant.
and also
fuck you for the "he didn't talk about what *I* wanted to talk about. so monero bros are disingenuous"
as if we haven't litigated it to death before.
just stop calling it "tracing"
:s/bros/clowns/ other than that, spot on 🎯
