I just popped in because I heard about majamina's chart and wanted to check it out. I must commend him for his patience in dealing with the discussion I see going on here.

Johny, either you have never studied statistics/probability or your Mnemonics aren't working. One coin toss will yield either a head or a tail. This equates to your "Either a transaction is traceable or it isn't." But what about the set of a billion coin tosses? While each is either heads or tails the set in a normal distribution tends towards .5 of each. Majamina's excellent chart shows that for anything less than close to 100% of the masternodes compromised, the chance of tracing any single transaction is vanishingly small.

For the gentleman (whose name I forgot sorry!) The refusal to comment on the implications of the chart, should the data be valid, shows yourself to be disingenuous. As a scientist and educator, I have no problem challenging the data behind a graph while recognizing the implication of that graph as it stands. It saves time, and shows respect for a worthy opponent. (Not to mention, demonstrates you have at least the education necessary to comprehend the math behind it.) There were many (and still a few, though much less) who disputed the validity of the data coming out of the LHC when the discovery of the Higg's Boson was announced. There was no disputing of the fact that the charts seemed to indicate that fact--if--the data was subsequently verified; which it was.

Your unwillingness to commit to the significance of majamina's chart reveals a mindset more concerned with preserving your personal status than one of someone who is truly in pursuit of the truth. That was sadly apparent after my reading the first few posts on this thread, and why I have refused to participate here.  I will watch for a little while to see the response this post gets. And maybe, if, it is received (and even countered) in a respectful manner I continue to check in.

Peace to you all...