> You can send up 70 UTXOs
Don't you see how consolidating these would be very bad?
Maybe you meant you can get ~70 UTXOs out from a Tx0?
> Whrilpool have no censorship
Only government can censor.
Everything else is just a private entity deciding who they do business with.
> does noy work with chainanalysis
Neither does zkSNACKs. Or do you say you are "working" with a shopkeeper when you buy something from the store?
> Its a zerolink cj and it breaks deterministic links
The protocol #[6] designed is being used but unfortunately, Scamourais understanding of it is similar to Roger Ver's understanding of the Bitcoin whitepaper.
Both are naively nitpicking on the wording.
Hiding the toxic change and different input values in one transaction before a coinjoin does nothing against observers, but it does cost more in mining fees.
> no address reuses or merges.
How about the consolidation of multiple toxic change outputs to join a pool?
Regarding address reuse, afaik neither implementation has them at the moment but it's a problem in both projects history. It might become a thing again in the future, like when Wasabi needs to allow payments in coinjoins.
No chainalysis? No censorship?
LUL you Wasabi guys .... seems you have no clue about your own implementation as well 😂
> You can send up 70 UTXOs
Don't you see how consolidating these would be very bad?
Maybe you meant you can get ~70 UTXOs out from a Tx0?
> Whrilpool have no censorship
Only government can censor.
Everything else is just a private entity deciding who they do business with.
> does noy work with chainanalysis
Neither does zkSNACKs. Or do you say you are "working" with a shopkeeper when you buy something from the store?
> Its a zerolink cj and it breaks deterministic links
The protocol #[6] designed is being used but unfortunately, Scamourais understanding of it is similar to Roger Ver's understanding of the Bitcoin whitepaper.
Both are naively nitpicking on the wording.
Hiding the toxic change and different input values in one transaction before a coinjoin does nothing against observers, but it does cost more in mining fees.
> no address reuses or merges.
How about the consolidation of multiple toxic change outputs to join a pool?
Regarding address reuse, afaik neither implementation has them at the moment but it's a problem in both projects history. It might become a thing again in the future, like when Wasabi needs to allow payments in coinjoins.
Its really funny that all the Anti-Samourai boys has one thing in common. They have absolutly no clue how Whirlpool works. That means you can't take them serious 😉
You pay a entry fee for Whrilpool and you can send up 70 UTXOs, remixes are free. Whrilpool have no censorship and does noy work with chainanalysis. Its a zerolink cj and it breaks deterministic links and there are no address reuses or merges.
Joinmarket does not break deterministic links, is not zerolink and sybill attacks are possible
He has really no clue about whirlpool. Told him 5 times or more to read the Samourai docu. He talks about things which are official documented.
Senseless with you as you don't understand the Whirlpool concept.
And merges are not very smart ;) But we end this discussion now because you don't understand it
Your are showing something like this
https://kycp.org/#/416da38ee147bdc86fd543a474315be920f1138df44560a56bfc3346a7c436df
Btw this is a Wasabi CJ with merges ...
You have rwlly absolut no clue, that's a shame. I guess you do bad PR and nothing more because otherwise Wasabi should fire you immediatly
It makes nothing traceable. You have really no clue how Whirlpool works, right? You are just talking about the TX0. You can't unmix a Whirlpool TX ;)
Because Whirlpool works perfect and it's the best solution we have.
You just explained how a TX0 works. Congrats. That is nothing special ;) Just read the docu again. I'm pretty sure you will learn alot
He is a genius :) I told him 1000 times he should read the Samourai docs.
But Address Reuses and they are working with Chainalysis and are falling in love with censorship
In reality you unmix nothing.
BUT we can talk about the Address Reuses in Wasabi, this topic would be interesting, right?
Whirlpool leaves deterministic links because it peels the change during the tx0 used to create sized equal outputs. I just unmixed the Whirlpool transaction from your screenshot to reveal the change: https://mempool.space/tx/323df21f0b0756f98336437aa3d2fb87e02b59f1946b714a7b09df04d429dec2
Address bc1qgwv9hn979rex0rhfp3cknfdkyrgk04493gclvv belonging to Whirlpool input 1 created 0.01346981 BTC in traceable change which has 100% deterministic links to bc1qjy3zud5c7qypvgccgvptvaxkcsg6g4jl3u4tdy
Address bc1q528pyda90y4j9nuqrcm65rlxz9txljtn208dqm belonging to Whirlpool input 3 created 0.01971146 BTC in traceable change which has 100% deterministic links to bc1q50akm6ggcwgjext09tuz0rcl6cya2huu70pef4
Feel free to post any other Whirlpool tx ids and I'll unmix them too.
You are basically talking about the doxxic change from whirlpool. Do you know that the mixed bitcoin can not be spend with the doxxic change in the same transaction?
The whole point is, that after one mix there are no deterministic links
Thx