Avoiding my point, as usual.
I guess I didn't catch your point, can you refer to your quote and indicate what is lacking a response? I'm still waiting for you to respond to my points above:
Personally, I combine toxic change with other toxic change where lack of privacy is minimum.
Why not use WabiSabi instead of Whirlpool so you don't have toxic change and have no lack of privacy at all?
You do not consolidate your private coins in the the coinjoin, but after it, using a mix partner.
If you are using a second coinjoin to solve the privacy flaw of the initial Whirlpool coinjoin, then why not just perform a single coinjoin that doesn't have the initial privacy flaw so you can cut through these two transactions?
Completely irrelevant and debunked already: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63120005.
2 - Tx0 clearly pays the coordinator, and this output is easily identified. The privacy of Whirlpool coinjoins does not depend on this fee payment being secret. It does not matter if you and I both pay to the same coordinator address - there is zero loss of privacy.
So the Whirlpool coordinator's output is easily identified. That's unfortunate...
Let's compare this privacy loss in Whirlpool to a WabiSabi coinjoin where the coordinator fee adds to the anonymity set: Which output is the coordinator fee??? https://mempool.space/tx/74254011886f8bcbc19269030a07d3e63cee242492f7a32818152e51995e6d31
Because it makes a splash. Whirlpool has maximized the entropy, whereas in Wasabi there is address reuse, possible input and output collaborators, merges-- all of which would reduce the overall entropy.
At this point, I'm putting you back on ignore, because we're going on cycles, and you simply want to just say the last word. There is nothing constructive that I can make out of you.
At this point, I'm putting you back on ignore, because we're going on cycles, and you simply want to just say the last word. There is nothing constructive that I can make out of you.
You simply haven't looked into how coinjoins work at all since you are accusing WabiSabi of creating negative dust when it's clearly Whirlpool that's creating negative dust, and claim WabiSabi's Boltzmann score is worse despite not having calculated the score at all. Numbers don't lie, but you do.
