Agree 100%.  The fud and misinformation being spread by the Wasabi team is only meant as deflection.  Bitcoin may not be perfect, but it's hundreds of times better than any fiat on the planet.  Bitcoin's fungibility, however is perfect, so any "taint proclamation" is meant to dictate which coins remain fungible.  It's an effort to centralize the determinations of which coins remain fungible.  It's not only short-sighted, it's down right sinister.


Would it really matter which chain analysis provider was used?  Do any of them have any legitimate way of insuring their results are accurate?  What level of accuracy is expected?

Let's assume for a second that chain analysis data was being used as evidence in a court room; what level of accuracy would be expected to refer to the data as anything circumstantial?  It's a rhetorical question; it would need to be verified as 100% accurate for it be considered anything but circumstantial.  

But what accuracy can we really expect?  Is 80% accuracy enough to alleviate one's fear of accepting "tainted" coins?  What individual or business would be okay with having 20% of their income blocked by their bank?

And what's the criteria for what's tainted and what isn't?  In the USA alone we have states have legalized the recreational use of marijuana, but many states continue to ban the recreational use of marijuana.  If I were to legally sell weed in one state in exchange for bitcoin, can I spend that bitcoin in another state where marijuana is banned?  Would chain analysis flag my UTXOs based on the location of my intended "send to" address?  How would they know?   What if I accepted cash instead, would the same restrictions apply?

What if it's all arbitrary, anyway and one exchange clears the coins, yet another decides to blacklist them?


I'm of the opinion that if you're using bitcoin, you have something to hide.  Even if that may not true right now, just wait 15 minutes.