Quote from: GingerAle on March 29, 2015, 04:13:43 PM

Quote from: toknormal on March 29, 2015, 04:08:41 PM

Quote from: othe on March 29, 2015, 03:39:36 PM

heck people aren't even forced to use darksend

Well I see that as the advantage actually. Nobody was "forced" to melt down their gold everytime they performed a transaction, but it was the fact that they optionally could that made it master of money.

Quote from: othe on March 29, 2015, 03:39:36 PM

Only with encryption you can defeat the fungibility issue

Why ? At what level is the fungibility issue "defeated" in your opinion ? When its no longer useable ? When the entire basis of crypto that makes it accountable, popular and accessible has disappeared ? Cryptography has never been a significant part of cryptocurrency - even though it may share the first few letters. It works on a system of digital signatures. An approach to enhancing fungibility that's consistent with that paradigm is therefore going have obvious merit. By burying the whole system in cryptography your creating something that bitcoin isn't - an encrypted messaging system - a new paradigm whose practical differences in terms of day to day use are far greater than improvements in fungibility it purports to solve. If you really believe in it you should argue it on that basis rather than trying to eek out an n'th degree anonymity advantage on a 'nothing else matters' basis.

I just wanted to quote this in case you deleted it

What a gem.

I'd like to know what the crypto in cryptocurrency stands for?

Toknormal, if you please.