Quote from: toknormal on January 14, 2016, 11:18:29 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on January 14, 2016, 10:36:11 AM

Anonymity != fungibility. They are not reliant on each other. They have some minor overlap but not really. This argument is just mostly delusional bullshit.

I already went through this with you so I won't re-rehearse those arguments here ad-nauseum. Suffice to say that to someone who makes up their definitions as they go along to suit their argument, it doesn't surprise me that everything else looks like "delusional bullshit".

Bitcoin is not fungible because it is not anonymous. Bullshit. Period. Carry on with your delusion if you want. Smart readers can smell your bullshit.

Quote from: toknormal on January 14, 2016, 11:18:29 AM

Quote from: TPTB_need_war on January 14, 2016, 10:36:11 AM

There is no transparency when a transaction on the block chain has mixing inputs and outputs. More bullshit.

It is not "more bullshit", otherwise cryptographic obfuscation technologies wouldn't go to the lengths they do to limit their end user's ability to verify their transaction movements on public block explorers.

Hahaha you entirely missed the point. The point is that whether the mixing is done with opaque cryptography on chain or by mixing the inputs and outputs of a transparent transaction, both are opaque. Thus you had no point from the start.

Do you realize how boring it is to talk to idiots who think they are smart?

Quote from: toknormal on January 14, 2016, 11:18:29 AM

Apart from that you haven't even understood or questioned what aspect of "transparency" I'm alluding to

Try to invent something to save face.