If anyone wonders why I quoted Tyler Winklevoss’ vocal support for Zcash when it was hit with a stupid FUD-delisting from Bittrex, or why I point here and in other threads to what Adam Back has said about fungibility:  This is why.

The above-quoted statement is mere FUD, without details.  No time to add details.

We need to get strong privacy in BTC, ASAP.  Those who are thoughtless and shortsighted don’t see how this has been a war of precedents from the start; and they lack any perspective on the big picture, long-term view.

Bitcoin set a bad precedent, just because the needed technology had not yet been developed.  Satoshi himself was interested in ways to make transactions unlinkable and untraceable, but he didn’t know how.  Now, the burden of fixing this problem has fallen on altcoins.

Some excellent precedents have been set for privacy.  Besides privacy coins, I don’t think that any exchange will dare to target Ethereum with a FUD-delisting over Tornado.Cash and Aztec Protocol, which provide much stronger privacy than LTC.  But someday, strong privacy needs to come home to Bitcoin—preferably before BTC fungibility gets so wrecked that it causes irreparable economic damage in Bitcoin.  Lack of fungibility destroys confidence in a currency; that is an old and timeless monetary principle, which BTC defies at its peril.