Topic: Announcing the Bitcoin Laundry (beta) (Read 11364 times)
Do anyone can clear me this consept please?I mean what is the difference bettwen this and bitmixer.io?do both works same or both are different?and please no pm's
How does this work and how do people know that it has actually been laundered what processes have you gone through to do this
Ifyou really looking to launder some money
Use bitmixer , they are reputated and wait won't be that long
How does this work and how do people know that it has actually been laundered what processes have you gone through to do this
all sorted now cheers mike
Good
So did you got your coins laundered or he just sent them back?
all sorted now cheers mike
Can you explain how this works?
Sure!
You visit the site and tell it you want to launder a certain number of bitcoins. You provide that number, along with the bitcoin address to deliver to.
The site generates a fresh new Bitcoin address and presents it to you with instructions to pay your desired amount to it.
You send the requisite number of Bitcoins to that address.
Once that transaction gets 1 confirmation, the site sends the address you provided the same number of Bitcoins, minus the commission.
Make sense?
Im sitting with 69 confirmations and no sign of my coins!? Im concerned.....
It has been so long does this even works anymore?
Anyway just to clear you up , if mike implemented it right , it will take time to change your (illegal BTC) to good btc , by waiting for someone else to contribute in the pool
Last transaction I seen on another thread were Mike confirmed it was November 2014. Guy got his coin back just a little over 18 hours. Way past that for me.... The wait is killing me!
Can you explain how this works?
Sure!
You visit the site and tell it you want to launder a certain number of bitcoins. You provide that number, along with the bitcoin address to deliver to.
The site generates a fresh new Bitcoin address and presents it to you with instructions to pay your desired amount to it.
You send the requisite number of Bitcoins to that address.
Once that transaction gets 1 confirmation, the site sends the address you provided the same number of Bitcoins, minus the commission.
Make sense?
Im sitting with 69 confirmations and no sign of my coins!? Im concerned.....
It has been so long does this even works anymore?
Anyway just to clear you up , if mike implemented it right , it will take time to change your (illegal BTC) to good btc , by waiting for someone else to contribute in the pool
Can you explain how this works?
Sure!
You visit the site and tell it you want to launder a certain number of bitcoins. You provide that number, along with the bitcoin address to deliver to.
The site generates a fresh new Bitcoin address and presents it to you with instructions to pay your desired amount to it.
You send the requisite number of Bitcoins to that address.
Once that transaction gets 1 confirmation, the site sends the address you provided the same number of Bitcoins, minus the commission.
Make sense?
Im sitting with 69 confirmations and no sign of my coins!? Im concerned.....
The commission dropped to 0.5%.
Not quite first to market.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/announcing-bitlaundry-decorrelated-payment-service-963
https://bitlaundry.appspot.com/
Also, another interesting thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anonymity-241
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/announcing-bitlaundry-decorrelated-payment-service-963
https://bitlaundry.appspot.com/
Also, another interesting thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/anonymity-241
Have any of the suggested improvements in this thread been implemented (since December 2010)?
Is the site still operational?
Is the site still operational?
lemur4bitcoin.com - lemurs for all!
Code:
syadasti@nobody:~/.bitcoin$ dig lemur4bitcoin.com ns
; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P1 <<>> lemur4bitcoin.com ns
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 16483
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;lemur4bitcoin.com. IN NS
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
com. 900 IN SOA a.gtld-servers.net. nstld.verisign-grs.com. 1291404117 1800 900 604800 86400
;; Query time: 146 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Fri Dec 3 20:22:21 2010
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 108
syadasti@nobody:~/.bitcoin$
ZOMG! ; <<>> DiG 9.7.0-P1 <<>> lemur4bitcoin.com ns
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 16483
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;lemur4bitcoin.com. IN NS
;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
com. 900 IN SOA a.gtld-servers.net. nstld.verisign-grs.com. 1291404117 1800 900 604800 86400
;; Query time: 146 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Fri Dec 3 20:22:21 2010
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 108
syadasti@nobody:~/.bitcoin$
Gee Mike, do you have to use the "L" word? ;-)
Are you familiar with 1MDC?
Are you familiar with 1MDC?
I'm familiar with 1MDC. Does L stand for something? I get what you're saying, but miss the reference unless it's simply to "ledger".
...
I can't say it for fear of invoking a demon. When I hear the "L" word I tend to cover my ears and loudly chant LA-LA-LA-LA-LA
lemur4bitcoin.com - lemurs for all!
...less than 200 lines of PHP, plus my bitcoin-php library. I'm looking for the best ideas, though.
The best idea I could give you is : switch to Rails my friend
Sure, because being able to curry my lambdas is really going to address the key problems you mentioned before.
Still, if you let me have your lemur, I will consider your proposal
...less than 200 lines of PHP, plus my bitcoin-php library. I'm looking for the best ideas, though.
The best idea I could give you is : switch to Rails my friend
Gee Mike, do you have to use the "L" word? ;-)
Are you familiar with 1MDC?
Are you familiar with 1MDC?
I'm familiar with 1MDC. Does L stand for something? I get what you're saying, but miss the reference unless it's simply to "ledger".
The more I think about this, the less I want to be a service which holds balances on behalf of depositors. I want my clients' risk exposure to be ephemeral, the duration of generation of a block or three. I also want to maintain the absolute minimal state data on my clients during and after their transactions. I don't want to be the dick who gets his walled seized by Teh Man and leaves thousands of depositors cursing my name.
Still, I like Davout's vision, lemurs and all. What I'm thinking about is a model in which depositors can stake a certain amount of value for a period of time they specify themselves, and after which it's returned to them automatically in full if there isn't a request submitted to make use of their deposit.
Am I right in thinking that since my system would take a commission and thereby build up a balance that over time that balance itself would introduce useful entropy?
As others have mentioned, this would be pretty easy to follow in the block chain. It's not much better than creating a new address and sending some bitcoins to yourself.
I outlined a somewhat easy-to-implement method for totally secure mixing on the wiki's anonymity page:
I outlined a somewhat easy-to-implement method for totally secure mixing on the wiki's anonymity page:
Quote
*Set up two Bitcoin installations.
*Put some amount of BTC in installation B. This is the maximum amount of BTC you can deal with at once (for all customers).
*Customers send BTC to installation A. You send them an equal number of coins (or minus a fee) from installation B. Send as 10-50 BTC increments.
*Send all coins from A to B when all orders are satisfied. You can't send coins from A to B if you have any orders that have not been satisfied from B.
*This can be automated, or you can do everything manually.
*Put some amount of BTC in installation B. This is the maximum amount of BTC you can deal with at once (for all customers).
*Customers send BTC to installation A. You send them an equal number of coins (or minus a fee) from installation B. Send as 10-50 BTC increments.
*Send all coins from A to B when all orders are satisfied. You can't send coins from A to B if you have any orders that have not been satisfied from B.
*This can be automated, or you can do everything manually.
It would be better to enter amount which will be received, not paid. Commision should be added to final amount to send. Currently, when I want to send 1 BTC to someone, I have to calculate commision itself.
Are you performing some scrambling in transaction? For example, when I send 1BTC, it should pay some amount instantly and some amount later even from another sending address. This way it should me much harder to pair both transactions.
By the way, I see you are living in Slovakia. Do you speak Slovak or Czech?
Are you performing some scrambling in transaction? For example, when I send 1BTC, it should pay some amount instantly and some amount later even from another sending address. This way it should me much harder to pair both transactions.
By the way, I see you are living in Slovakia. Do you speak Slovak or Czech?
Okay, amount received not paid is a different use case. The use case I was thinking of was a payment back to oneself on a different one-time address.
No scrambling at the moment. The code is dead simple, less than 200 lines of PHP, plus my bitcoin-php library. I'm looking for the best ideas, though.
Most of my income the past 4 years comes from translating Slovak text into English. I still have a hell of a time carrying on a conversation, but I can read the newspaper pretty well.
You obviously didn't get anything about my idea.
Dude, I'm still trying to catch up on your idea, the background, and why the issues you raise are important. And on this message I wasn't replying to ya
- These 100 BTC are dirty, they come straight from a scammers address
You'd be able to say
- These 100 BTC aggregated to have 0.1% likely to be dirty (depending the proportion of clean/dirty funds you mixed in a single receiving address before redispatching them)
BTW, it looks like you have a lemur on your shoulder. Is that safe?
Yes it is! It was safe for me, not for my bananas
That'd be really cool if you implemented that, I don't have time to do it right now, but if I did I'd put a big fat picture of a laundry machine, a receiving address, and a big fat text box where people would input like a hundred of their addresses separated by spaces, commas, lemurs, whatever for them to receive their funds back in random chunks.
The same would go for the people providing the clean money.
Ideally there would also be a way for the scammer to set the fee he's willing to pay, the more he'll pay, the more people will get incentive to provide clean funds, the more mixed and randomized his laundered funds will be.
Gee Mike, do you have to use the "L" word? ;-)
Are you familiar with 1MDC? It was an anonymising system for use with e-gold.
Basically it's a ledger on top of a ledger. Trades conducted by 1MDC users became invisible to e-gold because they were trading within the same e-gold account, tracked by a separate ledger.
Mybitcoin accomplishes much the same thing for bitcoin.
Mybitcoin users can trade amongst themselves and the trades never show on the bitcoin network because they are tracked on a separate book.
It was I who coined the term "blister" to describe this shared account, or book on book concept.
A system to obscure trades (blister) from the Liberty Reserve accounts ledger is HDMoney.
Shane
PS: about the "L" word. L is defined as structuring a financial transaction to obscure the origin of proceeds of crime. It's not "L" if it's not proceeds of crime. In the federation gone feral, winning a game is now a crime. Fortunately not all humans are subject to that feral fed. So, "L" becomes a matter of what state the winner is subject to - or not. ;-)
Are you familiar with 1MDC? It was an anonymising system for use with e-gold.
Basically it's a ledger on top of a ledger. Trades conducted by 1MDC users became invisible to e-gold because they were trading within the same e-gold account, tracked by a separate ledger.
Mybitcoin accomplishes much the same thing for bitcoin.
Mybitcoin users can trade amongst themselves and the trades never show on the bitcoin network because they are tracked on a separate book.
It was I who coined the term "blister" to describe this shared account, or book on book concept.
A system to obscure trades (blister) from the Liberty Reserve accounts ledger is HDMoney.
Shane
PS: about the "L" word. L is defined as structuring a financial transaction to obscure the origin of proceeds of crime. It's not "L" if it's not proceeds of crime. In the federation gone feral, winning a game is now a crime. Fortunately not all humans are subject to that feral fed. So, "L" becomes a matter of what state the winner is subject to - or not. ;-)
Jump to: