pull down to refresh

I've spent a small percentage of my stack coinjoining. I think its expensive, but in the end worth it until we get more competition/collaboration or more options in the future
A fair bit, for my long-term cold storage stash.
I'm not sure if I regret that. By the time I'd like to spend it, Bitcoin adoption will (hopefully) be much greater and I'll have privacy via Lightning / L2s anyway. On the other hand, maybe on-chain privacy will still be important and I'll be glad that I CJ'd at very low transaction fees.
I guess now it does not matter. I've spent money on far dumber things regardless.
reply
I've spent money on fast food and going to movie theaters. Coin joins are a much better deal.
reply
Why not using liquid > boltz > lightning ?
reply
bc you're depending on a third party not to leak your info / metadata with each step of the way. or maybe you want to settle more money than you can effectively with these methods
"To keep your secret is wisdom; but to expect others to keep it is folly"
ā€” Samuel Johnson
reply
there is very littler explanation of what is supposedly going on on this website lol
FAQ blank
Coinjoins will be cheaper than regular transactions one day
reply
Please explain.
reply
Cross input signature aggregation
Taproot was going to give us this, but people couldn't agree on which MuSig implementation to use. This is why we cant have nice things.
reply
This is kinda a fallacy. CISA doesn't really make it much cheaper (only around 10-20% because of the witness discount). This also assumes you are just merging transactions into one big aggregate transaction which doesn't actually give any real amount of privacy. To gain privacy from coinjoins you need to do something to prevent amount heuristics (either same amount or hamming weights).
I don't think Taproot was ever slated to have CISA. There are lots of weird edge cases that haven't been thought out and that's why it wasn't added AFIAK.
reply
Thanks for clarification. Maybe this is more accurate: Taproot enabled a CiSA soft fork by adding Schnorr. CiSA was not also included in Taproot because there is still a lot to discuss including which MuSig to use.
reply
MuSig isn't detectable, so we didn't need to decide "which" to use. It was more about making sure we can preserve backwards compatibility correctly and handling sighash flags weirdness
reply
10 - 20% is not that bad.. It could be motivational in times of high mining fees
reply
yes but like i said, this is just transaction batching, if you want privacy it will still be more expensive
reply
Exactly, but there is still hope šŸ™‚
reply
deleted by author
reply
So if we can agree on a single musig implementation that will allow all transactions to be coin joins?
reply
With new competitors like Mutiny, we'll have more Coinjoin service cheaper.
reply
Is it enough to do btc->L-btc->btc ?
reply
No
AFAIK you can see the peg out & trace the history on liquid too. Its just the amount that it hidden in liquid.
reply
Nice try, FBI
reply
srsly
reply
none of you have been a joinmarket maker
reply
Zero, i get paid to do coinjoins. Stop using centralized services and use join market. Infinite mixing, and other users pay you for the privilege of utilizing your liquidity.
reply
Freedom is never going to be cheap
reply
watch out for mercurylayer.com
reply
Zero. Although I consider myself an advance user, I am scared about doing something wrong with coinjoins. I also don't want to spend much. Any advice to lose the fear?
reply
i dont wanna know, but it is too much
reply
reply
reply
reply
nope. learn you must. throw away thy sats you must stop. https://darthcoin.substack.com/p/lightning-cleaning-machine
reply
There is a cost for LN swaps too
reply
sure there is. but you don't have to make unnecessary transactions just to obfuscate.
reply
If found that opening & closing channels + the swap fee works out to be similar to coinjoins
reply
a channel is forever, Laura ;) and just by using lightning does the job
reply
So is the swap data to the swap provider Gary
deleted by author
reply