fake privacy
If it's fake, you would be able to point to my money right now. I'm using ChipMixer every once in a while, for comparably large amounts, such as my weekly payment. You don't know if I've spent that money, or if I'm holding, unless you're the first person to break ChipMixer. If I hadn't sent them over there, it'd be trivial to open up the spreadsheet and point to my receiving address. But, you can't.
Am I wrong somewhere? Do we understand the same privacy?
It won't and worse, it puts a target on the backs of Bitcoiners by regulators and gives them a talking point.
Notice your shift. You started with "I don't hate privacy", and now you're admitting that privacy protection is bad, because it puts us targets in the eyes of regulators. Does that imply that we shouldn't have privacy protection, regardless of whether it comes from a centralized service or from the protocol?
It implies that privacy for Bitcoin should be done without the need for a third party. If your option for privacy involves a third party, thats money laundering, not privacy. Real privacy would be done at the protocol level for the benefit of everyone. Trustless privacy is the only privacy.
I also wouldnt be the first to break Chipmixer. Read up on it. Its not my duty to educate you and worse, youre too stuck in defending your paycheck to admit the truth.