Oddbean

anyone with a block explorer and enough knowledge to follow the money. they are going to map the entire utxo set using existing KYC/AML info and assign confidence scores to all of it large institutions will pay CA to help them avoid tainted, risky utxos.

Seems arbitrary and at an individual level the argument falls apart. Because a person or institution decides to not accept a specific utxo doesnt make that thing init of itself nonfungible. Individuals can do what they please.

the point is that it is possible to differentiate between utxos of the same 'value' IOW, 'value' is not the only characteristic of a new utxo. Because the ledger is transparent, 'history' is also communicated. And because their 'history' is not the same, utxos of the same 'value' are nonfungible. by definition. yes and *then* people can make whatever decisions they want. but we have decided that "fungible" means that units of equal size cannot be differentiated from each other. and bitcoin is not that.

Rare sats are funny 😂 an example but a silly example. I see the perspective of the history, metadata about this utxo chain but this is at the human level. Imposed onto it. At the network level a utxo is a utxo. A sat is a sat, no matter how long or short its chained history is. Sure obfuscation of this history seems to provide ppl ”value” but not on the network.

sure whatever. nodes don't care. its still not fungible in real life. de facto nonfungible. so let's all go ahead get over the fact and move on bitcoin does NOT have all the properties of money it's probably never going to have strong privacy and its a big fucking problem

the hill I will die on nostr:nevent1qqsvglmyn442s4tkkejasne05kqzm02exyakeetg7fmv5ef2lyns42qprdmhxue69uhkummnw3ezuur0wf6x2mt0dejhymewvdhk6q3qlxzaxzge0jq9u9cecucctdt5lslwgp7hcxmp2l0wn8r2ecjenwasxpqqqqqqzrclg2u