As for ChipMixer, I believe they have very good reasons not to implement Bech32 yet:
I'm not sure I follow that logic. The anonymity from using ChipMixer does not rely on an attacker not being able to tell an output came from ChipMixer. Indeed, it is trivial to identity a ChipMixer output, given their characteristic funding transactions with 50 outputs of 0.016 BTC, or similar. It is therefore irrelevant if an output is legacy or Bech32 - it can easily be identified as a ChipMixer output either way. Rather, the anonymity comes from being unable to link these outputs to any inputs due to the time travel funding structure and set chip size.
Anyone can copy ChipMixer's "characteristinc funding" for their own transactions: just take an input, and create many chip-sized outputs in one transaction.
I've made some lists counting currently funded addresses in chips-size.
All addresses:1 m
BTC: 268782
2 m
BTC: 69499
4 m
BTC: 32541
8 m
BTC: 16476
16 m
BTC: 8782
32 m
BTC: 4378
64 m
BTC: 1940
128 m
BTC: 1469
256 m
BTC: 726
500 m
BTC: 39785
512 m
BTC: 616
1000 m
BTC: 86705
1024 m
BTC: 446
2048 m
BTC: 93
4096 m
BTC: 134
8192 m
BTC: 32
Only addresses starting with 1:1 m
BTC: 216475
2 m
BTC: 52087
4 m
BTC: 24640
8 m
BTC: 12498
16 m
BTC: 6626
32 m
BTC: 3485
64 m
BTC: 1700
128 m
BTC: 1318
256 m
BTC: 658
500 m
BTC: 19436
512 m
BTC: 592
1000 m
BTC: 52094
1024 m
BTC: 435
2048 m
BTC: 88
4096 m
BTC: 132
8192 m
BTC: 31
Only addresses starting with 3:1 m
BTC: 39821
2 m
BTC: 13391
4 m
BTC: 6801
8 m
BTC: 3297
16 m
BTC: 1944
32 m
BTC: 781
64 m
BTC: 209
128 m
BTC: 119
256 m
BTC: 58
500 m
BTC: 14684
512 m
BTC: 22
1000 m
BTC: 27670
1024 m
BTC: 7
2048 m
BTC: 5
4096 m
BTC: 2
8192 m
BTC: 1
Only addresses starting with bc1:1 m
BTC: 12450
2 m
BTC: 4016
4 m
BTC: 1099
8 m
BTC: 679
16 m
BTC: 211
32 m
BTC: 112
64 m
BTC: 31
128 m
BTC: 32
256 m
BTC: 10
500 m
BTC: 5665
512 m
BTC: 2
1000 m
BTC: 6940
1024 m
BTC: 4
2048 m
BTC: 0
4096 m
BTC: 0
8192 m
BTC: 0
Only weird addresses (anything with a "-" in it)
:
1 m
BTC: 36
2 m
BTC: 5
4 m
BTC: 1
8 m
BTC: 2
16 m
BTC: 1
32 m
BTC: 0
64 m
BTC: 0
128 m
BTC: 0
256 m
BTC: 0
500 m
BTC: 0
512 m
BTC: 0
1000 m
BTC: 1
1024 m
BTC: 0
2048 m
BTC: 0
4096 m
BTC: 0
8192 m
BTC: 0
Notes:
I'm using data from October 24
because of bandwidth problemsI only check the total balance, some addresses may have received funds several times.