bullshit. and so disingenuous.
so lets get this straight
you're claiming there's some determalistic (or even some general probabilist method) that undermines monero privacy?
Like, the adversity has 1/16th of a chance of correctly guessing the social graph over 1 transaction.
1/256th over 2tx hops
1/4096th over 3 etc
and *even if you have additional information to identify the movement of an output in a tx, its broken over any previous/successive hops because a NEW doffie-helman exchange is made.
so what's your fucking problem?
you literally had RFK make an intelligent case one day ago.
and at least he has a brain and isnt just a bullshit artist.
The address published on the chain relates to absolutely nothing anywhere.
You are being deliberately deceptive. bad super testnet.
online payments are very bad for your privacy
transact with shiny metals IRL
why are you lying to people?
the recipients "address" is just a key negotiate a diffie-helman exchange. appears nowhere else and relates to nothing.
and yeah, thats how ring sigs work. you publish 16 possible senders, one being the true spend.
its looking like we will get full chain proofs in a year or two.
and what exactly is the problem with knowing the fee paid for a tx when you can't differentiate any tx on the chain?
pretty sad disingenuous posting
DJT getting shot won't make him any less of a malignant narcissistic asshole.
He doesn't care about you and isn't interested in the things that matter to you.
oh gotcha
its about price.
Yes I ABSOLUTELY prefer they sell the bitcoin they stole from people.
politicians are not going to save you
the best thing they can do is leave it alone
The idea here is
by embracing delisting and acclimating to operating *outside* the tradfi area
see: DEXs, p2p markets, circular economies etc
monero gets a headstart on actual grassroots usage
and relatedly
develops immunity to manipulation by 3rd parties.
otoh, BTC
by embracing adoption by tradfi
actually weakens its censorship resistance
true or not...? its a matter of perspective.
but basically true I think.
accuse people of spouting half truths
when refuted refuse to respond and tell them to go away
classic maxi cultist.
Homie
you made a couple of (incorrect) assertions in your OP.
I refuted them.
I'm sorry you can't cope with that.
they could just not tax it.
that would be staying out of the way.
imagine thinking a strategic reserve made from other peoples confiscated property is the best possible bitcoin policy.
Well we sure as hell don't have to support candidates who promote policies DIRECTLY against our best interests.
It is obviously not in our best interest for the US Federal govt to get involved in bitcoin.
If you're anti-state
why would you want the US govt to hold 4m BTC?
It makes no sense. I want them to go away and be LESS powerful.
If they get into bitcoin they will dk *whatever they can to leverage their capture of legacy finance to exert pressure on the bitcoin network.
Inviting them in is stupid
quite a word salad to just say
"i have no use for real privacy and embrace surveillance"
neither of you get bitcoin
much less monero
if you think liquid is a reasonable solution for privacy.
i dunno bro
15k txs/day is pretty good
also, what "huge risks that you're going to be ok?"
lol
"i don't know or care that lack of privacy erodes censorship resistance"
have fun being fiat rich.

obuserd