This discussion is very tiring.
Mathematically can't get exponential growth of mixing without exponential growth of overlap, unless the supply of transaction outputs is also growing exponentially.
Each output is being mixed with an exponentially-declining share of an exponentially greater number outputs.
My bounty algorithm shows that old outputs will mix until they hit their trigger of maximum mixes then the sender is de-anonymized. Thus the exponentially growing supply of outputs is continually being pruned, either by a mitigation you will implement or by de-anonymization if you don't implement mitigation.
attempting to impose some tracing-based blacklist becomes equivalent to to a coin ban.
No only a ring > 1 input ban, i.e. ban on anonymity.
Okay, authorities may ban anonymity. Thank you for pointing that out.
Incorrect, they only blacklisted illegal activity. The anonymity died as an artifact. This can be an important distinction for legal and politically correct "standards" (aka propaganda).
I never heard of dedicated and concerned developers that expected everything to be handed to them on a silver platter in completely polished form so they don't have to do any work.
I expect nothing. I'm simply pointing out that if you want to be listened to by people with any real technical competence (as opposed to others who don't have the background to even tell the difference between valid and invalid claims), you need to focus your comments in a way that rises above the noise floor of many vague and poorly supported claims (yours and others'). Especially here, where frankly a lot of people are either ignorant, full or shit, or have a hidden agenda (or perhaps all of these). It is up to you whether you want that or not.
Ditto.
If XMR had responded to BCX's points about the quick difficulty readjustment and 20% discard with a whitepaper about such issues and the Cryptonote solution, then I would be more impressed
We can't and won't respond with a whitepaper to every vague claim of "there might be a flaw" that is posted on bitcointalk whether that is from you or BCX or anyone else.
Thus that is a difference between XMR and my style. Different culture. I took BCX's points seriously and made some interesting discoveries from it.
You keep repeating your point that authorities won't blacklist because it blacklists the entire coin. And I keep making the point that they don't care. If you fuck with their control over money, they will do anything they can effectively do, even probably taking us to nuclear war if it will achieve their aims. Rather you have to think more in terms of what they can and can't do operatively, not what you think they can't do because you think it is unreasonable.
That is misrepresenting my point. They won't blacklist because it is ineffective: 1) because the output may have already been spent (and it is unknowable whether that is the case); and 2) because downstream blacklisting will be ignored by anyone using the coin at all. And if they do, it won't accomplish much, because, well, it is ineffective (or effective only insofar as a ban is effective).
And you continue to ignore my repeated point that if they control the mining, they can effectively ban.