XMR vs DRK

[fluffypony]

OK...perhaps you can give us, say, the top-ten of those factors that can fingerprint the data.

Also could you please explain how it is trivial to extrapolate the data when you control 50% of the MNs in your example above.

OK, I'm still not sure this is a fair representation. Hopefully someone who knows more about Darksend can chime in. I'll do some more research in the meantime.

And no offence, but you got it wrong about Darksend yesterday so I'm not sure that your assessment can be considered reliable.

do you have a specific vulnerability you want to bring to DRK's attention?  Sounds like more waffle and time wasting.

There seems to be a disconnect here. I know Darkcoin is build on a flaky foundation, I don't need to prove that. Proving the opposite is critical, and neither the Darkcoin leadership nor its proponents have done so (nor do I have any reason to believe they will do so).

When you make statements like the above I'm reminded that this thread is a landmine - if I spend the hours researching and extrapolating it will be pointless, as proponents will nitpick. The only way I could possibly win is to spend days and weeks creating a proof-of-concept to demonstrate validity, and even then there will just be some lipstick-on-a-pig move to patch one particular leak in the overflowing dam.

Majamina, your final comment and BlockaFett's comment is the real nail in the coffin here - I'm doing free analysis in my spare time (how much did Kristov Atlas get paid again?) based on virtually nonexistent technical documentation, so of course there are assumptions I have to make in the interest of expediency. An incorrect assumption in one area does not invalidate my analysis in another, unrelated area. Were this a formal analysis I would not have raised that point, as I would have gone through the code and done heaps of testing before asserting a fact.

At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of the obsession with "proving" that a single attack surface doesn't exist. There has not been a single iota of proof - stating something as if it is fact, or showing some graphs without a model showing its assumptions are not proof, not by any definition of the term. If you want further analysis and specifics I will gladly provide you with my hourly rate and expected engagement period, but beyond that I've reached the end of what I'm willing to do for free. That is not a cop-out, it is just the reality when every suggested attack has to get ground down to minutiae whilst ignoring large swathes of what attackers are capable of. The discussion in this thread has been like talking to someone who sticks their fingers in their ears and goes "na na na, you're wrong, na na na na".

Again, and for the record: you cannot discount an attack by claiming ignorance, simply stating it isn't possible, or turning everything into an accusation of trolling / FUD.

I have observed, in this thread and others, that the bulk of the Darkcoin proponents are like those in the anti-vaccination movement. It doesn't matter what I say, what Bitcoin core developers say, what cryptographers say, or what the creator of BitTorrent says about Darkcoin. It doesn't matter what anyone theorises, it won't even matter if a body of evidence is presented. Anti-vaccinators won't change their minds until their child dies, and Darkcoin proponents won't change their minds until people start suffering.

RationalWiki sums up what the parallel to what we're observing with Darkcoin:



I'd say this thread has been fun, but it hasn't.

[1714475469]

1714475469

[1714475469]

1714475469

[1714475469]

1714475469

[BlockaFett]

OK...perhaps you can give us, say, the top-ten of those factors that can fingerprint the data.

Also could you please explain how it is trivial to extrapolate the data when you control 50% of the MNs in your example above.

OK, I'm still not sure this is a fair representation. Hopefully someone who knows more about Darksend can chime in. I'll do some more research in the meantime.

And no offence, but you got it wrong about Darksend yesterday so I'm not sure that your assessment can be considered reliable.

do you have a specific vulnerability you want to bring to DRK's attention?  Sounds like more waffle and time wasting.

There seems to be a disconnect here. I know Darkcoin is build on a flaky foundation, I don't need to prove that. Proving the opposite is critical, and neither the Darkcoin leadership nor its proponents have done so (nor do I have any reason to believe they will do so).

When you make statements like the above I'm reminded that this thread is a landmine - if I spend the hours researching and extrapolating it will be pointless, as proponents will nitpick. The only way I could possibly win is to spend days and weeks creating a proof-of-concept to demonstrate validity, and even then there will just be some lipstick-on-a-pig move to patch one particular leak in the overflowing dam.

Majamina, your final comment and BlockaFett's comment is the real nail in the coffin here - I'm doing free analysis in my spare time (how much did Kristov Atlas get paid again?) based on virtually nonexistent technical documentation, so of course there are assumptions I have to make in the interest of expediency. An incorrect assumption in one area does not invalidate my analysis in another, unrelated area. Were this a formal analysis I would not have raised that point, as I would have gone through the code and done heaps of testing before asserting a fact.

At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of the obsession with "proving" that a single attack surface doesn't exist. There has not been a single iota of proof - stating something as if it is fact, or showing some graphs without a model showing its assumptions are not proof, not by any definition of the term. If you want further analysis and specifics I will gladly provide you with my hourly rate and expected engagement period, but beyond that I've reached the end of what I'm willing to do for free. That is not a cop-out, it is just the reality when every suggested attack has to get ground down to minutiae whilst ignoring large swathes of what attackers are capable of. The discussion in this thread has been like talking to someone who sticks their fingers in their ears and goes "na na na, you're wrong, na na na na".

Again, and for the record: you cannot discount an attack by claiming ignorance, simply stating it isn't possible, or turning everything into an accusation of trolling / FUD.

I have observed, in this thread and others, that the bulk of the Darkcoin proponents are like those in the anti-vaccination movement. It doesn't matter what I say, what Bitcoin core developers say, what cryptographers say, or what the creator of BitTorrent says about Darkcoin. It doesn't matter what anyone theorises, it won't even matter if a body of evidence is presented. Anti-vaccinators won't change their minds until their child dies, and Darkcoin proponents won't change their minds until people start suffering.

RationalWiki sums up what the parallel to what we're observing with Darkcoin:



I'd say this thread has been fun, but it hasn't.

so, no. you don't have any details on how DRK is vulnerable, except to say that the DRK dev's haven't proven that you can't break the system.  Pretty weak for the 100s of hours you spent trying to troll DRK don't you think?

[majamina]

This was back in late 2014 and has nothing to do with the current threat by that guy about deanonymizing darksend, so before you go accusing others of trolling, at least do your research first, newbie.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/darkcoin-finds-fixes-darksend-privacy-bug/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=816141.0 - darkcoin exploit found in 2 hours by amateur (why open source matters for anon)

I think you misunderstand. You're saying that nobody is trying to break Darksend. I am saying....'so is all the energy just going into trolling then?' (because there's certainly a lot of that going on!)

[Joshuar]

This was back in late 2014 and has nothing to do with the current threat by that guy about deanonymizing darksend, so before you go accusing others of trolling, at least do your research first, newbie.

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/darkcoin-finds-fixes-darksend-privacy-bug/

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=816141.0 - darkcoin exploit found in 2 hours by amateur (why open source matters for anon)

I think you misunderstand. You're saying that nobody is trying to break Darksend. I am saying....'so is all the energy just going into trolling then?' (because there's certainly a lot of that going on!)

Oh, I interpreted that question as, is all my energy going into trolling, lol. Sorry then.

[strix]

Our jugdement is always clouded by our emotional investments

Satoshi made us think in a different way, to not to trust, to question. Satoshi gave us Blockchain, the trustless authority.

When we have blockchain based solutions, why should we place our trust on nodes? Isnt it what we all are here for? to build trustless systems?

There are two types of people here, those who want to gain more fiat and those who want to help humanity. Choose your side

This is a noble sentiment, but not entirely true. There are certainly any number of gradations on the scale running from St. Francis of Assisi, to Bill Gates. Now while I consider BG to be little more than a criminal, on any number of measures he could be considered of more help to humanity than S.t Francis. The fact is that the desire for fiat and to help humanity are not mutually exclusive. More to the point of this discussion is the fact that even a "pure" desire to help humanity will not settle this debate.

I suspect (in a completely unfounded way ) that I have more in common with the first person sited above, than most folks on this forum; my pursuit of fiat has been, for the most part, to be able to help others who are not in a position to do so. 10 months ago, on a mountain in the middle of a jungle, connected by a feeble long-distance wi-fi link, I wasted some time browsing, and found an ongoing debate between advocates of something called Shadow coin, Monero, and Darkcoin. As a technophile, and someone who witnessed first-hand the devestation wrought by banksters, I was intrigued.

The vulgarity, and crudeness were hard to stomach, (not to mention the name "Darkcoin") but for the sake of those I wanted to help, I continued investigating. In the end, having only limited resources of time and even less of money, I had to decide to follow only one. In spite of its name I chose Darkcoin. I chose it not based on superior technology, (which I suspected it had) but on the basis of superior people. They had their share of trolls and FUDers, but they also had a reasoned core of supporters (such as majamina here :-) who reasonably and politely stood up to the FUDers and trolls, or simply ignored them. Even more importantly, Darkcoin's developer, did not live in shadows or participate in the trollfest, but continued, day-in, and day-out, to improve the coin. I saw no ongoing development in the other coins, and their developers did not even deserve the term, from what I could see; they certainly weren't willing to show their faces in the light of day.

I returned to the U.S. to teach last September, and began participating in the DRK community, lobbying along with some others for a name change, and slowly trying to acquire a masternode of my own. I now own 908 DASH and hope to buy another $80.00 worth tomorrow. (That is after sending $280 (which is half my pay) to help those I left.") In retrospect  seems clear I have made the right decision. Shadow coin is no longer worth discussing, and the general tenor of Monero backers supports the market's judgment of them.  In large part it was the incessant screams of "instamine," which I was perfectly capable of investigating on my own, which drove me from them. Maybe they are right, and their tech is better, to me it makes no difference, the caliber of their people out-weights any consideration of the tech.

It grieves me to think that most of you probably have no idea what I am talking about, and will never know the joy of being invited to share a meager meal with those who would not be alive but for your small involvement with them. Should you want to experience this, pm me, and I will be happy for you to accompany me on my next trip. It is my hope that it will not be too long before a masternode will relieve me of the need to return to the States to refill my coffers.

If I am wrong, and DASH becomes worth nothing, and Monero takes over the world, I will sleep easy, knowing that Evil men often rule the day while goodness lurks in the dark; that money is but a means to an end, and that character determines the nature of that end.

I pray that you all end well...

[majamina]

There seems to be a disconnect here. I know Darkcoin is build on a flaky foundation,

like you knew about Darksend yesterday?

I don't need to prove that. Proving the opposite is critical, and neither the Darkcoin leadership nor its proponents have done so (nor do I have any reason to believe they will do so).

Critical for who? You? Investors? The Pope? Please elaborate...

When you make statements like the above I'm reminded that this thread is a landmine - if I spend the hours researching and extrapolating it will be pointless, as proponents will nitpick. The only way I could possibly win is to spend days and weeks creating a proof-of-concept to demonstrate validity, and even then there will just be some lipstick-on-a-pig move to patch one particular leak in the overflowing dam.

So as the developer of a competing anon coin you are unprepared to demonstrate how the anon coin with the leading market cap is fundamentally flawed. You will just leave it to self-implode and then win. Is that right? If so, fair enough, but it does beg the question why you spend so much time arguing against a coin that you _know_ is flawed and will fail.

Majamina, your final comment and BlockaFett's comment is the real nail in the coffin here - I'm doing free analysis in my spare time (how much did Kristov Atlas get paid again?)

I think it was about 1000 DRK, maybe a bit more, when dark was a couple of bucks. He did a thorough review with full co-operation from Evan. He didn't say it was flaky.

based on virtually nonexistent technical documentation, so of course there are assumptions I have to make in the interest of expediency. An incorrect assumption in one area does not invalidate my analysis in another, unrelated area.

No, but it does demonstrate that you're willing to come on here and slag the opposition tech without understanding how it works.

At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of the obsession with "proving" that a single attack surface doesn't exist. There has not been a single iota of proof - stating something as if it is fact, or showing some graphs without a model showing its assumptions are not proof, not by any definition of the term. If you want further analysis and specifics I will gladly provide you with my hourly rate and expected engagement period, but beyond that I've reached the end of what I'm willing to do for free.

So you're willing to analyse DASH vulnerabilities on a commercial basis, but not for the benefit of your coin which you are no doubt invested in, financially, emotionally, temporally....interesting.

Begs the question why you're actually posting extensively on here at all and not concentrating on that hourly rate.

That is not a cop-out, it is just the reality when every suggested attack has to get ground down to minutiae whilst ignoring large swathes of what attackers are capable of. The discussion in this thread has been like talking to someone who sticks their fingers in their ears and goes "na na na, you're wrong, na na na na".

I think that's entirely unreasonable. You've made very broad technical statements about Darksend etc and have not backed them up with proof. The only times I've said 'you're wrong', literally or figuratively, are when you have been wrong - i.e. Darksend transactions and your ridiculous list of MN opsec requirements.

Again, and for the record: you cannot discount an attack by claiming ignorance, simply stating it isn't possible, or turning everything into an accusation of trolling / FUD.

where have I turned anything into an accusation of trolling/fud?

I'd say this thread has been fun, but it hasn't.

why are you still posting in it then? you bid farewell earlier but then came back....

no hard feelings, naturally

[oaxaca]

...At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of ...

Can you elaborate on these major flaws?

[othe]

...At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of ...

Can you elaborate on these major flaws?

How do you cryptographically proof you made a payment if it has been send through darksend?

[oaxaca]

...At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of ...

Can you elaborate on these major flaws?

How do you cryptographically proof you made a payment if it has been send through darksend?

You open your wallet, click on the transaction, and printscreen?

[Shrikez]

Our jugdement is always clouded by our emotional investments

Satoshi made us think in a different way, to not to trust, to question. Satoshi gave us Blockchain, the trustless authority.

When we have blockchain based solutions, why should we place our trust on nodes? Isnt it what we all are here for? to build trustless systems?

There are two types of people here, those who want to gain more fiat and those who want to help humanity. Choose your side

This is a noble sentiment, but not entirely true. There are certainly any number of gradations on the scale running from St. Francis of Assisi, to Bill Gates. Now while I consider BG to be little more than a criminal, on any number of measures he could be considered of more help to humanity than S.t Francis. The fact is that the desire for fiat and to help humanity are not mutually exclusive. More to the point of this discussion is the fact that even a "pure" desire to help humanity will not settle this debate.

I suspect (in a completely unfounded way ) that I have more in common with the first person sited above, than most folks on this forum; my pursuit of fiat has been, for the most part, to be able to help others who are not in a position to do so. 10 months ago, on a mountain in the middle of a jungle, connected by a feeble long-distance wi-fi link, I wasted some time browsing, and found an ongoing debate between advocates of something called Shadow coin, Monero, and Darkcoin. As a technophile, and someone who witnessed first-hand the devestation wrought by banksters, I was intrigued.

The vulgarity, and crudeness were hard to stomach, (not to mention the name "Darkcoin") but for the sake of those I wanted to help, I continued investigating. In the end, having only limited resources of time and even less of money, I had to decide to follow only one. In spite of its name I chose Darkcoin. I chose it not based on superior technology, (which I suspected it had) but on the basis of superior people. They had their share of trolls and FUDers, but they also had a reasoned core of supporters (such as majamina here :-) who reasonably and politely stood up to the FUDers and trolls, or simply ignored them. Even more importantly, Darkcoin's developer, did not live in shadows or participate in the trollfest, but continued, day-in, and day-out, to improve the coin. I saw no ongoing development in the other coins, and their developers did not even deserve the term, from what I could see; they certainly weren't willing to show their faces in the light of day.

I returned to the U.S. to teach last September, and began participating in the DRK community, lobbying along with some others for a name change, and slowly trying to acquire a masternode of my own. I now own 908 DASH and hope to buy another $80.00 worth tomorrow. (That is after sending $280 (which is half my pay) to help those I left.") In retrospect  seems clear I have made the right decision. Shadow coin is no longer worth discussing, and the general tenor of Monero backers supports the market's judgment of them.  In large part it was the incessant screams of "instamine," which I was perfectly capable of investigating on my own, which drove me from them. Maybe they are right, and their tech is better, to me it makes no difference, the caliber of their people out-weights any consideration of the tech.

It grieves me to think that most of you probably have no idea what I am talking about, and will never know the joy of being invited to share a meager meal with those who would not be alive but for your small involvement with them. Should you want to experience this, pm me, and I will be happy for you to accompany me on my next trip. It is my hope that it will not be too long before a masternode will relieve me of the need to return to the States to refill my coffers.

If I am wrong, and DASH becomes worth nothing, and Monero takes over the world, I will sleep easy, knowing that Evil men often rule the day while goodness lurks in the dark; that money is but a means to an end, and that character determines the nature of that end.

I pray that you all end well...

Eloquent post but you can not be serious...or do I miss the irony?

[othe]

...At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of ...

Can you elaborate on these major flaws?

How do you cryptographically proof you made a payment if it has been send through darksend?

You open your wallet, click on the transaction, and printscreen?

Because you can't just make up a shitty screenshot?

DRK where printscreen is considered to be cryptography....

[5w00p]

1) Posting an on-topic comment about either of these two coins, even if it  is NEGATIVE about one or the other or both, is not trolling.
Some of you need to learn what that slang word means.

2)strix: I commend your efforts and your self-proclaimed diligence in investigation. However, to say that the Monero devs hide in the shadows is preposterous. fluffypony shares and has shared his real name from what was probably Day 1 of Monero development. Just because he uses a screenname does not mean he is skulking in the shadows. David Latapie uses his real name as his screenname. So, nice try, but you apparently didn't really put that much effort into your research of Monero.

Your efforts are valiant, if a bit dramatized, but as I read the beginning of your post, I would have thought for certain that you would have chosen Monero. Your choices are your prerogative. But don't act like you are a saint among men and that your choices are the righteous ones. You are simply a man who makes his own decisions, and your own flaws and biases are inherent in and influential on your decisions in life -- just the same as it is for me, or anyone else.

[oaxaca]

...At this stage there are a series of major flaws that remain untouched because of ...

Can you elaborate on these major flaws?

How do you cryptographically proof you made a payment if it has been send through darksend?

You open your wallet, click on the transaction, and printscreen?

Because you can't just make up a shitty screenshot?

DRK where printscreen is considered to be cryptography....

What if the background image is really cool?

Seriously, if address "Xkh65Rfk8..." requested funds and the blockchain says that "Xkh65Rfk8..." received funds what is the problem?  Is this a major flaw?

Hypothetical Situation:

Coffee shop owner:  "OK, that'll be .7865 DASH please.  My address is Xkh65Rfk8...
Me:  "OK, sent."

Coffee shop owner checks his wallet and .7865 DASH appear.

Is his response A) "Thank you, come again" or B) "Can you cryptographically proof you sent me the funds?"

[othe]

Extremely big, yes.

[majamina]

Extremely big, yes.

For who?

Joe Public?

Johnny Merchant?

Highfalutin Cryptonerd?

[oaxaca]

Extremely big, yes.

I was too slow with my edit so I will repost here:
----------------------------
Hypothetical Situation:

Coffee shop owner:  "OK, that'll be .7865 DASH please.  My address is Xkh65Rfk8...
Me:  "OK, sent."

Coffee shop owner checks his wallet and .7865 DASH appear.

Is his response A) "Thank you, come again" or B) "Can you cryptographically proof you sent me the funds?"

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Well that's not the concern. The concern is an adversary spying on a small but significant portion of masternode activity (say 15%). Your one tx might have an astronomically low probability of being revealed, but other transactions on the network won't be so lucky.

yes they will, that's how probability works

if there is an unbelievably tiny probability or catching a DS transaction with 15% of the network, you will catch an unbelievably tiny number of transactions....i.e. none in any sensible timeframe.

You will still catch transactions. If you fire a gun into a large crowd, someone will get hit, even if everyone's individual probability is low.

A robust anonymity solution will make it just as costly to unmask one solution vs any other.

[ArticMine]

So?  What is your problem? Big pharma companies buy smaller ones so they could stop the development of current drugs as to eliminate competition.
In this case Evan bought a name. Your developers who sold it are to blame!
Its a free market, you could have bought it off from your developers. Were your developers transparent? Did they tell community what was going to happen?
Your developers saw an oppurtunity to get out with some cash and they did, you guys should do the same as you got the boost!
Also should direct all the hatres towars  your developers who sold the project, your developers abonded your coin! Deal with it !

I rest my case!

Our jugdement is always clouded by our emotional investments

Satoshi made us think in a different way, to not to trust, to question. Satoshi gave us Blockchain, the trustless authority.

When we have blockchain based solutions, why should we place our trust on nodes? Isnt it what we all are here for? to build trustless systems?

There are two types of people here, those who want to gain more fiat and those who want to help humanity. Choose your side

This is a noble sentiment, but not entirely true. There are certainly any number of gradations on the scale running from St. Francis of Assisi, to Bill Gates. Now while I consider BG to be little more than a criminal, on any number of measures he could be considered of more help to humanity than S.t Francis. The fact is that the desire for fiat and to help humanity are not mutually exclusive. More to the point of this discussion is the fact that even a "pure" desire to help humanity will not settle this debate.

I suspect (in a completely unfounded way ) that I have more in common with the first person sited above, than most folks on this forum; my pursuit of fiat has been, for the most part, to be able to help others who are not in a position to do so. 10 months ago, on a mountain in the middle of a jungle, connected by a feeble long-distance wi-fi link, I wasted some time browsing, and found an ongoing debate between advocates of something called Shadow coin, Monero, and Darkcoin. As a technophile, and someone who witnessed first-hand the devestation wrought by banksters, I was intrigued.

The vulgarity, and crudeness were hard to stomach, (not to mention the name "Darkcoin") but for the sake of those I wanted to help, I continued investigating. In the end, having only limited resources of time and even less of money, I had to decide to follow only one. In spite of its name I chose Darkcoin. I chose it not based on superior technology, (which I suspected it had) but on the basis of superior people. They had their share of trolls and FUDers, but they also had a reasoned core of supporters (such as majamina here :-) who reasonably and politely stood up to the FUDers and trolls, or simply ignored them. Even more importantly, Darkcoin's developer, did not live in shadows or participate in the trollfest, but continued, day-in, and day-out, to improve the coin. I saw no ongoing development in the other coins, and their developers did not even deserve the term, from what I could see; they certainly weren't willing to show their faces in the light of day.

I returned to the U.S. to teach last September, and began participating in the DRK community, lobbying along with some others for a name change, and slowly trying to acquire a masternode of my own. I now own 908 DASH and hope to buy another $80.00 worth tomorrow. (That is after sending $280 (which is half my pay) to help those I left.") In retrospect  seems clear I have made the right decision. Shadow coin is no longer worth discussing, and the general tenor of Monero backers supports the market's judgment of them.  In large part it was the incessant screams of "instamine," which I was perfectly capable of investigating on my own, which drove me from them. Maybe they are right, and their tech is better, to me it makes no difference, the caliber of their people out-weights any consideration of the tech.

It grieves me to think that most of you probably have no idea what I am talking about, and will never know the joy of being invited to share a meager meal with those who would not be alive but for your small involvement with them. Should you want to experience this, pm me, and I will be happy for you to accompany me on my next trip. It is my hope that it will not be too long before a masternode will relieve me of the need to return to the States to refill my coffers.


If I am wrong, and DASH becomes worth nothing, and Monero takes over the world, I will sleep easy, knowing that Evil men often rule the day while goodness lurks in the dark; that money is but a means to an end, and that character determines the nature of that end.

I pray that you all end well...

These two comments belong together. As BiteMyShinyMetalAss has correctly pointed out the attempt by the Darkcoin foundation to kill Dashcoin in order to obtain the Dash name for the purpose of waging trademark battles in the courts puts Darkcoin aka Dash squarely in the Bill Gates / Big Pharma camp. It also explains the sheer amount of trolling that the Main DRK now Dash thread has attracted after the re brand was announced. This kind of corporate / big business type bullying is likely to rankle many in the crypto coin communities regardless of whether or not they hold Dashcoin or Monero.

strix You have made an impassioned plea for ethics over greed; however its is DRK aka DASH that lies in the "corporate greed" camp.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Well that's not the concern. The concern is an adversary spying on a small but significant portion of masternode activity (say 15%). Your one tx might have an astronomically low probability of being revealed, but other transactions on the network won't be so lucky.

yes they will, that's how probability works

if there is an unbelievably tiny probability or catching a DS transaction with 15% of the network, you will catch an unbelievably tiny number of transactions....i.e. none in any sensible timeframe.

No, that's not how probability works. If you fire a gun into a large crowd, someone will get hit, even if everyone's individual probability is low. The attacker's probability of hitting something is much higher.

A robust anonymity solution will make it just as costly to unmask one transaction vs any other.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

These probability calculations are misleading because they are from the perspective of the individual transactor as opposed to the attacker.

Evan is basically saying "The networlk isn't secure, but there's so fucking many of you that the chances of your transactions being traced are slim. Here's a really low percentage to distract you: 0.000000000000001%. Wow!"