Preface, I reiterate and say the same thing a different way many times, because I'm trying to be explicit and ensure I'm communicating my point accurately.
I'm neither trying to distract nor gaslight.
Which is why I qualified my statement with the qualifier "appears."
Any conversation in the cryptosphere is already charged with hype/troll presumptions. Snowflakery doesn't help, either.
Can we just calm down and admit I've been here since DRKs were less than a penny and not trying to troll or feed trolls?
You brought up dead change and made the claim that Dash "does not manage it at all". You even claimed it's "discouraged from discussion" when it's not. How do I know? We're talking about it right now. Without coercion. To be precise no discouragement of any sort is happening on this forum, neither from Core nor from the mod team, because IMO it's way too tolerant for it's own good. But I digress.
I went through the trouble of browsing through ancient forum threads to deliver you evidence that the issues was indeed addressed, despite your claim to the contrary.
Which one? And how many are there? Be precise.
Because as far as I'm aware what you're describing is exactly the dead change issue. I see no "part" that was fixed. It was exactly fixed what you're talking about. Here's
another time Evan addressed the issue
I went through even more trouble for you and looked through my personal Dash Core wallet from which I mixed a 3 digit amount of Dash a while ago. I've also spent some of those mixed funds and I looked at every single input and change I received. Not a single time does a "0.00999999" denomination or anything similar to it appear. I got many harmless 0.01000010 inputs as change indicating the issue to be successfully avoided.
So this is just one one data point from me personally, but as far as I can see you've ignored the very fix's existence and still claim it's a problem, when I just confirmed the fix to be effective from first hand research.
Can PrivateSend be improved? Obviously.
Is Dead Change still an issue after years of PS improvements? I haven't seen any evidence for that.
I'm ready to have my mind changed if you can present me recent evidence directly from the blockchain explaining how a PrivateSend tx resulted in the problem you've described.
0.00999999 was just an example. What I'm referring to is any duffheap smaller than the smallest denomination.
I'm looking at one of my wallets. I've made hundreds of DS TXes. Now, it's pretty rare that a TX comes out precisely matching the denominations. There is ALWAYS change.
I send 0.953487 DASH. 9x .1s get used, and 6x .01s get used. But, then there's change for one of those .01s, because only .003487 was actually needed.
(yes, I'm leaving out the fact that denoms are really 1.0001, etc. for simplicity)
Dozens of such transactions exist. All these .00xxxxxx change amounts add up. I've got several DASH that won't denominate and can't be mixed. So, I:
sendtoaddress "Xanaddressinanotherwalletoreventhesamewallet" exactcurrent.ballance "" "" true false false
Now all those bits of dust combine into one larger VIN that is big enough that it can be denominated and mixed. Most people think "problem solved!"
Notice, for obvious reasons, "true false true" is a combination which can never actually be used. Because Dead Change.
But... Every single one of those pieces of dust was tied to a denomination of 0.01 which was more than what the actual TX needed. That's why that dust/change exists to begin with. Now that they all got rolled into one VIN, this proves that all that dust/change was in the same wallet. You couldn't roll it into one TX unless this were true. This ALSO proves that those .01s from which the dust was derived, also all came from the same wallet. BUT, since each of those VINs were in
the same TX with other denominations, it proves that every 10, 1, .1 and .01 in the same TX is in the same wallet. The original DS TXID has every denom for that TX in it. so, all the denomas are known because the TXID is known as a result of the change off of the original .01.
Even the denomination process leaves it's own change, which can/must be rolled in the same way if you ever expect to use it. But, this is to be expected. 436.54834651 does not divide evenly into 10, 1, .1 and .01. Just like pretty much every other TX ever...
So, yes, I've described the Dead Change problem to a T. How? By observing a transaction I made just now...
Not only do I not see how your logical explanation could detach this connectivity, the whole reason I'm bringing it up is because I'm looking at it with my own eyeballs right this moment... If it was fixed 3.5 years ago, why can I see it happening right now? This is why I bring up the "Why hasn't the Dead Change issue been fixed?" inquiry.
I did not bother to look for any statements of it being fixed, because I'm looking at it, so it obviously hasn't been fixed.
Why would I look for a statement regarding event X, when I can clearly observe that event X has not occurred, and that very observation is the reason for the inquiry?
Point to it on the chain? No thanks! Its already a security problem. I understand your perspective in wishing to see it, but due to the nature of it, we'll have to stick with this conversational model.
Go ahead and test it yourself. Mix up a DASH or two. Go crazy and make it 16 deep. Since this is a post-mix exposure, the depth doesn't matter.
Send some randomly sized DS TXes. Doesn't matter where. Same wallet, a different one, irrelevant.
There will be change off of those DS TXes. That change comes from one of the .01s being oversized. It has to be. It's inevitable. Every single one of those .01s is in the same TX as the 10s, 1s, and .1s, so this TXID ties everything in that TX to that bit of change. So far, it doesn't really matter. Everything in THAT TX is associated with THAT TX. This is normal. How could everything that's in the same TX not be associated? It's in the same TX, duh... But, it only takes
one more thing to make it into a problem...
As long as it's just Dead Change, it doesn't matter.
But, when you get $4,000 worth of Dead Change piled up, you start to care about not being able to touch it...
A person who doesn't understand
one more thing decides to stack all that Dead Change into a single VIN.
Poof. All that change is now in the same TXID. And all of the VINs that change came from have their own TXIDs, which are now proven to be of the same source. Every single one of those pre-existing DS transactions is now known to have been from the same wallet. Every single DS TX that this wallet has ever performed is now bundled up and tidy on the blockchain. Every DS had a TXID with a bit of dust, and all that dust is now linked together. So, if any single TX you've ever made has your name on it, every TX you've ever made has your name on it.
I don't see this unlinked or undone anywhere. Even if there is a claim of it being fixed, I'm looking at it with my own eyeballs, so... Claim irrelevant and obviously untrue. How could it be true when, 3.5 years later, I'm plainly observing it?
Tell me how I'm wrong. Please.
In other points of similar topic; DS mixing is stupid fast now. As soon as a block comes, bam, multi-session is finding triplets and hammering 10s, 1s, .1s, and .01s in rapid-fire succession. I don't think there's any more room for improvement there, it's 10/10. The only improvement I can see is altering it from 3 to 3 + N. N = however many more people show up, which is naturally entropic. Deliberately pause and wait for more. Sure, a fast block may bump it entirely, but that rare, and since it was a fast block, the very same proposed mix TX could just as well occur in the next block. Possibly allow repeats, too... But, that has some negative connotations, so, er...