The 2% transaction fee (in example above) would go back to the owner of the input address via another address thus it has no cost. The fee is simply a mechanism to obfuscate the ownership of the owner to obfuscate the ownership of the coins. The higher the fee and/or hashing power the faster you can funnel but there is no reason it couldn't work at any fee level.
You are really thinking you can taint the transaction fee of any tainted transaction which is too "high"? Honestly have you thought this through? How high is too high? 2%, 1%, 0.5%? What happens when someone puts transaction involving tainted coins w/ "too high of a fee" (how high is too high?) on the network
as a poison pill. They will get picked up by pools and hashed into the next block. The transaction fee will go to hundreds (or thousands of miners). You think every pool (and that includes all 300+ nodes on p2pool) is going to run your checks and exclude that transaction from the block. As block rewards decline do you think any pool can afford to exclude valid paying transactions? If a single one doesn't then tainted coins from a transaction w/ "too high of a fee" (as absurdly vague as that is) is now in hundreds of wallets. Their coins are now tainted forever?
If you don't taint the transaction fees of transactions which have "too high of a fee" then coins can be funneled through transaction fees. If you unilaterally decide 2% is too high then it is trivially easy to create "cleaning" transactions with random fees between 0.2% and 1.3%? By combining these with clean inputs, and real transactions, and hundreds of addresses one can make it difficulty to identify which coins if any should be blacklisted.
So which is it? transaction fees of tainted transactions are taint free (which allows laundering funds through bogus transaction fees)
OR
transaction fees of tainted transactions are tainted (which allows a single transaction to taint the wallets of hundreds of innocent miners)?
It is readily apparent that checking for stolen coins will hurt your profits somehow, given the virulent 'sky is falling' assault on the idea.
As far as your personal attacks.
FUCK OFF. I don't use stolen bitcoins, I have never stolen Bitcoins. Me pointing out the ridiculously easy flaws in your scheme is academic. If I can think of giant exploits in 5 minutes an attacker sitting on $250K will certainly have the motivation to think of more elaborate bypasses.
Idiotic systems like yours will hurt fungibility of Bitcoin and that hurts all users including myself.Currency must be fungible to be effective. This basic fundemental of economics is why countries pass legal tender laws. A dollar is worth a dollar because it is accepted everywhere in the US and buys you a dollars worth of goods. If some dollars were worth more, and some worthless, and some accepted by some merchants and some by others it would fail as a currency.
Less fungible Bitcoin = less effective Bitcoin = less adoption = less value. Given I have 20GH/s farm and have been mining a long time yes that means idiots like you have the potential to hurt my financial stake in Bitcoin. If it means me running a transaction fees laundering service or regularly putting poison pills on the network tainting thousands of wallets to show you the futility of your (and Mt.Gox's) actions I will.
