lol no. We don't talk about it because there is no hope for a decent privacy solution on a transparent chain and other than acknowledging this simple truth when someone who can only see black and white yet again puts out false information that will inevitably lead less knowledgeable people astray, there is generally no point in doing so.

Because such people are not open to rational arguments.

Try to pay for a house with payjojned coins and see how it goes (you've tainted the seller's coins now), try to deposit to an exchange and see how it goes.

And yeah sure, you can do this and you can do that, a dozen things, and you can avoid using this or that service as a workaround for the inherent and inescapable flaws of the underlying technology. How do you think those of us who've tried to manage all that complexity found the alternative?

Payjoin is ridiculously underwhelming compared to ring signatures in Monero and ring signatures in Monero are ridiculoualy underwhelming compared to what FCMPs will bring in the medium-term.

You'll find a few hard-headed stubborn Monero maxis that are the mirror image of toxic bitcoin maxis minus the dramatic gains and the strength in numbers. They are just as deluded in seeing no value in #bitcoin as the bitcoin maxis are in not seeing the value in #monero

It would be better for everyone who cares about freedom and privacy if this constant nonsense would stop.

#monero #bitcoin #privacy


 

 Have fun staying poor! 

 See, this exactly the kind of thing that I mean.

You see black and white only: if I use Monero, then I must not have any Bitcoin, or so your faulty reasoning goes.

It's really very simple, as a hedge against fiat world bitcoin is probably the best bet there is out there.

But for real world spending with the assurances that a L1 provides, it's not, at least not yet.

You can believe both and allocate accordingly.

But to discount everything else for the reasons you do, is quite frankly intellectually dishonest. And I'll point that out every single time.