pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 3 replies \ @john_doe 7 Feb \ parent \ on: Monero territory monero
If on-chain, you feel traceability is an issue for your utxos, then use coinjoins.
From my perspective at the protocol level it is fungible. A value in can later be converted as a value out. When people play with Bitcoin to search for "rare" coins, there are just adding new rules which are not on Bitcoin but exist in their world.
Similarly even if banknotes have identifiers and hence can be traced this doesn't undermine it's fungibility, since in the real world nobody care in most cases.
Fungibility issues may be raised among Monero people, but IMHO it is a weak argument. As a criticism UX of Lightning is more convincing (still LN UX gradually improves over time).
Paying for fungibility via coinjoining which Samourai Wallet devs have literally been indicted for by the US DoJ seems silly when monero has this by default...
And in a high miner fee environment it's even worse.
reply
I see your point, but can't agree as at the protocol level there is fungibility. There is no difference between the numbers in inputs and outputs. People may interpret these numbers as rare satoshis but these are rules not related to Bitcoin.
A higher miner fee environment is a better argument IMHO. But then we will have tools using payjoin, Ark, etc to batch payments and add privacy on top of Bitcoin.
reply
Fungibility is a spectrum. Monero has is full stop. Bitcoin... Sure, it's debatable since you're clearing debating it.
reply