Quote from: xhomerx10 on July 01, 2022, 11:00:41 PM

Quote from: death_wish on July 01, 2022, 08:56:12 PM

Quote from: xhomerx10 on July 01, 2022, 06:10:11 PM

LTC just got dumped from some exchanges due to the privacy issue. BTC doesn't have this issue.

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.

That's a bat slap.

I put as much effort into my reply to ImThour as he put into his analysis of a situation he thought required investigation. I brought the matter relating the the drop in value of LTC to his attention and I assumed he could take it from there. The perils of sending your LTC to exchanges are best left to another thread.

No offense, xhomer. You understand how that came off the wrong way, and I just had to reply accordingly. This has been a fight ever since Mike Hearn and his canaille spun out propaganda to brainwash people that wrecking BTC fungibility was somehow a good thing. Ultimately, I do not think the problem can be resolved until we attain what Adam Back said in that video: Cryptographic indistinguishability and unlinkability. Trust the maths.

Quoted for truth; note the date on a discussion that we are still having in 2022:

Quote from: Raize on November 15, 2013, 05:51:15 PM

Taint tracking is precisely why we need ZeroCoin or CoinJoin or whatever. Do it now.

I am NOT joking. Bitcoin is useless without fungibility. Tracking taint programmatically or with regulatory intent is a clear attack on Bitcoin in perhaps the only way that it can presently be attempted since theres no way anyone can get mining superiority anymore. The Bitcoin Foundation should be renamed the Fiat Foundation if they aren't going to take this seriously. Besides, the miners aren't going to let anything get changed to track taint anyway, so why would the devs even talk about this.