Hehe fun thing.
We all believe in Eduffield but we are a bit skeptical towards Darksend.
So.. Eduffield if you just say it will work for sure, we all can start buying more DRK!
It's code... code can break if it's not clean, extremely well thought out, trial-tested, reviewed, etc etc. It needs time to be patched to better levels of reliable functionality and prove itself, just like BTC code is taking years and still has questionmarks if something can break it and render it useless. Even things like stratum, kgw, dgw, need fixing. You can't have complicated code working flawlessly from day 1, no matter the assurances. That's just how it is.
It's always better to have realistic expectations rather than unrealistic ones because that way no disillusionment can occur later on and comments like "ohhhhhh disaster, darksend is a flop" start to spring up after some bug or something.
You know, the solution eduffield came up with is very simple, has about a 99.9% obfuscation (enough info, you maybe able to make some associations with enough power, but very expensive). This is why I see this as a huge advantage:
1. the simpler something is, the more directly it works, the less "holes" that will be found!
2. The "hole" this system has is obvious and a clear solution has been implemented. I think it will be very difficult if not impossible to take advantage of this system because of the fine charged if there is any funny business. It's financially unfeasible. This is the only "hole" that can be seen and it is logically and financially closed.
3. The NSA possibly could find probable cause that a wallet belongs to a person, maybe even that that person has made repeated purchases to another person, I don't know. They almost have infinite funds. However, if I were the NSA, I'd try to get this information by infecting computers with back doors etc... malware, which they already do according to Snowden. Who can defend against a government that does such things, and ours does. The only way to protect ourselves from the government is by staying off line.
So, you can pile more systems of obfuscation on top of DarkSend as it is, but you would only make it have more hidden holes that could be discovered by a malicious person who could do a ton of damage! Keep it simple stupid, is a successful acronym for a reason: KISS
And finding a simple yet extremely effective solution is a sign of brilliance. E=mc(2) came from clearing out the debris and only looking at the facts, the clear facts.
The issue Anonymint raises is not about losing anonymity, but of Darksends being blocked
