Coinjoins are NOT the way \ stacker news ~bitcoin

7200 sats \ 44 comments \ @SatoshisSkeleton 26 Oct 2023 bitcoin

They're hot wallets at certain points. This should be a non starter.
It's a clumsy workaround to an underlying issue.
See numbers 1 and 2

I saw some shit going down on Samourai and thought of this.

1773 sats \ 4 replies \ @davidw 26 Oct 2023

Coinjoins are the way. We need to normalise their use and for the providers to default using them.

Payjoins are the evolution from the original versions, and given they are indistinguishable versus regular coinjoins… they will allow us to have default privacy WHEN (not if) businesses adopt them.

This scaremongering and the archaic regulations that are in the pipeline are just distractions. Technology in the form of newer coinjoin implementations will render them unenforceable.

20 sats \ 3 replies \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

But why? Pooling and obfuscation was the original point of Bitcoin. I mean...

11 sats \ 2 replies \ @davidw 26 Oct 2023

When the incentives are beyond just privacy and actually saving money on transaction fees, pooling will naturally take place.

People maybe won’t want to pay $800 for a single base layer transaction fee, but they will pay $20, if payjoins can pool the transaction fee. Also businesses using the base layer could skip transactions entirely by having their customers pay their suppliers directly. Without a second transaction to charge onto customers. New payment terms will arise from this arrangement. Gone will be 90 day net rip-off payment terms.

When it’s more than about privacy, people will adopt it.

When it’s just about privacy, there’s the “should I, shouldn’t I” debate. And the nervousness about the footprint you’re leaving onchain. Cowards in legal teams will take the least risky option and enforce mass surveillance into their products, because they don’t want to be hit with fines for not following vague ‘regulations’. When it’s about being more profitable, efficient and competitive, legal will have a backseat role. Incentives are important.

And finally, to complete my rant, we don’t need a useless privacy coin to achieve the ‘original point of Bitcoin’ as you put it.

5 sats \ 1 reply \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

Disagree. Bad solution

2 sats \ 0 replies \ @davidw 27 Oct 2023

What’s a better solution? Using Monero? Don’t make us laugh.

Not doing it at all, is also a defeatist mentality.

What would you like to see done differently?

249 sats \ 10 replies \ @benthecarman 26 Oct 2023

I agree coinjoins aren't the way but these are definitely not the reasons why

15 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

Yes, continue....

11 sats \ 8 replies \ @xz 26 Oct 2023

What are the reasons?

51 sats \ 5 replies \ @benthecarman 26 Oct 2023

When you do a coinjoin it is extremely obvious on-chain. This essentially doxxes you as a privacy seeking user, and we've seen this bite people in the ass before with exchanges asking what they were doing pre-coinjoin.

There are other reasons as well like how long they can take to get sufficient privacy while also being expensive.

7 sats \ 1 reply \ @anon 26 Oct 2023

This essentially doxxes you as a privacy seeking user

You mean a perfectly normal person?

Denormalizing privacy seeking behavior is really bad. Everyone should coinjoin specifically to normalize it. The same way everyone should pay cash.

21 sats \ 0 replies \ @benthecarman 27 Oct 2023

we aren't going to get everyone to coinjoin because it is expensive. we should be able to blend into the crowd, not make a separate crowd just for privacy people

5 sats \ 1 reply \ @xz 26 Oct 2023

I get your point about the implications and potential to bite asses. I suppose it's just a sad fact that it's a sad world, with no privacy.

The expense is subjective. I guess if someone wants to pay for encrypted email services, this is completely warranted and legal. I could not use private communications to transact?

Or we are going to move to all communications are monitored. Even letters in the post?

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @xz 26 Oct 2023

Thanks for the reply.

105 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 26 Oct 2023

80iq right here

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

👀

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

💯

81 sats \ 2 replies \ @deletedd 26 Oct 2023

deleted by author

6 sats \ 1 reply \ @evanbaer 26 Oct 2023

Also buying hashrate to mine new bitcoin. Privacy friendly and you support the network at the same time.

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

Yep

125 sats \ 2 replies \ @supertestnet 26 Oct 2023

They're hot wallets at certain points. This should be a non starter

Why? What's wrong with a hot wallet?

It's a clumsy workaround to an underlying issue

Seems fixable with a good ui

10 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 26 Oct 2023

Yeah agreed. There are always tradeoffs. We all use hot wallets from time to time.

15 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

👀🤔

70 sats \ 1 reply \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

Liquid and L2 help. Require more trust though.

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

15 sats \ 4 replies \ @kepford 26 Oct 2023

Relax. There are always tradeoffs. Its true that there are negatives to coinjoin but I think you're overreacting. Education is the key. People need to understand how it works, what are the upsides and downsides. Hot wallets aren't bad. Every lightning node is a hot wallet... so I guess we are all dumb for using lightning. I'm not putting my life savings in a hot wallet but that doesn't mean they have no utility.

This nonsense between two bitcoin projects with different views on privacy, security, and sovereignty is just that. Two different sets of views that have different implementations with different tradeoffs.

3011 sats \ 2 replies \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

Fair. But also hot wallets are fugazi.

Lightning can be recovered on L1 so not hot. Per se.

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @kepford 27 Oct 2023

Lightning nodes are hot wallets. Its one of the risks. Hot wallets aren't bad. They are just higher risk than cold wallets. This whole discussion has gone off track into opinion instead of a discussion of tradeoffs.

Coinjoin isn't perfect but it also isn't something no one should consider. Based on the comments some folks don't understand how it works and dont seem interested in learning.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 27 Oct 2023

I will add that there are efforts to make lightning nodes safer but any hot wallet is connected to the Internet and that adds risks.

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

Relax. Don't do it.

11 sats \ 4 replies \ @iguano 26 Oct 2023

using coinjoins is worst than KYC in my opinion.

unless of course YOU NEED to mix your coins with other drug dealers and dark web dealers.

5 sats \ 2 replies \ @aoeu 27 Oct 2023

Why is this? Not everyone that mixes is doing "illegal" things.

140 sats \ 1 reply \ @iguano 27 Oct 2023

oh, sure no, but, who knows if your coins are being mixed with some nasty shit. TBH, I don't find very private this concept of let everyone else knows that you prefer your coins mixed to who knows else. If you do KYC in the first place, they can track you to the mixer. I find the LN way better for privacy in this case.

11 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

Fair point.

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

Yup

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @southside263 26 Oct 2023

if people want:

https://www.coinjoins.org/

10 sats \ 2 replies \ @xz 26 Oct 2023

I see the point was made, why should we have to mix, join, obfuscate? I think that's a good point. But here we are.

As someone else said, why not then? We would do this with cash, no?

I walk to town in the morning, buy two pies and a steak in cash, the cash gets put in the till. I get some change. The next customer walks in, buys, pays in cash, gets some of that very same cash as change and also asks if the cashier can change a ten for two fives. The cashier takes some of his earnings to a restaurant, bar, whatever and enjoys. I eat my pies and steak and revisit. Again and again. Everybody is happy.

Is there something I'm missing or is the idea of private transactions something people don't understand anymore? I'm aware that cash is traceable but then again we, have a public blockchain, do we not?

20 sats \ 1 reply \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

Lost me at Pie and Steak. Mmmmmm

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @SatoshisSkeleton OP 27 Oct 2023

My pie!

10 sats \ 0 replies \ @2bithits 26 Oct 2023

Despite the drama from samorai/wasabi coinjoins are a great way to obscure your TX history. Unannounced LN channels also work well for private TX

6 sats \ 2 replies \ @BlokchainB 26 Oct 2023

Samourai Wallet was super buggy for me. Has it gotten better?

55 sats \ 1 reply \ @spacewrangler 26 Oct 2023

Yes, works really well, and has some really nice features (if you can ignore their hate of the lighting network, and their feud with wasabi)

166 sats \ 0 replies \ @satoshi_in_the_classroom 26 Oct 2023

They're anti Lightning? Huh. Whadda ya know

5 sats \ 0 replies \ @aoeu 27 Oct 2023

My issue is that coinjoining doesn't help with KYC. Sure, they no longer know exactly which sats are mine but still might know that I bought 10 million sats from them. I'm more likely to Coinjoin my KYC free stash for that reason. Also, I bet there will be better privacy solutions in the future.

0 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 27 Oct 2023

If you find this post and want to learn more about coin join look at Sparrow"s docs. They are helpful.