bestmixer or chipmixer?

[NowYouAreSee]

People compare fees but, lol seriously? Is it that need to be compared? Are people looking to save a buck with the risk to give up their privacy?
Privacy, Hello! Isn't it what is most important? Yes right? Now I would suggest making some searches because if you think all mixers work "great" I can assure that it's not the case.

I think it's a fair thing to do when Bestmixer's fees range from 1% (but usually start at 2.5% by default) and go up to 5% for their Gamma pool, with no proof that it actually improves privacy.
Meanwhile Chipmixer offers 0% fees, and the same level of privacy for all of their clients..?

Almost forgot about their fees per adress and tx fees;

Code:

+ 0.00029430 BTC for each receiving address 
Recommended transaction fee: 0.00133347 BTC per kilobyte

Which means that if i were to mix 0.001, i'd pay a whopping 32% in fees. (v ≈≈≈0% w/ chipmixer, if i were to accelerate a low byte tx that is obviously..)

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!
I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

[1715454055]

1715454055

[1715454055]

1715454055

[AdolfinWolf]

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!
I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

There is no proof of either one of those statements that you're making.

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!

Please, show me proof that you can link a deposit adress of Chipmixer to an output accurately, otherwise, you're spouting nonsense.

I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

There is no proof that Bestmixer actually hides/conceals *every* trace of it's internal mixing that's leading to the output you're receiving. of course it would be impossible to prove a negative, but i don't think anyone has extensively looked into this, or researched it.
(And we all know what happend to dozens of mixers in the past who said similar things.. (Not only were transactions able to be traced back to the mixer, they could accurately be traced back to the user who initiated the transfer.))

Also, what exactly would be the added benefit of someone not knowing your money came from a/"the" mixer? You're afraid of being labeled as what exactly?

[TryNinja]

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!
I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

That’s funny for you to say after this post: Breaking Mixing Services

Quoting it:

I found some trivial bugs (timing attacks, leakages, xss, ...) through which nearly all relevant centralized bitcoin mixing services could be broken. Based on outgoing mixing transactions (transactions sent by the mixer) I was able to identify the correct incoming transactions sent by customers (vice versa). [...]

[...] In my thesis, I attacked coinmixer.se (at the time of writing it was the biggest centralized mixing service), however - except chipmixer.com1 - every other centralized mixing service I checked could be broken in a similar fashion.

While the author doesn’t explicitly quotes BestMixer’s name, it is clear that BestMixer works exactly as the other traditional mixers (except that they charge huge fees for some “extra privacy” methods that no one can confirm if it works or if it even does anything at all).

[NowYouAreSee]

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!
I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

There is no proof of either one of those statements that you're making.

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!

Please, show me proof that you can link a deposit adress of Chipmixer to an output accurately, otherwise, you're spouting nonsense.

I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

There is no proof that Bestmixer actually hides/conceals *every* trace of it's internal mixing that's leading to the output you're receiving. of course it would be impossible to prove a negative, but i don't think anyone has extensively looked into this, or researched it.
(And we all know what happend to dozens of mixers in the past who said similar things.. (Not only were transactions able to be traced back to the mixer, they could accurately be traced back to the user who initiated the transfer.))

Also, what exactly would be the added benefit of someone not knowing your money came from a/"the" mixer? You're afraid of being labeled as what exactly?

http://chipstatdethbuwk.onion/

What is the purpose of using a mixer?
Naturally, I do not want anyone to know that I used a mixer.
Unfortunately, chipmixer does not give me such confidence.

[NowYouAreSee]

You say that it is more profitable to use chipmixer, while all his transactions are easy to track down!
I'd rather pay 50% commission to bestmixer, but no one would know that I got the money from the mixer!

That’s funny for you to say after this post: Breaking Mixing Services

Quoting it:

I found some trivial bugs (timing attacks, leakages, xss, ...) through which nearly all relevant centralized bitcoin mixing services could be broken. Based on outgoing mixing transactions (transactions sent by the mixer) I was able to identify the correct incoming transactions sent by customers (vice versa). [...]

[...] In my thesis, I attacked coinmixer.se (at the time of writing it was the biggest centralized mixing service), however - except chipmixer.com1 - every other centralized mixing service I checked could be broken in a similar fashion.

While the author doesn’t explicitly quotes BestMixer’s name, it is clear that BestMixer works exactly as the other traditional mixers (except that they charge huge fees for some “extra privacy” methods that no one can confirm if it works or if it even does anything at all).

You base your statements on conjectures.
Although in the case of chipmixer, we see simple evidence that their entire system works against their customers.

[TryNinja]

You base your statements on conjectures.
Although in the case of chipmixer, we see simple evidence that their entire system works against their customers.

Quoting a previous post from this same thread:

I just had a look and it doesn't appear to make any link between funds coming out of ChipMixer to funds going into ChipMixer so it seems to show that ChipMixer works.

[NowYouAreSee]

You base your statements on conjectures.
Although in the case of chipmixer, we see simple evidence that their entire system works against their customers.

Quoting a previous post from this same thread:

I just had a look and it doesn't appear to make any link between funds coming out of ChipMixer to funds going into ChipMixer so it seems to show that ChipMixer works.

I got the impression that you are intoxicated by the service in which you participate in a signature company.
I mean, everyone can find out that you received coins from a chipmixer and just hang a suspicion flag on your funds.
Imagine that you are an anonymous alcoholic)) And here you understand that anyone can easily find out this information))
Then from this equation you need to throw out the word "anonymous" is not it?

[AdolfinWolf]

I got the impression that you are intoxicated by the service in which you participate in a signature company.
I mean, everyone can find out that you received coins from a chipmixer and just hang a suspicion flag on your funds.
Imagine that you are an anonymous alcoholic)) And here you understand that anyone can easily find out this information))
Then from this equation you need to throw out the word "anonymous" is not it?

And so you're assuming that everyone who uses Chipmixer is an "alcoholic".  That's quite the assumption to make.

And here you understand that anyone can easily find out this information

Assuming something =/= correlate with reality.
The only way someone can "find anything out" is by assuming that everyone who uses Chipmixer is (in your case) an "alcoholic". logic and law simply don't work that way.

http://chipstatdethbuwk.onion/

What is the purpose of using a mixer?

You tell me. It's unclear to me what exactly you use a mixer for.

Naturally, I do not want anyone to know that I used a mixer.
Unfortunately, chipmixer does not give me such confidence.

No, You'd rather pay a 5% flat-fee, and trust that Bestmixer.io actually gives you coins out of their "Private-Investor" pool (which has got to run out sooner or later?), for what reason exactly? You're afraid of being labeled/assumed as an "Alcoholic" (?) I mean... Be my guest.

Again, you're trusting their word that these coins won't be able to be traced back to their mixer, or any of their operations, but that just seems very vague to me. Coins are always "Traceable" (up to a degree).
((I wouldn't be surprised of most of these "Investor" coins are bought on a KYC exchange..?))

Anyhow, if you place that much trust in Bestmixer.io to leave absolutely no trace on your coins, for whatever reason you might have, i'm not stopping you from using them.
Just don't spout unclear nonsense about your competitors for whatever reason you have, without any real evidence to back it up.

Then from this equation you need to throw out the word "anonymous" is not it?

Why? enlighten me on how exactly Chipmixer deanonymizes it's userbase?

[slocker]

This is something that is hard to decide. Using it or not, if yes which one if not then its ok.

If you have some doubt about it then use this one

[NowYouAreSee]

I got the impression that you are intoxicated by the service in which you participate in a signature company.
I mean, everyone can find out that you received coins from a chipmixer and just hang a suspicion flag on your funds.
Imagine that you are an anonymous alcoholic)) And here you understand that anyone can easily find out this information))
Then from this equation you need to throw out the word "anonymous" is not it?

And so you're assuming that everyone who uses Chipmixer is an "alcoholic".  That's quite the assumption to make.

And here you understand that anyone can easily find out this information

Assuming something =/= correlate with reality.
The only way someone can "find anything out" is by assuming that everyone who uses Chipmixer is (in your case) an "alcoholic". logic and law simply don't work that way.

http://chipstatdethbuwk.onion/

What is the purpose of using a mixer?

You tell me. It's unclear to me what exactly you use a mixer for.

Naturally, I do not want anyone to know that I used a mixer.
Unfortunately, chipmixer does not give me such confidence.

No, You'd rather pay a 5% flat-fee, and trust that Bestmixer.io actually gives you coins out of their "Private-Investor" pool (which has got to run out sooner or later?), for what reason exactly? You're afraid of being labeled/assumed as an "Alcoholic" (?) I mean... Be my guest.

Again, you're trusting their word that these coins won't be able to be traced back to their mixer, or any of their operations, but that just seems very vague to me. Coins are always "Traceable" (up to a degree).
((I wouldn't be surprised of most of these "Investor" coins are bought on a KYC exchange..?))

Anyhow, if you place that much trust in Bestmixer.io to leave absolutely no trace on your coins, for whatever reason you might have, i'm not stopping you from using them.
Just don't spout unclear nonsense about your competitors for whatever reason you have, without any real evidence to back it up.

Then from this equation you need to throw out the word "anonymous" is not it?

Why? enlighten me on how exactly Chipmixer deanonymizes it's userbase?

1. I will ask you again, why use a mixer?
2. I think talking with you is something useless, because you participate in the company signatures of chipmixer and you get paid for each message, which means you are not objective in your opinion.
3. If your statement that bestmixer buys coins on the stock exchange is true, then this is great news.

[AdolfinWolf]

1. I will ask you again, why use a mixer?
2. I think talking with you is something useless, because you participate in the company signatures of chipmixer and you get paid for each message, which means you are not objective in your opinion.
3. If your statement that bestmixer buys coins on the stock exchange is true, then this is great news.

1. To break a link between funds/transfers.

2. I'm just correcting you on the lies you're spreading.

3. Is it though? That means that "the stockexchange" knows exactly/could know exactly which coins are from Bestmixer, and knows exactly where they are going.
Law enforcement could easily get that information, and voila, there goes everything you've been paying such premiums for. (And all the attempts at obfuscating the source (the user who initiated the transfer) of the funds, not to mention.)

That's another third-party you need to blindly trust. (While they (the exchange) doesn't/don't have any incentive NOT to cooperate, etc.)

That's just how i see it though. I'd love to know why and how you think this is "great".

[NowYouAreSee]

1. I will ask you again, why use a mixer?
2. I think talking with you is something useless, because you participate in the company signatures of chipmixer and you get paid for each message, which means you are not objective in your opinion.
3. If your statement that bestmixer buys coins on the stock exchange is true, then this is great news.

1. To break a link between funds/transfers.

2. I'm just correcting you on the lies you're spreading.

3. Is it though? That means that "the stockexchange" knows exactly/could know exactly which coins are from Bestmixer, and knows exactly where they are going.
Law enforcement could easily get that information, and voila, there goes everything you've been paying such premiums for. (And all the attempts at obfuscating the source (the user who initiated the transfer) of the funds, not to mention.)

That's another third-party you need to blindly trust. (While they (the exchange) doesn't/don't have any incentive NOT to cooperate, etc.)

That's just how i see it though. I'd love to know why and how you think this is "great".

How can the exchange understand that the funds came from the mixer? Your statement is a lie!
What is the advantage of getting coins from the exchange? Huge volumes on exchanges, coins are mixed there better than in any mixer!
Thus, the exchange itself is a mixer, only on a large scale.
Now, having this website http://chipstatdethbuwk.onion/, any service can mark a transaction that has been sent from chipmixer as suspicious.
It seems to me that soon there will be an official ban from the state bodies on the use of such services.
What will you say then?

I repeat once again - this is bad when someone knows that your funds came from the mixer.
This is just my subjective opinion.

[TryNinja]

How can the exchange understand that the funds came from the mixer? Your statement is a lie!
What is the advantage of getting coins from the exchange? Huge volumes on exchanges, coins are mixed there better than in any mixer!
Thus, the exchange itself is a mixer, only on a large scale.
Now, having this website http://chipstatdethbuwk.onion/, any service can mark a transaction that has been sent from chipmixer as suspicious.
It seems to me that soon there will be an official ban from the state bodies on the use of such services.
What will you say then?

Great. Don’t use any mixer them.

Send your coins from a darknet market to your favorite exchange, and then to Coinbase. See what happens when a government/police wants to know who are you. I’m sure the exchange (that stores your IP, KYC information, history of deposits, trades and withdrawals) will back you up.

I mean, seriously? Exchanges over mixers? I’m starting to think you are just trolling us at this point.

I repeat once again - this is bad when someone knows that your funds came from the mixer.
This is just my subjective opinion.

Believe me when I say that anyone with enough time, motivation and resources can get almost any mixer pool of addresses after some time. I doubt most mixers do more than send you coins from their wallet, and then use the user’s deposit coins/address for future transactions w/ other costumers. And that’s extremely easy to analyze.

[filipwx]

So i lose close to 6-7$ Depending on the amount i mix.

With bestmixer i lose less than 4$,and i think anonimity is much better on bestmixer,plus the unique code is really good since it gets me loyalty discounts.

Or you could just send 0.056BTC, get the 0.032BTC, 0.016BTC and 0.008BTC chip (as explained by DarkStar) and pay exactly 0BTC fees for that. Keep the change (the $6-7) and buy a beer with it, or use a different mixer just for that, donate to your charity, whatever...

But feel free to use the mixer you like the most. Cheers.

These guys should make their fees more transparent.

[sega01]

If you really care about anonymity, why not use two mixers in series?

[Findingnemo]

If you really care about anonymity, why not use two mixers in series?

For sure if they can do it for free.

[stomachgrowls]

If you really care about anonymity, why not use two mixers in series?

For sure if they can do it for free.

If my transactions do involve thousand of dollars then doing mixing on series wont be a problem even if you do just waste some fees  

No business would give out free service. hehe. My choice will be always on Chipmixer.

[FaucetKING]

I think that the members here will eventually support ChipMixer.. You will keep seeing peoples engage here wearing the signature compaign of ChipMixer which is not  appreciated -_-.. Let only the platform users who had a real experience talk.. Don't just support ChipMixer because they are paying you for wearing a signature.

[TryNinja]

I think that the members here will eventually support ChipMixer.. You will keep seeing peoples engage here wearing the signature compaign of ChipMixer which is not  appreciated -_-.. Let only the platform users who had a real experience talk.. Don't just support ChipMixer because they are paying you for wearing a signature.

Maybe it should be better if YOU stop supporting shady exchanges just because you are being paid to hear a signature.

Many of the ChipMixer's campaigners already used the mixer (myself included). And most of the ones who didn't don't support it just for the sake of their signature, but because they are unique. While 100% of the other mixers do basically the same thing, ChipMixer has a completely new business and mixing model (PWYW fees and chips). That's what makes it so special.

On the other side, Yobit... Yobit Scam Accusation megathread. "Normal" modus operandi or shady practices?

P.S: stop post bursting for you 20 posts/day campaign quota. That's also not appreciated.