3 ms·
Respectfully I disagree with this statement, on a conceptual, as well as factual level. >Tornado cash is good enough tbh I hold neither of these, but as someo
by 0des 4y ago
Respectfully I disagree with this statement, on a conceptual, as well as factual level.
>Tornado cash is good enough tbh
I hold neither of these, but as someone with a significant amount of experience in the field, the facts are clear. "Good enough" is not an objective measurement of the binary quality of fungibility. Monero is fungible.
Is this me saying everyone should go out and buy some Monero, no, it is me saying that when you consider the mechanics of the way these two scantly comparable technologies function, there is one clear winner because only one is fungible.
I don't have a response to the social issues of those that use or perpetuate Monero adoption, just as I don't have a response to the social issues of those that use or perpetuate USD, or any other asset. It's not my business what other people do, and I don't feel associated by virtue of using the same utility.
> That technology [ ... ] is an evolutionary dead end
This will need a source.
- tromp 4y ago> the binary quality of fungibility The fact that Monero has been growing the minimum ring size over time, as well as refining the decoy selection algorithm, shows that fungibility, in the sense of transaction graph obfuscation, is more of a spectrum.
- vmception 4y agoIts good enough in user experience and storage, in fact far superior to Monero’s experience. When a user then wants fungibility the one time they want the state’s money and financial institution then they use Monero as a conduit.