Topic: [ANN] ChipMixer.com - Bitcoin mixer / Bitcoin tumbler - mixing reinvented - page 124. (Read 92891 times)

Future of bitcoin mixing is mixing embedded in the wallet. It is hard to imagine browser without https support. It will be hard to imagine bitcoin wallet without mixing.

We are thinking about it.

Yes, there is no 0.5 mBTC chip. Deposited amount is rounded down to mBTC.

I want to confirm about chips which are available;
In the first page mentioned ; There are chips with 0.001BTC, 0.002 BTC, 0.004 BTC and so on till 4.096 BTC.
So, there are 0.008 BTC, 0.016 BTC, 0.032 BTC, 0.064BTC, 0.128 BTC, 0.256 BTC, 0.512 BTC, 1.024BTC, 2.048 BTC, and 4.096 BTC?
I've sent bitcoin to be mixed, let's say 0.0645788 BTC > since there is no chip available for that amount, it will be 0.064 right?
I consider the rest of it (0.0005788) as donation, am I wrong?

And, in the first page mentioned ; For example you deposit 0.112 BTC and you receive 0.064 + 0.032 + 0.016.
Is that mean if someone send some amounts that can not divide into certain chips that available, will received directly into chipmixer wallet, right? Let's say someone send 0.13956, then he will have some chips : 0.128 + 0.008 + 0.002 + 0.001 and the rest 0.00056 will be received by chipmixer.

Thanks.

Thank you for having me as part of your signature campaign. Grateful for the opportunity to spread the word.

I was just wondering how this business model can stay afloat with the massive costs involved. Darkstar recently returned from his vacation and I noticed the pay out for the two weeks posting spree would have cost Chipmixer more than 2 bitcoins. Nearly $10k for 14 days which is a massive overhead cost. Given that you don't charge fees, I can imagine the signature campaign eating heavily into profits aka donations from generous users of the mixer.

I hope your customers will donate a more generous portion of their mixed coins. I would suggest introducing a fee system similar to bitmixer's traditional pricing model in addition to an option to donate.

I completely agree. If mixers like ChipMixer start getting more popular and even possibly get fully integrated into wallets such as was attempted with the Electrum wallet it would completely change the meaning of using one. Rather than them being seen by the average person as trying to hide something or as possibly money laundering, it could completely remove the negative stigma held against it. Furthermore, a more widespread usage of the mixer would also mean that because of the significant volume of mixing transactions, the actual mixing is much more effective, as there are more outputs and inputs that can mask any relations that could otherwise be found between multiple addresses or individuals.

Non criminals staying away based on your position will give credence to the misconception that mixing services is meant for criminals alone but that will be wrong even if I not been a criminal but value my privacy uses mixing services even if feds comes after me, they would probably do some investigation into my activities before coming at me and if they found nothing incriminating will they still go ahead and also I have not read anywhere that its illegal to send my coins to a mixing service.

What are the chances that you will get the same dirty coins from the same guy multiple times that it could make the government actually think It's you? even If they do, they should be familiar on how mixers work and without proof, nothing much can be done.

People shouldn't let their government bully them.

How is acceptable that you can't keep the minimum of privacy because you are "scarred of the feds"? This means that we can't use VPN or a encrypted and safer email provider to be safer online because we would look like a criminal?

If using a service to keep you private is a "strike" for the feds, then there is something wrong.

I get what you mean. But what I was trying to say is that non-criminals would probably stay away from mixers because of the fear of being suspicious to the feds or whatever government entity. Anyway, maybe I'm just overly paranoid and overthinking stuff  .

There are two definitions of what is 'dirty' coin.

First definition - dirty coin is an illegal coin. Illegal as in "you cannot accept payment with it, they are not worth anything". Because they were used in a way you do not like. Somebody gambled, somebody brought drugs, somebody invested in ICO / BCC / BCH. Bad man, bad money. Dirty money! Me no want dirty money! Sin!
Governments like to have power to control money. They can create as much fiat as they want. They cannot control Bitcoin. But they can control media and what is said about Bitcoin. It is getting more difficult to say that Bitcoin is money of terrorists and drug dealers becase more and more people invest in Bitcoin and they know they are not terrorist nor drug dealers. Still as with civil forfeiture - if you can invalidate somebodys money, you control their wealth.

Second definition which I use - dirty coin is a coin that is linked to myself. If it was withdrawn from KYC exchange or used to buy things online, somebody may and will use it to spy on me and that is why I need to clean it.

Based on those two definitions, I do not believe in illegal coins and there is no possibility to receive dirty coin out of mixer.

Sending chip-sized amount to a single address looks very similar to using ChipMixer. As it may confuse blockchain analysis, it is advisable to try.

I 100% agree with you. By using chipmixer you are essentially increasing the fungibility of your bitcoins. There is a risk of your bitcoins 'worth' less or being blocked by exchanges or other entities if they can be easily traced, but using chipmixer avoids direct connections, meaning that interchangeability is improved.

Receiving 'dirty' coins is always possible, and the risk of that happening on chipmixer is no more likely than on other bitcoin mixers, or even if you just received a regular bitcoin transaction without mixing.

@ chipmixer What do you mean by creating our own chips though? You mean off the site, just loading some regular sized chips ourselves?

But with ChipMixer there's more. You can also get the mixer receipt that you are offered when you mix your coins which effectively proves that the coins that you are using were the ones you got from a mixer, practically proving there is no real link (or very improbably at least) between the chips that you got and any previous activity related to those chips. Of course, this shouldn't be necessary, but in the case that you for whatever reason get suspicion by anyone you don't want to be suspected by, having the receipt can help prove you are in no way related to any kind of illegal activity.

It does not prove they were mixed by ChipMixer... but maybe they were? Lets say you are a blockchain analytist. You encounter ChipMixer-like output. You assume there is 50% probability it may be ChipMixer, so there is 50% chance no link between input and output. You have just gained some fungibility even when you do not use ChipMixer.

Creating your own chips make blockchain analysis harder. We encourage everybody to do that.

True, i guess i've used chipmixer several times myself and the chip values just seem so obvious.

But then again, you'll probably never be called out for receiving someone else's dirty inputs because this kind of stuff happens all the time. It's hard enough to link a pseudo anonymous identifier to a real person(if you take the right precautions), let alone find out the purpose of the transaction on the bitcoin blockchain, especially after you mix your coins.

The main purpose of a mixer is for privacy anyways, so i really don't think you'll encounter any sort of issue with mixing with Chipmixer. You'll have much more risk of getting caught if you use a mixer to buy illegal things than use a mixer and receive dirty coins. Just my opinion.

I agree with most of your post, however, having unconfirmed inputs in a regular size does not prove they were mixed by chipmixer at all... I could easily use some of my unspent outputs in a transaction that generates new outputs with the exact same value as chipmixer's chips...
The proof is the letter chipmixer can give you, signed by them... However, as it has been discussed before, it's not completely sure a judge will allow a signed letter by an anonymous mixer as valid proof.... I know the courts in my country are very bureaucratic and not tech-savvy at all...

There is definitely a possibility that this could happen. But through the use of mixing your coins with chips you are significantly reducing the risk of this happening. There is very little chance anyone can just look at blockchain records and figure out that this chip belonged to you, and is cashed out to x address. There is even less chance of you being accused of using other people's dirty funds when you use chipmixer.

Even if you do find yourself receiving someone else's "dirty" mixed coins, it's not your fault. You can easily prove that your coins were mixed(chips come in regular sizes, makes this easier to prove as well).

In the end, almost all bitcoins can be traced to "dirty" activity. There is really no clean bitcoin if you think about it. If you receive a bitcoin transaction from someone there is probably just as much a probability that the coins are "dirty", and it'll be easier to trace than if you used a mixer.

He's asking if the coins he receives could have been used before by someone who has more to hide than himself. The answer is of course yes. Bitcoins are not newly created by ChipMixer, and your Bitcoins are not destroyed by ChipMixer after receiving them. But that's no different than when you withdraw cash from an ATM, or even receive money on your bank: money transfers hands a lot, and whoever owned it before you has nothing to do with you anymore.

Example: Every British bank note is contaminated by cocaine within weeks of entering circulation

You are not, the addresses you receive from are funded once and once only I believe and when you ask for the withdrawal they are sent to you, the addresses are pre-funded so I doubt you are getting anyone else bitcoins.

just curious, am i receiving someone else dirty coins after the mixing?

Agreed. It's the same thing with wanting to keep your information private when someone asks you how much money you have in your bank account. It's none of their business. Me wanting to mix my bitcoin has nothing to do with legalities or trying to hide something; it has to do with me not wanting to expose to the world how much any given address holds at any given time. While I love the fact that Bitcoin operates on a PUBLIC ledger (unlike the private ledgers that banks use), I don't need everybody to know how much I hodl.

It's all part of the post-privacy way of thinking. The whole narrative about having nothing to hide.

When everyone claims that they having nothing to hide, people who want to keep some form of privacy are automatically suspicious. Private individuals become more and more transparent while governments and corporations become more and more opaque, while ideally it should be the other way round. You can see a similar way of thinking surrounding the TOR browser.