Oddbean

> Coordinator fees do not protect you at all against a Sybil attacker if the coordinator is part of your threat model I AM AWARE AND HAVE STATED THIS MANY TIMES. INCLUDING THE THREAD YOU LINKED. THIS IS TRUE FOR ALL CENTRALIZED COORDINATOR MODELS. TX0 IMPROVES SYBIL RESISTANCE AGAINST MALICIOUS ATTACKERS THAT ARE NOT THE COORDINATOR. WOULD HAVE TO PAY SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TO FLOOD ROUNDS THAN HONEST PARTICIPANTS. I NEVER RESPONDED TO YOUR LAST COMMENT BECAUSE IT WAS PURE GIBBERISH. https://m.primal.net/HWtf.png

YOU HAVE IT LITERALLY BACKWARDS. FLOODING COSTS LESS IN COORDINATOR FEES THAN CONSOLIDATING, GIVING SYBIL ATTACKERS AN UPPER HAND OVER HONEST USERS: Let's say you have 10 million sats. If you flood the 1 million sat pool with 10 UTXOs, you pay 100k sats to the coordinator. If you only create 2 UTXOs and participate in the 5 million sat pool, you pay 175k sats to the coordinator. THE FLOODER PAYS LESS TO THE COORDINATOR THAN THE HONEST USER. You still haven't even made an attempt to address the main issue which has nothing to do with Whirlpool's backward coordinator fee incentives - the REAL issue is how premixing needlessly consumes block space while HARMING the privacy gains of coinjoin participants: https://image.nostr.build/14026e01cbbd0981d24e2b4866265f026b92bc584d9e2dc16acf1d641a4b69ef.jpg#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1544x1491&blurhash=%7C8SF%40R%25M%7EqMy%25hgLogt8wgtRM_D%25xvR%24xv-qV%40oNxbbakCoLR*aejZWUj%5Bxuj%5D%25MWURQWANFoMW-%3FcMxIU%25gNFWExuRjRkM%7BX7xbnQR%2BbEWBX7spf%2CxakBIonjazWBxHNssEt7kCRPtQV%5BM%7BxuRjIUof%25LRkV%40oeWCWAog&x=3226e49be19cf5640fddfd6ca3bccf5b980d5202c66abdcbe16ee69572319df1

YOU SHOULD ACTUALLY TEST WHIRLPOOL BECAUSE YOU FUNDAMENTALLY DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS. UTXOS IN THE SAME TXO ARE FORCED INTO DIFFERENT ROUNDS. MEANWHILE YOU ARE ADVOCATING FOR A COORDINATOR THAT ACTIVELY COOPERATES WITH SURVEILLANCE FIRMS AND A PROTOCOL THAT GRINDS UTXOS INTO DUST.

A Sybil attacker is not limited to using a single client, they can tx0 with multiple clients in order to participate in the same round. YOU APPARENTLY DO NOT FUNDAMENTALLY UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS SINCE YOU THOUGHT FLOODING PAYS LESS IN COORDINATOR FEES COMPARED TO CONSOLIDATING. I've never "advocated for a coordinator", I'm pointing out technical flaws that waste block space and harm privacy and create unbalanced incentives that subsidize Sybil attacks and all you do is VIRTUE SIGNAL TO DEFLECT FROM REAL ARGUMENTS. If you really gave a shit about "censorship", you would just check the "run coordinator" box on your BTCPay Server coinjoin plugin. Do you have the balls? Let's talk about dust grinding! Whirlpool is paying 369 sats in fees to create a non private output for 305 sats??? https://mempool.space/address/bc1qp25y8kfywz88myuh7ed3dmx3vv2z2dwuxhjnlv

> A Sybil attacker is not limited to using a single client, they can tx0 with multiple clients in order to participate in the same round. YES, AND THEY WOULD PAY MORE IN FEES THAN AN HONEST PARTICIPANT. THAT IS THE POINT.

NO, THEY WOULD PAY LESS IN FEES, AS I CALCULATED ABOVE: nostr:nevent1qqsxy0jpyte535k6x734v33d87ksdafst27qc9ta2aqnpzew6kn43pgppamhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5pzqzuaulz7stfxc2zkjzsne5tyzjd95rhrzvdejyhpczand3ntgudtqvzqqqqqqyq40ye3 THIS FLOODING DISCOUNT FOR SYBIL ATTACKERS DOESN'T EVEN STOP AT 10 UTXOS, IT GOES TO 70 UTXOS IN THE 1M-50M SAT POOLS!

A DISCUSSION ABOUT BITCOIN PRIVACY IS NEVER "NOT WORTH CONTINUING". YOU'VE SPENT 20 POSTS ARGUING ABOUT SYBIL ATTACKS (that don't apply whatsoever if the coordinator is part of your threat model) WITHOUT EVER ADDRESSING HOW TX0 PREMIXING WASTES BLOCK SPACE AND HARMS PRIVACY COMPARED TO DOING A CUTHROUGH TRANSACTION: https://image.nostr.build/14026e01cbbd0981d24e2b4866265f026b92bc584d9e2dc16acf1d641a4b69ef.jpg#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1544x1491&blurhash=%7C8SF%40R%25M%7EqMy%25hgLogt8wgtRM_D%25xvR%24xv-qV%40oNxbbakCoLR*aejZWUj%5Bxuj%5D%25MWURQWANFoMW-%3FcMxIU%25gNFWExuRjRkM%7BX7xbnQR%2BbEWBX7spf%2CxakBIonjazWBxHNssEt7kCRPtQV%5BM%7BxuRjIUof%25LRkV%40oeWCWAog&x=3226e49be19cf5640fddfd6ca3bccf5b980d5202c66abdcbe16ee69572319df1

WE HAD THE CONVERSATION. PEOPLE CAN READ IT NOW AND MAKE THEIR OWN CONCLUSIONS. TXO IS NOT A WASTE. I ALSO HAD A THREE HOUR CONVERSATION WITH THE FOUNDER OF WASABI. UNEDITED. LIVE. https://www.podpage.com/citadeldispatch/citadel-dispatch-e015-bitcoin/

"Tx0 is not a waste" PLEASE JUST LOOK AT THE CHART, YOU LOSE POTENTIAL ANONSET GAINS AND CONSUME MORE BLOCK SPACE BY PREMIXING: https://image.nostr.build/14026e01cbbd0981d24e2b4866265f026b92bc584d9e2dc16acf1d641a4b69ef.jpg#m=image%2Fjpeg&dim=1544x1491&blurhash=%7C8SF%40R%25M%7EqMy%25hgLogt8wgtRM_D%25xvR%24xv-qV%40oNxbbakCoLR*aejZWUj%5Bxuj%5D%25MWURQWANFoMW-%3FcMxIU%25gNFWExuRjRkM%7BX7xbnQR%2BbEWBX7spf%2CxakBIonjazWBxHNssEt7kCRPtQV%5BM%7BxuRjIUof%25LRkV%40oeWCWAog&x=3226e49be19cf5640fddfd6ca3bccf5b980d5202c66abdcbe16ee69572319df1

Try BTCPay Server's coinjoin plugin instead of Whirlpool. It's uses an upgraded protocol that's MASSIVELY cheaper, and you can make EVERY spend a coinjoin, without revealing common input ownership or creating toxic change - nostr:nevent1qqs2lypcwr8d2rjcawh5a534pfq3marffrt5eqawdlurcgt0cqqh27gppamhxue69uhkummnw3ezumt0d5pzpywf5hs6jazpznr0uttp4ex7sf3fa24qldf0fq5gpy78ulsrd7pjqvzqqqqqqyvu22vn

So that the meaning of this conversation an ad. On question : if people are smart enough to see that coinjoin or btcpay server are not for privacy is that ok ? https://image.nostr.build/39d3bc7574ebc0848420ebfc92544a471a70d56d46f721d1a448aa48e5323602.jpg