Taint is a human psychological problem and only way of fixing it is to taint every possible bitcoin that exists, to make exchanges refuse -everything-.

The fact tha zkSNACKs had to start blacklisting is just an intensification of the effect then nation state have with its encroachment on everyones privacy.

Bitcoin Core have slow progress, everything that doesn't have money have slow progress, companies make faster progress. Protecting yourself against the attacks of the nation state is acceptable.

We also need to get some facts straight, when zkSNACKs looks at addresses on the input side, it have the right to determine who it will let into it, since it is a centralized mixer either way, but it can no longer track outputs as some of the naysayers here are saying. It also have absolutely no ability to profile its userbase, or to collect any informationa about any user who have installed up the wallet, which is still censorship resistant and have better privacy than electrum wallet with default settings. I have been personally against the implementation of the blacklisting and voiced my concerns about it to no avail, but further consideration proves it was an acceptable decision otherwise the company would have shut down and there would be one less player in the privacy space who works on actual privacy tools that contribute to the fungibility bitcoin.

And anyone here who is so vehemently hostile to the idea of censorship to protect a company, are stuck in a fantasy land, so better wake up from that fairy tale before you end up getting 6102'd. People who have not commited any crimes in the past have went to prison. Ross Ulbricht went to prison because he was willing to show everyone that bitcoin can function as a payment mechanism for merchants and to exchange goods and services. That was not a crime he did, yet he serves double life sentence without parol plus 40 years.

The stakes have gone higher, and we the road to freedom and privacy is not a straight one.