55 sats \ 4 replies \ @hynek OP 20 Apr 2023 \ on: Coinjoin is coming into Trezor 🚀 bitcoin
I'm also sorry that the coordinator doesn't take everyone to coinjoin, but I respect it. No one should be forced to serve everyone.
  1. Most people are glad that their utxo won't be mixed with people not respecting the non-aggression principle
  2. The coordinator is open source and anyone can start another instance
  3. There are no information revealed about the user. UTXO existence is public and coordinator knows nothing about the user. Request is send via dedicated tor identity.
You are welcome to help us improve the tech if you want to be helpful @takaponka, @sethforprivacy, @falsefaucet
write
preview
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @bitdov 30 Apr 2023
  1. The prohibited list is not for people that are not respecting the NAP, it's for people's UTXOs that governments put on a list for their reasons. You will still be mixing with actual criminals, just not with the one's that messed with the owners of the regulatory list.
This list could include YOUR UTXOs one day, for any arbitrary reason.
  1. Ok. But a privacy tool giving any legitimacy to BS chainanalysis heuristics is asinine behavior.
  2. If you start the coinjoin process and the service is denied to you, this is where the biggest problem lies. This person is now in known possession of "illegal UTXOs" in some jurisdiction, and potentially could be tracked since the coordinator is being open sourced, but you cannot attest for what the compromised (IMO) coordinator is running on their end, as well as their chain analysis partner(s). While you might trust your local government or jurisdiction, there are several governments and their jurisdictions where funds you might have received will be deemed illegal. Every bitcoin will/should be tainted at some point, depending on the jurisdiction. So entering your service voluntarily into this mess is a very bad sign IMO. Surely should be "bad for business"
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @falsefaucet 20 Apr 2023
Why does an individual utilize the conjoin/collaborative spends?
What is the purpose of using this privacy tech?
Imo it's an attempt to obscure the history of UTXOs. And there are varying reasons for this. Not all are nefarious or, would be deemed illegal by state/country governments.
This implementation literally checks the UTXOs (against what 'list') before permitting them to enter.
Now you guys as a company. Assuming your with trezor from your posts and defense of this, you guys have every right to do as you see fit. But the way this is portrayed as some optimal conjoining schema.
It's not imo.
Just as you guys have the right to do as you see fit. I have the same right to call it out.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @takaponka 20 Apr 2023
No, you shouldn't serve anyone but you could try. Instead you serve LE. I'm sorry but 0 arguments can convince me that it is a good thing. There is no hate I'm just saying.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @hynek OP 20 Apr 2023
Thanks for you honesty. I will not try to convince you than..
reply