@Harlot. Agreed, it is Singapore's laws. I was asking the question again for you to understand that it is in the exchange's decision to put guilt in the user's actions because of Singapore's laws.
You can hate me for asking questions, hehehehe. However, they are important questions that need to be asked, I reckon.
Topic: [2020-04-13] Coin Mixer’s Record Month Proves Bitcoin Users Want Anonymity (Read 656 times)
April 22, 2020, 10:18:33 PM
April 22, 2020, 03:19:07 PM
Is it not true that Binance Singapore froze a user's account because they something they did not want?
This is a matter of domestic laws from Singapore and not the actual guilt itself. CoinJoin transactions based on Singapore's AML procedures may have been violated by the user when they have mixed their withdrawals for privacy.i would love to see a source showing that MAS has published specific guidance or that this is a statutory issue. i doubt singapore AML laws refer to coin mixing. i also skimmed over the new payment services act and it seems pretty lax.
i wonder if binance SG's partners (Xfers or vertex venture holdings) have an internal policy about overt coinjoin/mixing, and the partnership is contingent on complying with it. something tells me it's about an abundance of caution rather than the law itself, and that it's not really binance proper that is behind it.
April 22, 2020, 07:17:49 AM
@Harlot. Hehehe. It was only an argument. I did not try to put guilt. Is it not true that Binance Singapore froze a user's account because they something they did not want?
This is a matter of domestic laws from Singapore and not the actual guilt itself. CoinJoin transactions based on Singapore's AML procedures may have been violated by the user when they have mixed their withdrawals for privacy. However like I said this does not make them automatically guilty of something far more than adding privacy to their transaction, The Singaporean government cannot automatically assume that they are doing illicit activities just because they have mixed their cryptocurrencies. Mixing coins in Singapore might have violated some of their AML laws but its just that they aren't guilty of anything beyond mixing their coins.
April 21, 2020, 08:15:52 PM
@oeleo,
I'd twist your question in my way here:
Even if we bounce our coins into 100 or even 1000 addresses and keep them in 1000 different addresses each, who gives these exchanges the power to ask us where the funds came from? Will they even ask if I use a wallet that's unknown to these exchanges and is highly untraceable for services like chainalysis (like if ever such a wallet arises)? What if I send my BTC from each of those 1000 addresses to Binance? Will they stop me and ask for proof that these addresses belong to me? Where the hell remains anonymity then?
P.S.: What has these exchanges to do with gambling sites? For eg.; If I send some considerable amount of BTC from sportsbet.io to a centralized exchange, won't they accept it as a deposit?
I'd twist your question in my way here:
Even if we bounce our coins into 100 or even 1000 addresses and keep them in 1000 different addresses each, who gives these exchanges the power to ask us where the funds came from? Will they even ask if I use a wallet that's unknown to these exchanges and is highly untraceable for services like chainalysis (like if ever such a wallet arises)? What if I send my BTC from each of those 1000 addresses to Binance? Will they stop me and ask for proof that these addresses belong to me? Where the hell remains anonymity then?
P.S.: What has these exchanges to do with gambling sites? For eg.; If I send some considerable amount of BTC from sportsbet.io to a centralized exchange, won't they accept it as a deposit?
Agreed! However, in this sad world that is the cryptospace, they can clearly lock your account because they would be questioned by a government that gave them the license to operate.
In any case, everyone gave good arguments. Thank you.
@Harlot. Hehehe. It was only an argument. I did not try to put guilt. Is it not true that Binance Singapore froze a user's account because they something they did not want?
April 21, 2020, 01:57:59 PM
I know it's ridiculous, I'm laughing myself about it.
Imagine someone accepting payments in BTC and he receives tainted bitcoins. If we follow their reasoning he will be linked to a criminal person and he will start to be in trouble at the moment he deposits to an exchange platform. They will gladly provide any information collected to the police upon request.
And exchange platforms are the bridge between the crypto world and the traditional banking system for the majority of people since we don't massively use DEXs.
The trend will be to say "people have to make their due diligence before receiving a payment" but how do you want the average Joe to make it when the majority uses a web-based wallet, don't even know how to sign a message, etc.
Imagine saying "Show me your bitcoin first" when you're selling something
What is considered as a tainted coin, it's difficult to say, they mostly rely on companies I mentioned and the large databases they all are building, and it's very hard to find information about it since it's not exactly something that's been publicly known.
April 21, 2020, 01:43:49 PM
Agreed. Privacy is a fundamental right, however, that was not the argument. I was asking why or how can we assume that regular people who use bitcoin only as a speculative investment, or use it legally, mix their coins? This would put taint on their coins and also put their accounts on exchanges at risk.
I've replied with your argument earlier but it seems like it wasn't enough for you. Let me explain that this is an invalid argument. Why? Your argument already put guilt in their actions just because they are using a mixer for their daily activities. In simple terms if we put this in a court the roles will be reverse and now the burden of proof even though the defendant is not yet proven guilty is on them just because they use a mixer. Well in our law the burden of proof is always the ones who are accusing the defendant and they should always prove that this normal users you are talking about are using mixers illegally.
April 21, 2020, 12:37:00 PM
@oeleo,
I'd twist your question in my way here:
Even if we bounce our coins into 100 or even 1000 addresses and keep them in 1000 different addresses each, who gives these exchanges the power to ask us where the funds came from? Will they even ask if I use a wallet that's unknown to these exchanges and is highly untraceable for services like chainalysis (like if ever such a wallet arises)? What if I send my BTC from each of those 1000 addresses to Binance? Will they stop me and ask for proof that these addresses belong to me? Where the hell remains anonymity then?
P.S.: What has these exchanges to do with gambling sites? For eg.; If I send some considerable amount of BTC from sportsbet.io to a centralized exchange, won't they accept it as a deposit?
I'd twist your question in my way here:
Even if we bounce our coins into 100 or even 1000 addresses and keep them in 1000 different addresses each, who gives these exchanges the power to ask us where the funds came from? Will they even ask if I use a wallet that's unknown to these exchanges and is highly untraceable for services like chainalysis (like if ever such a wallet arises)? What if I send my BTC from each of those 1000 addresses to Binance? Will they stop me and ask for proof that these addresses belong to me? Where the hell remains anonymity then?
P.S.: What has these exchanges to do with gambling sites? For eg.; If I send some considerable amount of BTC from sportsbet.io to a centralized exchange, won't they accept it as a deposit?
April 21, 2020, 09:36:17 AM
I know it's not a mixer but the point is about tainted coins and how we will become discriminated
It's ridiculous. What counts as "tainted" bitcoin? Anything that has been mixed? Anything that has been traded peer-to-peer? Anything that has been part of a CoinJoin transaction? Anything from a casino? How far back do we look? If you go back far enough, the vast majority of bitcoins in circulation will have been "tainted" in some way. What if I bounce my bitcoin between 10 brand new addresses? Does that make it "clean" again? How about 20 addresses? How about 100? How do I know that bitcoin I am buying completely legitimately won't be declared "tainted" by another exchange for some other obscure reason?Centralized exchanges are starting to make rules about what their users can and cannot spend their own money on, and who they are and are not allowed to transfer their own money to. It goes against the very idea of bitcoin being decentralized and uncensorable, the very nature of bitcoin, the very thing bitcoin was designed to do. Everyone should be avoiding these exchanges at all costs.
Privacy was the main reason I initially chose to avoid centralized exchanges and do all my trading peer-to-peer, but as time goes on, the list of reasons to avoid CEXs just keeps growing and growing.
April 21, 2020, 04:15:34 AM
Is it just the withdrawal action that this Binance and other Exchange Mafias prevent you from conducting on their app/site or they also don't allow deposits if we use mixing services to hide our transactions from being traced that we send to these exchanges?
What makes them decide whether the coins are coming from a "bad" source and gives them the right to stop us from using these services? If these Exchanges and other major places won't allow us to use mixers for our own good, don't you think that more people will get into the darknet and use the mixing for the real bad then due to being provoked?
What makes them decide whether the coins are coming from a "bad" source and gives them the right to stop us from using these services? If these Exchanges and other major places won't allow us to use mixers for our own good, don't you think that more people will get into the darknet and use the mixing for the real bad then due to being provoked?
KYT (Know your transaction) with the help of blockchain intelligence companies like Chainalysis or Elliptic having a lot of clients such as Binance and even governments.
A platform can well freeze users' accounts and ask questions like what are the origins of your funds. I'm lazy to search but I remember someone who got 2 accounts blocked on 2 exchange platforms because the bitcoins were coming from Bisq. (I know it's not a mixer but the point is about tainted coins and how we will become discriminated (Banknotes are used in illegal activities and tainted yet nothing is done, what could be done btw))
Companies are building databases to link BTC addresses to know identities. Yeah, it's ironic in a world fo decentralization, anonymous transactions and privacy generally speaking. I see a privacy concern for bitcoiners.
These same companies supposed to promote the crypto sphere.
So all the persons praising Binance and co here and there should also remember what they're doing against people
April 20, 2020, 06:13:44 PM
Is it just the withdrawal action that this Binance and other Exchange Mafias prevent you from conducting on their app/site or they also don't allow deposits if we use mixing services to hide our transactions from being traced that we send to these exchanges?
What makes them decide whether the coins are coming from a "bad" source and gives them the right to stop us from using these services? If these Exchanges and other major places won't allow us to use mixers for our own good, don't you think that more people will get into the darknet and use the mixing for the real bad then due to being provoked?
What makes them decide whether the coins are coming from a "bad" source and gives them the right to stop us from using these services? If these Exchanges and other major places won't allow us to use mixers for our own good, don't you think that more people will get into the darknet and use the mixing for the real bad then due to being provoked?
April 20, 2020, 04:39:53 AM
This would put taint on their coins and also put their accounts on exchanges at risk.
From the data I have discussed earlier in this thread, 40% of coins passed through mixers come directly from exchange accounts, and more still will come from exchanges via either someone's personal wallet or via another mixer. There is therefore a significant amount of bitcoin from exchanges being mixed. It isn't a frequent occurrence for exchange accounts to be put at risk by this, or else it wouldn't be happening so much.As LeGaulois says, the desire for privacy and mixing or similar techniques is only going to increase with time. How will exchanges be able to discriminate against "tainted" bitcoin when the vast majority of coins of in existence have been mixed or otherwise anonymized at some point?
April 20, 2020, 01:39:03 AM
...
There are many legitime reasons to seek privacy with Bitcoin for things we do in our daily life and there is a difference to make between 2 things, privacy, and secrecy, and both are different.
Why don't you let the door of your house open when you get sex with your wife so? There are certain things you don't need the world to know about.
Perhaps you don't get why privacy is needed because you have no need yourself and maybe a limited usage of BTC.
Quote
Financial privacy is an essential element to fungibility in Bitcoin: if you can meaningfully distinguish one coin from another, then their fungibility is weak. If our fungibility is too weak in practice, then we cannot be decentralized: if someone important announces a list of stolen coins they won't accept coins derived from, you must carefully check coins you accept against that list and return the ones that fail. Everyone gets stuck checking blacklists issued by various authorities because in that world we'd all not like to get stuck with bad coins. This adds friction and transactional costs and makes Bitcoin less valuable as a money.
There is more to read here Why privacy to understand better why it's not needed to be 'suspicious' about bitcoiners who aren't ready to display their anus to others.
Believe me or not within 5 years we will wee more persons looking to increase their privacy with BTC (especially when it will become heavily regulated, taxed,...) we will see more solution like Wasabi, Samourai, mixers,... more tech will emerge, BTC will improve itself and finally it will become a standard.
I always thought Coinjoin should have been included in Bitcoin Core from the start.
I dont argue against privacy - that is fine. nobody does. as long as there is a transparent way where you / regul / enforments can show all is compliant and no shit happened
April 20, 2020, 12:14:06 AM
I was asking why or how can we assume that regular people who use bitcoin only as a speculative investment, or use it legally, mix their coins? This would put taint on their coins and also put their accounts on exchanges at risk.
I replied way up there with an example of how regular people back then probably wished they had a way to anonymize their wallets back then, or at least give them a better degree of privacy.
Again, you assume if I mix my coins, I taint them. Assumption again is mixing is going to get your coins dirty. Roger Ver, among others, got his bitcoins from an auction of seized bitcoins. Those were definitely tainted. He's doing ok.
Exchanges, banks. You put your money with them and you're definitely tainting them. Banks = provably most frequent financial offenders.
April 19, 2020, 08:40:13 PM
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Because privacy is a fundamental right. You don't have to be doing something illegal to want to keep your financial dealings private or to obfuscate how much bitcoin you are holding.Why do regular people who own fiat not post their bank statements publicly?
Why do regular people who own gold not post their holdings publicly?
Why do regular people who own stocks and shares not post their holdings publicly?
Why should bitcoin users be any different?
Bitcoin is unique in that anyone in the world can see what you are holding if they know your address(es), and so bitcoin is unique in its need for mixing services.
Agreed. Privacy is a fundamental right, however, that was not the argument. I was asking why or how can we assume that regular people who use bitcoin only as a speculative investment, or use it legally, mix their coins? This would put taint on their coins and also put their accounts on exchanges at risk.
April 19, 2020, 04:16:52 PM
...
There are many legitime reasons to seek privacy with Bitcoin for things we do in our daily life and there is a difference to make between 2 things, privacy, and secrecy, and both are different.
Why don't you let the door of your house open when you get sex with your wife so? There are certain things you don't need the world to know about.
Perhaps you don't get why privacy is needed because you have no need yourself and maybe a limited usage of BTC.
Quote
Financial privacy is an essential element to fungibility in Bitcoin: if you can meaningfully distinguish one coin from another, then their fungibility is weak. If our fungibility is too weak in practice, then we cannot be decentralized: if someone important announces a list of stolen coins they won't accept coins derived from, you must carefully check coins you accept against that list and return the ones that fail. Everyone gets stuck checking blacklists issued by various authorities because in that world we'd all not like to get stuck with bad coins. This adds friction and transactional costs and makes Bitcoin less valuable as a money.
There is more to read here Why privacy to understand better why it's not needed to be 'suspicious' about bitcoiners who aren't ready to display their anus to others.
Believe me or not within 5 years we will wee more persons looking to increase their privacy with BTC (especially when it will become heavily regulated, taxed,...) we will see more solution like Wasabi, Samourai, mixers,... more tech will emerge, BTC will improve itself and finally it will become a standard.
I always thought Coinjoin should have been included in Bitcoin Core from the start.
April 19, 2020, 11:59:34 AM
Debunk what agenda and use case you have. It cannot be a good one
So because I value my privacy, by your logic I must inherently be up to something shady or immoral? So why do you post under a pseudonym? I'll ask again for your real name, address, and all your email and social media logins. After all, you've just said that privacy is "not needed for normal people". Why won't you share that information? What have you got to hide?I suppose it makes sense that someone who shills for a privacy invading, centralized scam like BSV doesn't understand why the average person might value their privacy. Perhaps if the world wasn't filled with identity thieves like Craig Wright, some people might be less concerned with keeping their KYC data to themselves.
April 19, 2020, 11:36:58 AM
Lol, you re just on the track to enable, scale up crime.
Cash is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban it?The internet is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban it?
Tor is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban it?
Encryption is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should be we ban it?
Mixers are used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban them?
Just because criminals use a service doesn't mean the service is untrustworthy, immoral, illegal, unnecessary, or unwanted.
Only criminal or dumb idiots try to hide
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, is such a mind-numbingly stupid argument that is beggars belief how often it gets repeated. If you are so unexceptional, so unassuming, so uninteresting, so meek, so pitiful, that you have nothing to fear by letting everybody and their aunt monitor your every action, movement, communication, transaction, then so be it. Please post your real name, social media profiles, email addresses, and passwords to this thread, so we can all take a good look around. Yeah, I didn't think so.Quote from: Glenn Greenwald
The old cliché is often mocked though basically true: there’s no reason to worry about surveillance if you have nothing to hide. That mindset creates the incentive to be as compliant and inconspicuous as possible: those who think that way decide it’s in their best interests to provide authorities with as little reason as possible to care about them. That’s accomplished by never stepping out of line. Those willing to live their lives that way will be indifferent to the loss of privacy because they feel that they lose nothing from it. Above all else, that’s what a Surveillance State does: it breeds fear of doing anything out of the ordinary by creating a class of meek citizens who know they are being constantly watched.
Quote from: Jacob Appelbaum
There is the inherently selfish response of ‘I have nothing to hide’. Well it is true that I am not ill. It is true that I am not blind. But I still want to live in a world that has hospitals. I still want to live on a street that has accessibility for blind people. And it is also the case that I want to live in a world where everyone has privacy, thus dignity, confidentiality and integrity in their daily lives, without having to ask for it, to beg it from a master. Because it is the case that when you ask someone for those things, they may not grant them. And then you will know that you are not free.
You just talking ppl into using it, cause you might need it.
Better inform ppl how bad mixers are. There is no proper discussion, cause it is shit, and not needed for normal ppl at all.
Debunk what agenda and use case you have. It cannot be a good one
April 19, 2020, 10:30:27 AM
Agreed. For this reason, did criminals find a new method to trick Chainanalysis and make it appear that they are regular people randomly mixing their coins?
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
It doesn't mean if a person automatically uses Mixers will then he or she be is in a process of doing an illicit activity. I've seen enough posts here in the forum on how they want to avoid KYC from using a DEX or other ways to exchange their crypto, I've seen enough posts on how they want to buy Bitcoin without verifying something or using their credit cards, I've seen enough posts on how they can transact online without providing any personal information, all of this posts/threads just implies that a lot of people still aim to have privacy because they value it too much that's why they use mixers as well. If Chainalysis assumes that everyone who are using mixers are criminals then they must do more better research than this.
April 19, 2020, 08:58:39 AM
Agreed. For this reason, did criminals find a new method to trick Chainanalysis and make it appear that they are regular people randomly mixing their coins?
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Actually, I don't think many criminals who first used Bitcoin really understood its architecture the way the devs or enthusiasts did (to me, it explains why so many like SR and AB and other P2P sellers in US got caught so easily). But certainly, pre-existing laundering methods would have been applied - under/over-invoicing, obfuscating physical beneficiaries, etc. and then they probably topped up the act with Bitcoin.
Why would regular people want privacy? Seriously? Google it, friend. Or ask Vitalik Buterin or I dunno, others, how much spam he gets every day asking for crypto cause people knew his wallet address and how much he holds.
Also, a Chainalysis whistleblower basically admitted that forensics software like theirs may not be as sophisticated as we're led to believe: https://news.bitcoin.com/chainalysis-whistleblower-shares-company-secrets-in-explosive-ama/
April 19, 2020, 07:53:43 AM
Lol, you re just on the track to enable, scale up crime.
Cash is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban it?The internet is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban it?
Tor is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban it?
Encryption is used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should be we ban it?
Mixers are used by many people, and some of them are criminals. Should we ban them?
Just because criminals use a service doesn't mean the service is untrustworthy, immoral, illegal, unnecessary, or unwanted.
Only criminal or dumb idiots try to hide
Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, is such a mind-numbingly stupid argument that is beggars belief how often it gets repeated. If you are so unexceptional, so unassuming, so uninteresting, so meek, so pitiful, that you have nothing to fear by letting everybody and their aunt monitor your every action, movement, communication, transaction, then so be it. Please post your real name, social media profiles, email addresses, and passwords to this thread, so we can all take a good look around. Yeah, I didn't think so.Quote from: Glenn Greenwald
The old cliché is often mocked though basically true: there’s no reason to worry about surveillance if you have nothing to hide. That mindset creates the incentive to be as compliant and inconspicuous as possible: those who think that way decide it’s in their best interests to provide authorities with as little reason as possible to care about them. That’s accomplished by never stepping out of line. Those willing to live their lives that way will be indifferent to the loss of privacy because they feel that they lose nothing from it. Above all else, that’s what a Surveillance State does: it breeds fear of doing anything out of the ordinary by creating a class of meek citizens who know they are being constantly watched.
Quote from: Jacob Appelbaum
There is the inherently selfish response of ‘I have nothing to hide’. Well it is true that I am not ill. It is true that I am not blind. But I still want to live in a world that has hospitals. I still want to live on a street that has accessibility for blind people. And it is also the case that I want to live in a world where everyone has privacy, thus dignity, confidentiality and integrity in their daily lives, without having to ask for it, to beg it from a master. Because it is the case that when you ask someone for those things, they may not grant them. And then you will know that you are not free.
April 19, 2020, 07:40:51 AM
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Because privacy is a fundamental right. You don't have to be doing something illegal to want to keep your financial dealings private or to obfuscate how much bitcoin you are holding.Why do regular people who own fiat not post their bank statements publicly?
Why do regular people who own gold not post their holdings publicly?
Why do regular people who own stocks and shares not post their holdings publicly?
Why should bitcoin users be any different?
Bitcoin is unique in that anyone in the world can see what you are holding if they know your address(es), and so bitcoin is unique in its need for mixing services.
Lol, you re just on the track to enable, scale up crime. Nothing else.
Average Joe doesn't care cause he doesn't do anything wrong and in case u need to proof where you ve you funds from, or u gonna lose it / getting confiscated cause u cannot proof they might be stolen/ tainted
Only criminal or dumb idiots try to hide, or help to
Btw, privacy never means anonymity
April 19, 2020, 03:49:07 AM
-snip-
This is part of the argument I make when talking to people about why they should care about their online privacy.Many people say they aren't overly concerned about their online privacy because they either don't think they are doing anything illegal/immoral/wrong/embarrassing/etc. that they want to keep private, or because they don't fear their government using that information against them. That may be the case now, but what about for the next 50 years? Do you trust every future administration/government for the rest of your life? Because they will have access to your data too. Do you trust them not to pass any laws that might make things you are saying or doing now cause issues for you in the future. Do you trust them to use your data against you? What about all the administrations of all the other countries your government shares your data with, and there are many.
There could be any number of laws passed, new governments, global developments, etc., in the rest of your life that will make you wish you paid much closer attention to your online privacy, such as Executive Order 6102. Mixing or otherwise anonymizing your bitcoin is good practice for everyone, regardless of what you are using bitcoin for.
April 19, 2020, 03:13:14 AM
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Because privacy is a fundamental right. You don't have to be doing something illegal to want to keep your financial dealings private or to obfuscate how much bitcoin you are holding.In these uncertain times, it's important to remember the stakes. It may seem unlikely now, but another Executive Order 6102 -- directed at Bitcoin -- is not impossible. The less that exchanges and governments know about your holdings, the better.
April 19, 2020, 02:31:48 AM
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
Because privacy is a fundamental right. You don't have to be doing something illegal to want to keep your financial dealings private or to obfuscate how much bitcoin you are holding.Why do regular people who own fiat not post their bank statements publicly?
Why do regular people who own gold not post their holdings publicly?
Why do regular people who own stocks and shares not post their holdings publicly?
Why should bitcoin users be any different?
Bitcoin is unique in that anyone in the world can see what you are holding if they know your address(es), and so bitcoin is unique in its need for mixing services.
April 18, 2020, 11:04:46 PM
Is there available data where it graphs for what those legal transactions to bitcoin mixing are? There might be more criminals that have become more sophisticated in their bitcoin laundry methods hehehe.
Actually, technology and sophistication come before the crime. Criminals are simply among those more likely to be early adopters of new/emerging technology. That's a proven enforcement pattern, which is why enforcement have also been known to recruit former criminals -- how else do you get ahead of the curve right?
But yeah. Coming back to the headline, that's all the stats prove. That Bitcoin users want more privacy.
Agreed. For this reason, did criminals find a new method to trick Chainanalysis and make it appear that they are regular people randomly mixing their coins?
Why would regular people who use bitcoin as a speculative investment want to mix their coins?
April 18, 2020, 04:03:49 AM
Is there available data where it graphs for what those legal transactions to bitcoin mixing are?
I provided the link for my data in my post above - https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612You can enter anything in the "Name" and "Email" boxes - you don't need to receive an email with a code or similar to progress to the webinar video. If you skip to 37:13 in the video, you'll see the complete breakdown of source of funds sent to mixers. Combining centralized, p2p exchanges, and other mixers, you account for three quarters of all coins being sent through mixers.
April 18, 2020, 03:42:27 AM
Is there available data where it graphs for what those legal transactions to bitcoin mixing are? There might be more criminals that have become more sophisticated in their bitcoin laundry methods hehehe.
Actually, technology and sophistication come before the crime. Criminals are simply among those more likely to be early adopters of new/emerging technology. That's a proven enforcement pattern, which is why enforcement have also been known to recruit former criminals -- how else do you get ahead of the curve right?
But yeah. Coming back to the headline, that's all the stats prove. That Bitcoin users want more privacy.
April 17, 2020, 08:48:56 PM
The stats/news shown by ETFBitcoin and oeleo show that only a minority of transactions (2% is only 1 in 50!) related to Bitcoin mixing are for illicit purposes. And we already saw this drop even as early as 2016/17 -- post-Silk Road, people already understood Bitcoin wasn't good for deep dark bad things. Those who didn't get the lessons learnt it during the Alphabay takedown in 2017.
Users are wisening up and asking for anonymity, cause for celebration, and vindication of Bitcoin's own development direction towards privacy.
Users are wisening up and asking for anonymity, cause for celebration, and vindication of Bitcoin's own development direction towards privacy.
Is there available data where it graphs for what those legal transactions to bitcoin mixing are? There might be more criminals that have become more sophisticated in their bitcoin laundry methods hehehe.
April 15, 2020, 10:05:43 AM
Governments around the world are becoming more populist and moving to the Socialist mode. They want votes from the welfare rats, at the expense of the hard-working population. This phenomenon is occurring in almost all the continents. And the problem with Socialism is that within a short time, you run out of rich people whom you can loot. All these rich people would either migrate to some other country, or they will become poor after losing their wealth.
The tax authorities are obviously afraid of mixers, because they give an option for the Bitcoin users to refuse unjust demands from the IT department. Let's see for how long they will tolerate them.
The tax authorities are obviously afraid of mixers, because they give an option for the Bitcoin users to refuse unjust demands from the IT department. Let's see for how long they will tolerate them.
April 15, 2020, 01:30:20 AM
The stats/news shown by ETFBitcoin and oeleo show that only a minority of transactions (2% is only 1 in 50!) related to Bitcoin mixing are for illicit purposes. And we already saw this drop even as early as 2016/17 -- post-Silk Road, people already understood Bitcoin wasn't good for deep dark bad things. Those who didn't get the lessons learnt it during the Alphabay takedown in 2017.
Users are wisening up and asking for anonymity, cause for celebration, and vindication of Bitcoin's own development direction towards privacy.
Users are wisening up and asking for anonymity, cause for celebration, and vindication of Bitcoin's own development direction towards privacy.
April 14, 2020, 09:52:06 PM
@malevolent. Exchanges can also declare a hack then issue a token to sell to their users to help the exchange raise the funds required to replace the stolen funds. This money carousel scheme was created by Bitfinex before hehehehe.
April 14, 2020, 03:52:43 PM
In the name of compliance, your seized funds go to the exchange's bottom line. Which, more often than not, is itself stolen by hackers in the event of an exchange hack. So we lose, eventually the exchange loses too, and the only people who win from this are the very criminals the AML system was designed to stop.
Criminals and the tax man, assuming exchanges report the seized money as income.
...unless, oh wait, they declare they have been hacked.
https://techcrunch.com/2018/06/19/korean-crypto-exchange-bithumb-says-it-lost-over-30m-following-a-hack/
April 14, 2020, 10:52:59 AM
I wonder if this is a simple increase of users with a median volume or is just somebody with a huge stash using their service to clean coins.
The "record" is still just only 1000 BTC up for a month so if we assume somebody is doing this twice with an exchange in a middle to further clean his footsteps the sum becomes ridiculous small, to signal a change in users' behavior.
I highly doubt that the average Joe (omg, I've written hoe the first time:
) has suddenly realized it's better that nobody knows where his coins are coming from.
Oh, Binance again, I simply can't get enough when I hear how much they are fucking with their users and still there is a mass of newbies bowing down to their god CZ and praising how much this cancerous entity is doing for the crypto world.
Btw, you know Binance is running its business in Singapore without a real license, right?
So they will bend down to anyrequest order from the Monetary Authority of Singapore!
Grab your popcorn and be ready for some serious fireworks when the EU will start looking at what they are doing in Malta.
The "record" is still just only 1000 BTC up for a month so if we assume somebody is doing this twice with an exchange in a middle to further clean his footsteps the sum becomes ridiculous small, to signal a change in users' behavior.
I highly doubt that the average Joe (omg, I've written hoe the first time:
) has suddenly realized it's better that nobody knows where his coins are coming from.The article also mentioned that Binance Singapore froze customer's accounts because it does not tolerate transactions that are directly and indirectly associated with businesses that offer gambling, darknet and mixing services.
Seriously, screw Binance and screw all services which pull crap like this. Oh, Binance again, I simply can't get enough when I hear how much they are fucking with their users and still there is a mass of newbies bowing down to their god CZ and praising how much this cancerous entity is doing for the crypto world.
Btw, you know Binance is running its business in Singapore without a real license, right?
So they will bend down to any
Grab your popcorn and be ready for some serious fireworks when the EU will start looking at what they are doing in Malta.
April 14, 2020, 03:20:49 AM
I am starting to think we're slowly moving towards the point where we're going to launch some technology we'll auto-destroy ourselves with - very weird times we're living in.
I think it's already happening with the advent of things like Google Home and Google Nest. Not content with simply recording your online activities, corporations have now moved to recording everything that happens inside your own home. Not only that, but people are paying for the privilege of putting themselves under 24/7 surveillance. The only thing they can't do yet is record your thoughts, but I have no doubt that given enough time the technology to do that will exist and Google or similar will release a "thought assistant", and people will pay for that too.Quote from: Glenn Greenwald
No matter the specific techniques involved, historically mass surveillance has had several constant attributes. Initially, it is always the country’s dissidents and marginalized who bear the brunt of the surveillance, leading those who support the government or are merely apathetic to mistakenly believe they are immune. And history shows that the mere existence of a mass surveillance apparatus, regardless of how it is used, is in itself sufficient to stifle dissent. A citizenry that is aware of always being watched quickly becomes a compliant and fearful one.
Such mass surveillance is the first step on the road to government doing whatever they like.
April 14, 2020, 02:00:57 AM
It's very unfortunate that seeking privacy makes you a marked man.
Sometimes I feel like the entire society is just a glorified herd.
Yes, you're right, it's quite usual that the ones that "stand out" with their privacy settings get to be considered to "have something to hide" and the focus can get onto them. (It doesn't always happen like this though).
But this is imho related to the fact many can't comprehend others have different way of thinking and different reasons (the crypto example is that people may seek for mixers because they are not comfortable others peaking into their pockets; of course, there will always be the bad guys too using mixers).
April 13, 2020, 08:03:06 PM
It's very unfortunate that seeking privacy makes you a marked man. If the base level of transparency that Bitcoin has was applied to conventional transactions people would be rutting in the streets and firing politicians out of cannons.
We've been taught that way. You don't have a Facebook, Twitter or Instagram? You're considered a weirdo. I am starting to think we're slowly moving towards the point where we're going to launch some technology we'll auto-destroy ourselves with - very weird times we're living in.The way they educate us since we're born to be 100% transparent with the government and submit to them while they're hiding in the dark is disgusting. It's either all or none, but it takes such events as pandemics to find out that we've been paying taxes to have pandemic charities set up asking for donations and our grandparents & parents have worked hard to bring down communism for hospitals to take them off ICUs* and so on.
They're literally shitting on every single thing our past generations paid, worked & fought for.
* I get the point of removing the ones with the least chances of survival from ICUs to put those with the highest chance on them. But if govs were to take proper precaution, we would've had no more situations like overcrowded hospitals.
April 13, 2020, 06:51:20 PM
Until all payments are indistinguishable exchanges will keep acting like this. As long as tracking Bitcoin users/coins is possible, doing that is seen as being 'compliant' with AML regulations, recommendations, etc.
In the name of compliance, your seized funds go to the exchange's bottom line. Which, more often than not, is itself stolen by hackers in the event of an exchange hack. So we lose, eventually the exchange loses too, and the only people who win from this are the very criminals the AML system was designed to stop.
April 13, 2020, 03:28:32 PM
Seriously, screw Binance and screw all services which pull crap like this. This is the kind of thing we moved away from fiat to try to escape - third party entities having control over your money, telling you what you are and are not allowed to spend your own money on, censoring your transactions, etc. If Binance don't like gambling, fine, don't provide gambling services. But tracking my bitcoin after it has been withdrawn from Binance and then shutting my account down because they found out I later took part in some gambling is some next level privacy invasion. Just another reason to add to the endless list of reasons to never used centralized scam exchanges like this.
It's very unfortunate that seeking privacy makes you a marked man. If the base level of transparency that Bitcoin has was applied to conventional transactions people would be rutting in the streets and firing politicians out of cannons.
Until all payments are indistinguishable exchanges will keep acting like this. As long as tracking Bitcoin users/coins is possible, doing that is seen as being 'compliant' with AML regulations, recommendations, etc.
April 13, 2020, 12:58:53 PM
It's very unfortunate that seeking privacy makes you a marked man. If the base level of transparency that Bitcoin has was applied to conventional transactions people would be rutting in the streets and firing politicians out of cannons.
April 13, 2020, 10:51:23 AM
The thing is the majority don't care about privacy, it's especially available for the persons entering into crypto the past years since they're only interested in speculating (and since they need to use a middleman (exchange platform) which ask your personal information...)
They don't care about who does what for which purpose, how to do this and that. Nope all that is interesting them is how to deposit money, to buy BTC and to stat to speculate
Years ago people were talking about tech, nowadays they talk about trading, pump, and dump, etc. Years ago we were talking about decentralization, nowadays people massively use centralized services.
Privacy is a valid argument for us but not for others and you can even avoid using it with them.
They don't care about who does what for which purpose, how to do this and that. Nope all that is interesting them is how to deposit money, to buy BTC and to stat to speculate
Years ago people were talking about tech, nowadays they talk about trading, pump, and dump, etc. Years ago we were talking about decentralization, nowadays people massively use centralized services.
Privacy is a valid argument for us but not for others and you can even avoid using it with them.
April 13, 2020, 01:32:18 AM
The article also mentioned that Binance Singapore froze customer's accounts because it does not tolerate transactions that are directly and indirectly associated with businesses that offer gambling, darknet and mixing services.
Seriously, screw Binance and screw all services which pull crap like this. This is the kind of thing we moved away from fiat to try to escape - third party entities having control over your money, telling you what you are and are not allowed to spend your own money on, censoring your transactions, etc. If Binance don't like gambling, fine, don't provide gambling services. But tracking my bitcoin after it has been withdrawn from Binance and then shutting my account down because they found out I later took part in some gambling is some next level privacy invasion. Just another reason to add to the endless list of reasons to never used centralized scam exchanges like this.As ETFbitcoin has said, the data show that only around 2% of mixed coins are associated with either darknet markets or with gambling (https://register.gotowebinar.com/recording/8980410054773689612). The vast majority of mixed coins come directly from exchanges, meaning it is largely people trying to prevent entities such as Binance from spying on them. It's great to see more people are taking their privacy seriously.
April 12, 2020, 07:26:05 PM
The article also mentioned that Binance Singapore froze customer's accounts because it does not tolerate transactions that are directly and indirectly associated with businesses that offer gambling, darknet and mixing services.
I reckon those 3 are bitcoin's biggest use cases hehehe.
Samourai Wallet’s Whirlpool has seen a notable increase in user activity during 2020 so far.
While Whirlpool saw a retraction in user activity at the end of 2019 after posting a record of 303.55 BTC in volume during October, each month of Q1 2020 set consecutive records for the number of Bitcoin’s mixed on the platform
In January, a new record of 356.65 BTC was set, followed by 529.05 BTC in trade during February, and 1,523.45 BTC in March.
April appears on-course to set yet another record for the service — with 1,020.80 BTC or 67% of March’s total having been mixed just 11 days into the month.
Read in full https://cointelegraph.com/news/coin-mixers-record-breaking-month-proves-bitcoin-users-want-anonymity
I reckon those 3 are bitcoin's biggest use cases hehehe.
Samourai Wallet’s Whirlpool has seen a notable increase in user activity during 2020 so far.
While Whirlpool saw a retraction in user activity at the end of 2019 after posting a record of 303.55 BTC in volume during October, each month of Q1 2020 set consecutive records for the number of Bitcoin’s mixed on the platform
In January, a new record of 356.65 BTC was set, followed by 529.05 BTC in trade during February, and 1,523.45 BTC in March.
April appears on-course to set yet another record for the service — with 1,020.80 BTC or 67% of March’s total having been mixed just 11 days into the month.
Read in full https://cointelegraph.com/news/coin-mixers-record-breaking-month-proves-bitcoin-users-want-anonymity
Jump to: