True, but this case is even worse. Wasabi has been portrayed as the privacy enhancing tool of bitcoin years now. It wasn't just a wallet, but a wallet whose reputation was built on privacy. Infringe this little principle and your project becomes pointless. On the other hand, I don't remember Google presenting themselves as pro-privacy advocates.

You can't face sanctions easily and as said, if you say you do, you won't be trustworthy anymore. I think the key to secure a privacy-oriented project, that relies on a central point, in this case the coordinator, is to do everything privately. If nobody knows who you are, they can't sanction you. See ChipMixer.

He doesn't say they keep your keys, but "a part of your wallet" - whatever the hell that means - but it's true that it makes zero sense. What's so difficult about actually promoting self-custody and privacy? Simple principles.

---

Is it just me or do you also believe there's nothing legitimate behind most of those bitcoin companies? Am I the only one who feels they're spending more time on marketing, talking about it in social media - generally on the appearance, but not on the actual thing?

Do you have the seed phrase or the private key(s)? If you don't you can't spend your coins. A watch-only wallet is what it says, a wallet that's supposed to only be watched. Explain what's CC, swan and how did you generate a watch only wallet since you didn't have a master public key to begin with.

Don't know if that's what you're asking, but:

Theoretically, it's safer to download the source code outside GitHub and then verify the signature of it, by downloading the public keys from GitHub. If you download both the signature, the public key(s) and the source code from GitHub, it's easier for an attacker, or from GitHub itself, to screw you. On the other hand, if you do the former, the attacker needs to compromise both sites at the same time.

Pretty much this. There's nothing more to say about shitcoins. Not using your savings for "investing", not borrowing money, not being greedy etc., should be said after you've answered yourself "What the hell is the thing that I'm buying?". If you're buying things that, at least have essence, such as stocks, bonds, metals, oil, gas etc., do ask yourself for these things. But, buying things like dogecoin, shiba, luna etc., that have no purpose, and can be re-created by humans anytime, is foolish.

In my opinion, you shouldn't put your money in altcoins. Period. If you're a newbie and do it, acknowledge that you're a fool. If you don't care, go on. But, acknowledge it.

So instead of whining about Lightning, go and propose a better solution. Raising the block size has fallen on face. It's been perpetually proven that the users don't want to change that rule. Consensus has shown it. If you don't like it, fork off. That's the beauty of decentralized systems. Stop enforcing your obnoxious conspiracies to others, it doesn't work. You're just becoming even more abhorrent.

Back to ignore.

There are three kind of crypto users regarding this matter:

skeemodream is the kind of guy who bites KYC, AML and ESG nonsense. Constantine28 is the one who doesn't understand what's the problem, but believes everything happens because of transparency, which is definitely not the case here. It's the arbitrary ruling. Monero has nothing to do about it.

vadoge is the kind of guy whose username says it all.

Succeed in what? Regulating it? They've overstated with KYC in centralized exchanges, wherein most of the users buy and sell from. They already have enough information to control them. Part of the United States' national spending goes straight to Chainalysis.

Whether you pay in cash, via bank account or via PayPal, it's the same currency. In fact, using fiat digitally is traceable. Much better for a government.

Or just don't have a .com. ChipMixer is dominating in bitcointalk in spite of everything. As I've already said, it'd be better to just link users here, in the ANN thread. Then, they can read a summary of what's ChipMixer or/and just click the onion link.

I'll have to agree with DooMAD here, the problem is rather psychological. There's no point to continue arguing with him, and as a proverb goes, arguing with a fool proves there are two. PrivacyG, save your breath, what you're saying has been repeatedly told to him in other threads with even more ridiculous titles[1][2][3].

He's not going to read your response; he'll read a few sentences and say the same bullshit again. He must be feeling great he's understood something millions of others don't. But, that isn't enough. He needs to enforce his opinion to others. What a trashy scumbag.

Leave the troll go hungry.

---

[1] [VIDEO]: Bitcoin Exists Only in Satoshi's Imagination
[2] Bitcoin Doesn’t Exist, Or How Satoshi Nakamoto Tells Lies To People
[3] Bitcoin is a 'two-phased' product, which makes it ponzi/pyramid-like

As you said, think of it from their perspective. They're a company, known as privacy-oriented, that believes privacy is a human right and should be preserved at all times. "At all times" means regardless of who, which, what, when, where. Their focus is on everybody's privacy, not on yours nor on mine nor on theirs, but everyone's.

If they're threatened to not be private, while that's the only principle they follow since the development of Wasabi, what do you think it's reasonable thing to do? Besides, there wasn't such pressure. Nobody forced them do nothing. This happened voluntarily, which shows that the fish stinks from the head.

Translation of the above: "I don't have any other arguments, I desperately need you to shut up, 'cause I know I'm right".

Πάντως, υπάρχουν πολλοί Ελ Σαλβαδορίτες που δεν το θέλουν.

Why isn't this true for fiat currency, again?

To merit or not to merit, that is the question.

The thing I can't give you, because I've already sent you 50 this month.

I don't know if that applies, but if we're talking about ways to generally lose money in Lightning we have:

• Loss of your partner's revocation keys.
• Loss of your commitment transactions.
• Loss of money by going offline for a long time.

The first two can happen if you lose backups.

The times he's whinnied about Lightning, definitely exceed both.

Everything related with decentralized coin minting is inefficient. You can't have a blockchain if you don't have decentralization, and you can't have decentralization if you don't have inefficiency. However, nobody said that bitcoin should be the default payment network. In my opinion, bitcoin is the hard money, re-invented, but, Lightning is the key to efficient payments.

For dinner? The ever-inflating currency. For anything in the web that I can't pay with cash? Bitcoin. Simply because I want to pay in cash, whether that's USD, EUR, BTC or gold.

Sure you do. If nSequence is lower than 0xffffffff - 1, it allows replacement. If they're using RBF, you can ask them to broadcast a new non-RBF transaction, where they spend the RBF's outputs.

But, you're the only one who sees no resources. You've limited yourself purposefully. I use bitcoin everyday. I purchase stuff with bitcoin; gift cards, servers, other web services, premium features etc., no matter what you think of it, I show you the exact opposite with my actions. And it's not just me. There are thousands of merchants willing to accept it as a currency. All these things demonstrate how incorrect you are.

And that's because it's useful. It provides things you can't otherwise have.

Don't do him good, that's a meat and drink for him. The moment you enter, demand rises, but supply remains the same.

Oh, wait, you meant literal reuse of the change address? Which wallet does such thing?

It can't be interesting if it doesn't make sense. To begin with, what's "investing value"?