[IDEA] No more merging of outputs for payments = more anonymity?

[Xenland]

What does the community think about Cheaper In Bitcoins to have the option where multiple addresses(as many required) can be generated to one fund one order. The only merge that happens(On the block chain) is the accidental chance that the same merchant "withdraws" the same coins to an address, which sounds unlikely if Cheaper In Bitcoins was getting a lot of traffic.

Half-baked?
Good Idea?
Huh?
Thoughts?
Questions?
Ideas?
Suggestions?
(Hey that last bit rymed!)

[Xenland]

Ah, who cares about anonymity anyways....

[MaxSan]

Correct me if im wrong but im pretty sure you can do this anyway with advanced clients (blockchain.info supports this sort of thing afaik)

[Xenland]

I ment as in you use those advanced clients to send to each generated address for the cheaper in bitcoins order.

[kangasbros]

Nothing prevents you from implementing this. It will improve anonymity, but is the improvement worth it? And it needs to be implemented on merchant-side, and probably only a very small percentage of your customers are going to use it. Most are just too lazy

[Xenland]

Apparently not too many people are worried about anonminity as a feature. thats a good sign. But darn it I thought a bit-illion dollar idea...

[bc]

Apparently not too many people are worried about anonminity as a feature. thats a good sign. But darn it I thought a bit-illion dollar idea...

I think it's a great idea. I hope others follow suit.