Topic: Are no-KYC services banned? (Read 1039 times)

Do you combine your inputs with those of others when using XMR? You do. So it's a mixer. We can refer to the other users as "mixers" instead of attributing it solely to the network, if you're concerned about the semantics.

No it's not a mixer, and there is no anything centralized that could control transactions.
Even if you combine inputs of Bitcoin with other people it's not a mixer, joinmarket is not a mixer, mimblewimble is not a mixer, etc.
You invented your own definition of mixer that is not corresponding to reality.

vjudeu

copper member

Activity: 906

Merit: 2258

Quote

You'd need to clarify what constitutes an "input" in physical cash

It is simple: a single input, or a single output, can be called "a coin". The main difference between fiat currencies and crypto, is that you can use any denominations you want. Which means, that if you would have a consensus rule, that "only coins with equal amounts, starting from 1, 2, and 5 are valid", then it would be a perfect soft-fork, and would recreate the change-making problem.

Some example: transaction fc406eb3fa4a3f305f5670880b9bc69aeed89b2756dd9eb34e7359c21969dcce, you give three coins to the shop: 9232, 9201 and 9110 satoshis. You pay for example 14460 satoshis, and keep 2931 satoshis as your change (or the other way around). And you also pay 10152 satoshis to the government, for keeping the currency alive.

Also, this analogy is even more relevant, when you think about how easy is to use a coin. Because you can pay with a single $100 bill, and then it is just a light piece of paper. But you can also bring a huge bag of 10,000 pennies, and put it on the table, in front of some cashier. Then, the amount will be the same, but if you think about resources, needed to process your transaction, then they will be bigger, and you will probably pay a bigger fee for wasting someone's time to count all of those single coins, and for forcing all people in the queue to wait for "confirmation".

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Do you combine your inputs with those of others when using XMR? You do. So it's a mixer. We can refer to the other users as "mixers" instead of attributing it solely to the network, if you're concerned about the semantics.

So the cash register at the supermarket is the mixer: I get different inputs in return for the inputs I give them.
Since we're talking about non-KYC services on the forum, maybe it's good to follow theymos' definition of a mixer:

When you put it like that, it's a funny comparison. Criminals use cash all the time too. It's not just the supermarket, it's virtually the whole economy.
And authorities being obsessed only with crypto makes this whole analogy look absurd. But also on the other hand now governments are limiting the legal use of cash. Now in Europe 200 and 500 EUR bills stopped being printed out long ago. Basically every one of these notes reaching a bank is withdrawn from circulation. And it was recently legislated that the maximum cash transaction in Greece can be 500 EUR! I guess other countries are set to lower the limit under central EU directive too.

Looking back at what Satoshi envisioned bitcoin as though, it's an electronic version of cash.
But this alone doesn't change much. It's the fact that it's decentralized that changes everything.

So... As long as the "supermarket" in your example is a registered business, the government doesn't care. They're going to comply with whatever law the government brings out anyday without resisting. As any big business would. Big businesses continue as normal even if we live under an oppressive military dictatorship.

Well, likewise with the supermarket, this forum has become too big to go unnoticed. But we as the users aren't that much of a revolutionary bunch to support it functioning if the government wants to actually shut it down due to it not following oppressive laws.

tl;dr sure gov policy has tons of contradictions if we want a revolution it's not gonna happen on its own

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Do you combine your inputs with those of others when using XMR? You do. So it's a mixer. We can refer to the other users as "mixers" instead of attributing it solely to the network, if you're concerned about the semantics.

So the cash register at the supermarket is the mixer: I get different inputs in return for the inputs I give them.

Bwahahaha, time to seize all the cash registers at Walmart!

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

So the cash register at the supermarket is the mixer: I get different inputs in return for the inputs I give them.

You'd need to clarify what constitutes an "input" in physical cash, but essentially, yes. You provide the cash register with your money, and in return, they give you change made up of other people's money. However, Monero operates differently when you make a transaction; your money gets mixed with other people's money, whether you actively choose this or not.

A more fitting comparison with cash would be this: Every time you spend a dollar bill, you meet 15 strangers. Together, you all place your dollar bills into a black box without seeing how much each person has put. Then, you hand this box to the cashier. She takes out your dollar bill (without being aware of its owner) and divides the remaining money into 15 individual boxes, each belonging to one of the strangers. Wouldn't that be a mixer?

Since we're talking about non-KYC services on the forum, maybe it's good to follow theymos' definition of a mixer

I understand his concept of a mixer. But, generally speaking, a "mixer" can be a wide range of other things.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

Do you combine your inputs with those of others when using XMR? You do. So it's a mixer. We can refer to the other users as "mixers" instead of attributing it solely to the network, if you're concerned about the semantics.

So the cash register at the supermarket is the mixer: I get different inputs in return for the inputs I give them.
Since we're talking about non-KYC services on the forum, maybe it's good to follow theymos' definition of a mixer:

Definition of a mixer

For clarity, here is a detailed definition of what we mean by a "mixer". Most people know intuitively what a mixer is and don't have to read this.

Something is considered a mixer if it meets all of these requirements:
1. It has a feature advertised for taking property, improving its privacy somehow, and then returning roughly the same type of property.
   a. Even though you can sometimes use non-mixers to mix coins by depositing and then withdrawing, this doesn't make it a mixer because this is an incidental use of the service; the service isn't advertised as privacy-enhancing.
   b. If a site is not primarily a mixer but has a mixer function, such as a mixer function on a gambling website, then the whole site is considered a mixer.
   c. If the site takes coins, gives you a possibly-transferrable IOU, and will convert this IOU back into mixed coins much later, then the temporary conversion into a different type of property does not prevent it from being considered a mixer.
   d. If the site internally converts your deposit into other things as part of its mixing, but ultimately the point of the product is to get your original type of property back, then that's a mixer, not an exchanger.
2. It is possible for the mixer to steal property passing through it. Assume that the sender does everything as correctly as possible. Also assume that no miners/verifiers on the base-layer cryptocurrency are evil. But assume that every other actor involved is evil (everyone able to vote in a DAO, every coordination server, every counterparty, every member of a multisig, etc.). Ignore short-term software bugs which are expected to be quickly fixed.
3. The service does not collect KYC-type info from all users. (This is not an endorsement of KYC generally, or a condemnation of non-KYC services generally. Non-KYC services of other types are still allowed, and in many cases they are a good idea.)

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

Quote from: LoyceMobile on May 24, 2024, 12:23:23 PM

That's like saying dollar bills are a mixer. Every time you spend it, you're missing money with other people's money.

Do you combine your inputs with those of others when using XMR? You do. So it's a mixer. We can refer to the other users as "mixers" instead of attributing it solely to the network, if you're concerned about the semantics.

LoyceMobile

hero member

Activity: 1659

Merit: 687

LoyceV on the road. Or couch.

Quote from: Medusah on May 24, 2024, 11:52:00 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on May 13, 2024, 04:23:24 AM

Monero is not a mixer.

Every time you spend XMR, you're mixing your input with other people's XMR.

That's like saying dollar bills are a mixer. Every time you spend it, you're missing money with other people's money.

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

Quote from: LoyceV on May 13, 2024, 04:23:24 AM

Monero is not a mixer.

Every time you spend XMR, you're mixing your input with other people's XMR.

Sorry for bumping this, I just realized I forgot to respond earlier.

joker_josue

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 4711

**In BTC since 2013**

Quote from: dkbit98 on May 13, 2024, 01:48:53 PM

Torrents are not used as money, that is a big difference Wink

And it is very hard for torrent files to be taken down, and whenever some website that is hosting torrents gets taken down they just create another one.
This can't be compared with mixers exactly since there are more centralization there, but there is always a chance that someone creates more decentralized way of improving privacy on bitcoin.
I don't have anything against kyc if it is optional and not mandatory for everything we do on internet.

Yes it is true. And any action that arises always requires a complaint or legal action between the copyright holder and the torrent platform.

In the case of mixes, it is the authorities themselves who are interested in acting and do not need a request from third parties to act. So, the authorities take the initiative to act against the mix, as this impacts much more on the government's coffers than copyright.

I just make this comparison, to understand more or less what is involved and what we are talking about. This "war" will probably take much longer than that of torrents, but I also believe that solutions will emerge that minimize this impact.

dkbit98

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 7064

Quote from: joker_josue on May 12, 2024, 02:05:33 AM

I return to the torrent examples. In the 2000s they were heavily persecuted by the authorities, with dozens of people arrested for running torrent sites. But they did not disappear and today they continue to operate. Did the authorities simply stop worrying? Certainly not. It is true that the mode of consumption has changed, but even so, torrent sites have managed to structure themselves in a way that reduces or makes it more difficult to experience problems.

Torrents are not used as money, that is a big difference Wink

And it is very hard for torrent files to be taken down, and whenever some website that is hosting torrents gets taken down they just create another one.
This can't be compared with mixers exactly since there are more centralization there, but there is always a chance that someone creates more decentralized way of improving privacy on bitcoin.
I don't have anything against kyc if it is optional and not mandatory for everything we do on internet.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: Medusah on May 12, 2024, 03:19:25 PM

decentralized mixers like Monero?

Monero is not a mixer.

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

Quote from: joker_josue on May 12, 2024, 02:05:33 AM

Something similar has to happen with mixers. It is true that in many cases, mixers have a direct impact on governments, due to tax avoidance.

They have a direct impact, because they go against their mass surveillance plans. However, even if their primary concern is taxation, what measures can they take against decentralized mixers like Monero? Shutting them down is unfeasible, and there's always the option of exchanging Bitcoin for Monero decentralized. Essentially, they are inadvertently driving us towards adopting unstoppable methods to achieve the same objectives, perhaps even more efficiently than before.

Would that line of thinking make sense from a governmental perspective?

joker_josue

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 4711

**In BTC since 2013**

Quote from: Medusah on May 11, 2024, 09:43:12 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on May 11, 2024, 08:22:40 AM

And people usually fall for that, so it will probably work unless we're actively opposing it.

What strategies do you propose for resisting it? Because from what I see, there aren't any. We're simply a minority, and our strengths lie in writing and developing software, which is indeed powerful, but it doesn't entirely solve the problem.

If there is no strategy yet, it is because one has not yet been achieved structurally.

I return to the torrent examples. In the 2000s they were heavily persecuted by the authorities, with dozens of people arrested for running torrent sites. But they did not disappear and today they continue to operate. Did the authorities simply stop worrying? Certainly not. It is true that the mode of consumption has changed, but even so, torrent sites have managed to structure themselves in a way that reduces or makes it more difficult to experience problems.

Something similar has to happen with mixers. It is true that in many cases, mixers have a direct impact on governments, due to tax avoidance. And this leads to them being much more active in this chase than they were with torrents. But, as long as mixes structurally cannot overcome these challenges, they will continue to have several problems.

Just like torrent, which is shared by users and not torrent sites, something similar needs to happen with mixers. Whether this is technically possible, I don't know. But, I believe that the solution goes this way.

Mr.right85

hero member

Activity: 1036

Merit: 674

Quote from: Medusah on May 11, 2024, 09:43:12 AM

As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

It was not allowed for having too many similarities with a mixing service, the non-kyc part was not the issue.

My first thought when I noticed that to have been the case, am sure there are no such ban in place for exchanger services except it’s got some mixing qualities. No KYC services are some of the vitals in the cryptospace.

Quote from: FinneysTrueVision on May 10, 2024, 02:00:38 AM

The service wasn’t very subtle about what they were trying to accomplish. This is what it said in their ANN thread:

Quote from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/exchange-service-no-kycno-amlno-registration-btcxmrusdtcash-5479822

We get your dirty coins and give you clean coins. don't get me wrong, this is not a mixer. When you use our service you don't need to be worry about any blocking funds or
anything else, cause you will get clean coins from users which use legal exchanges.

Lmao. "We get your coins, we give you other users' coins, but please don't mistake us for a mixer". Right, got it. Cheesy

Our, it ain’t mixing because none of your coins does eventually gets back to you or should I say, it’s an exchange of other users coins for yours? Bro, that’s mixing. That’s the whole idea about mixing, not having your coins getting back to you, getting off those traces. It doesn’t matter how or what process in which this is archived, it’s still mixing.

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

Quote from: DooMAD on May 11, 2024, 12:22:21 PM

True enough, sadly. And most will pay the price in the end. But as long as enough of us persist in doing things the right way, some will still have a chance at freedom.

It's melancholic. This journey has freed my spirit, yet I can't help but be frustrated by this realization. It's human to feel that way, I guess.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Quote from: Medusah on May 11, 2024, 11:52:33 AM

it is extremely difficult to convince people about adopting this approach.
(...)
And truth be told, most won't.

True enough, sadly. And most will pay the price in the end. But as long as enough of us persist in doing things the right way, some will still have a chance at freedom.

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

Quote from: DooMAD on May 11, 2024, 10:01:59 AM

Don't sign over your personal details for KYC. Don't acknowledge "taint" (and avoid using services which do). Don't give up ownership for the sake of convenience. Then they can't control you.

Alright, I'm already doing all of these, including pointing out people of their sleepwalking towards the edge of the cliff, but I still don't see sufficient progress. Particularly in an era where slight convenience is often traded for privacy, it is extremely difficult to convince people about adopting this approach. And, to be frank, I do not judge them; I've dedicated countless hours to grasping the importance of these ideas and practices myself. It would be unfair to expect someone else to be convinced without undergoing the same level of study. And truth be told, most won't.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Quote from: Medusah on May 11, 2024, 09:43:12 AM

Quote from: DooMAD on May 11, 2024, 08:22:40 AM

And people usually fall for that, so it will probably work unless we're actively opposing it.

What strategies do you propose for resisting it? Because from what I see, there aren't any. We're simply a minority, and our strengths lie in writing and developing software, which is indeed powerful, but it doesn't entirely solve the problem.

Mainly just point out to people when they're sleepwalking into subservience. The path of least resistance is often the one they want you to follow. Small acts of defiance can be powerful and limit the potential of nudge theory. If people don't allow themselves to be manipulated, they're more difficult to control. Don't sign over your personal details for KYC. Don't acknowledge "taint" (and avoid using services which do). Don't give up ownership for the sake of convenience. Then they can't control you.

Medusah

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 298

Quote from: FinneysTrueVision on May 10, 2024, 02:00:38 AM

The service wasn’t very subtle about what they were trying to accomplish. This is what it said in their ANN thread:

Quote from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/exchange-service-no-kycno-amlno-registration-btcxmrusdtcash-5479822

We get your dirty coins and give you clean coins. don't get me wrong, this is not a mixer. When you use our service you don't need to be worry about any blocking funds or
anything else, cause you will get clean coins from users which use legal exchanges.

Lmao. "We get your coins, we give you other users' coins, but please don't mistake us for a mixer". Right, got it. Cheesy

Quote from: NotATether on May 11, 2024, 02:34:57 AM

This is a bill by democrats. If they had proposed a law to stop anonymous payments to exchanges forever, it would've been shot down by republicans.

Democrats, Republicans, they're just two sides of the same coin when it comes to government. They both crave control, and given that only a small minority of their constituents prioritizes privacy, they'll recklessly implement Know Your Customer regulations without hesitation.

Quote from: DooMAD on May 11, 2024, 08:22:40 AM

And people usually fall for that, so it will probably work unless we're actively opposing it.

What strategies do you propose for resisting it? Because from what I see, there aren't any. We're simply a minority, and our strengths lie in writing and developing software, which is indeed powerful, but it doesn't entirely solve the problem.

DooMAD

legendary

Activity: 3948

Merit: 3191

Leave no FUD unchallenged

Quote from: NotATether on May 11, 2024, 02:34:57 AM

Why oh why has Bitcoin become partisan?

Because it's money, and money can be used as a form of control. How to control people is always a partisan issue. Much the the political manoeuvring at the moment is 'nudge theory'. Doing just enough to make people do what the authorities want. And people usually fall for that, so it will probably work unless we're actively opposing it.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: LoyceV on May 11, 2024, 02:27:02 AM

Quote

We all know where these crazy rules come from, it's just a matter of how we got there
https://cryptodaily.co.uk/news-in-crypto/observers:u-s-members-of-congress-propose-two-year-ban-on-crypto-mixers

I'm curious why they're proposing a ban for only two years, instead of forever.

Because they want to create the illusion that they are doing something productive, but we all know that no investigation or work group will ever happen into them.

This is a bill by democrats. If they had proposed a law to stop anonymous payments to exchanges forever, it would've been shot down by republicans.

Why oh why has Bitcoin become partisan?

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: examplens on May 10, 2024, 03:46:48 PM

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

The Dutch authorities disagree with you:

"a cryptocurrency mixing service is not necessarily illegal,"

Unfortunately, their opinion is just as important as the opinion of anyone here on the forum.

For most people, you're right. But as long as I live in this country, the opinion of the Dutch authorities matters (whether I like it or not).

Quote

We all know where these crazy rules come from, it's just a matter of how we got there
https://cryptodaily.co.uk/news-in-crypto/observers:u-s-members-of-congress-propose-two-year-ban-on-crypto-mixers

I'm curious why they're proposing a ban for only two years, instead of forever.

HEWRA

full member

Activity: 157

Merit: 100

Well all stuff aside, I have to admit that "tor-only", "non-kyc" and indirect mixing service seems quite shady from my perspective as a normal user of other exchanges.
I got to admit I miss times where most of the services did not require KYC to operate, but this three characteristics together doesn't feel quite safe to me Roll Eyes

examplens

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 3507

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

The Dutch authorities disagree with you:

"a cryptocurrency mixing service is not necessarily illegal,"

Unfortunately, their opinion is just as important as the opinion of anyone here on the forum. We all know where these crazy rules come from, it's just a matter of how we got there
https://cryptodaily.co.uk/news-in-crypto/observers:u-s-members-of-congress-propose-two-year-ban-on-crypto-mixers

joker_josue

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 4711

**In BTC since 2013**

Quote from: joker_josue on May 09, 2024, 02:00:48 PM

Whether you like it or not, when you talk about a mixing service, you automatically mean it as being used to move money obtained illegally, in order to lose track of it. Therefore, even if our use is not for this purpose, this is the tag that these services have before the authorities.

The Dutch authorities disagree with you:

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

"a cryptocurrency mixing service is not necessarily illegal,"

Yes it is true. It all depends on how it is used.

That's why I compared the current situation of mixes to torrent sites. Are they illegal? No. Can they be used? Yes. Could they contain illegal content? Yes. Does everyone use it for this purpose? No.

In the end, it all comes down to how the person will use the service and how the service is set up. And this is what can still be difficult to perceive in current mixes.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: joker_josue on May 09, 2024, 02:00:48 PM

Whether you like it or not, when you talk about a mixing service, you automatically mean it as being used to move money obtained illegally, in order to lose track of it. Therefore, even if our use is not for this purpose, this is the tag that these services have before the authorities.

The Dutch authorities disagree with you:

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

"a cryptocurrency mixing service is not necessarily illegal,"

Fun fact: Chain analysis bots have a separate category for "mixer" which they automatically classify as high-risk because they would otherwise have to, er, break CoinJoin, which we know they can't do. This is in addition to the other categories they have like gambling (??), sanctions evasion, government action.

I saw a stat on one homepage saying one of four wallets is suspicious.

If everyone were to use a mixer, it would break the model and make it 100% of funds being suspicious (therefore they cannot be suspicious) and it would force them to actually nab the criminals before they send them to a mixer.

FinneysTrueVision

sr. member

Activity: 1680

Merit: 379

Top Crypto Casino

The service wasn’t very subtle about what they were trying to accomplish. This is what it said in their ANN thread:

Quote from: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/exchange-service-no-kycno-amlno-registration-btcxmrusdtcash-5479822

We get your dirty coins and give you clean coins. don't get me wrong, this is not a mixer. When you use our service you don't need to be worry about any blocking funds or
anything else, cause you will get clean coins from users which use legal exchanges.

Being a non-KYC exchange isn’t the problem, there are still a few services like that which are currently running campaigns. The MrStork account showed up around the time of the mixer ban, prior to that they don’t seem to have any online presence. It almost appears as if this exchange service was created solely for the purpose of bypassing the mixer ban.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: NotATether on May 09, 2024, 11:29:00 AM

If this forum bans all non-KYC exchanges I guarantee you that members are going to be doing a 180 and praising once-reviled exchanges like Binance and Coinbase and stuff.

Only if they start a signature campaign here, which I don't expect.

Quote from: joker_josue on May 09, 2024, 02:00:48 PM

Whether you like it or not, when you talk about a mixing service, you automatically mean it as being used to move money obtained illegally, in order to lose track of it. Therefore, even if our use is not for this purpose, this is the tag that these services have before the authorities.

The Dutch authorities disagree with you:

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

"a cryptocurrency mixing service is not necessarily illegal,"

Quote from: philipma1957 on May 09, 2024, 05:18:43 PM

that is the future and it will go back to a paper bag with cash in it when you want to move wealth on the sneak.

That's another thing they're slowly banning. The maximum amount you're allowed to pay in cash gets lower and lower. That's going to stop honest people, while criminals are breaking the law already.

BitcoinGirl.Club

legendary

Activity: 2800

Merit: 2736

Farewell LEO: o_e_l_e_o

Quote from: Solosanz on May 07, 2024, 11:37:47 PM

Too bad, if Mr.Stork Exchange remove BTC withdrawal, their service would be fine. Tongue

Remove BTC > BTC, remove advertising aspect of improving privacy. The service will become a regular exchange service. It will not be that bad, if they want to advertise it in Bitcointalk.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4326

Merit: 8914

'The right to privacy matters'

Quote from: Bitcoin_Arena on May 07, 2024, 06:50:37 PM

Personally, i think all services that are rubbing shoulders with regulators (that we consider privacy focused) are going to be banned at some point. I am seeing the trend and we are headed for that direction. This will include no KYC exchanges, coins like monero etc.

Just a matter of time.

that is the future and it will go back to a paper bag with cash in it when you want to move wealth on the sneak.

crypto will not get used for sneak hidden wealth movement.

examplens

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 3507

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: TryNinja on May 08, 2024, 10:14:59 AM

Quote from: theymos on May 07, 2024, 11:12:21 PM

So I'd lean toward banning this particular service even if they didn't meet the mixer definition. "Make your dirty coins clean" is not something that typical no-KYC exchanges advertise.

So basically, talking/marketing about cleaning coins = banned.

No-KYC service *can* be used to clean coins but doesn't publicly talk about this = ok

Is that it?

This confused me too, but based on what I saw with them, they are based on cleaning tainted coins. Check their overview of service
The next thing, they completely took over and copied the exch design, which casts a lot of doubt on the honesty of their service. The biggest part of the code is identical.

After all, I certainly wouldn't trust them and they seem like they are a high-risk scam. It is probably better that they are removed from the forum.

joker_josue

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 4711

**In BTC since 2013**

There are many ways to do things, they just don't have to be announced in advance. It is up to each person to find the tools they want to use, to achieve what they want to do.

Whether you like it or not, when you talk about a mixing service, you automatically mean it as being used to move money obtained illegally, in order to lose track of it. Therefore, even if our use is not for this purpose, this is the tag that these services have before the authorities. Therefore, any external platform that carries out any type of promotion/publicity of these services may suffer penalties. I believe that no one wants this to happen to the forum.

Because, just as the forum does not authorize the promotion of markets where drugs, weapons and other illegal items are sold (according to the government), the same ends up happening with "mixers". It's true that sometimes you can be too radical with the etiquette of a particular service. In this, I agree that it should be analyzed in more detail in the future. Either way, I realize that it is an attitude with the aim of "playing it safe".

I look at this situation that is happening with mixers, the same as what happened 10 years ago with torrent sites. And until the dust settles, it will be difficult to explore this market without running into problems with the authorities. Maybe many don't remember the strong attack that torrent sites had, but today things are calmer, and in the end nothing has changed significantly.

Therefore, I think that sometimes it creates more drama than anything else. We must observe events and adjust the way we do the things we want. This does not mean that I agree with the authorities' actions on this topic, but unfortunately at the moment there is not much that can be done if we do not adjust our way of acting a little.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: pakhitheboss on May 09, 2024, 08:41:48 AM

After reading all the replies can I say that there is a shadow ban on non-KYC exchange. My straightforward reasoning is that none of us know how to work out to find bad money in the form of Bitcoin. It might be an issue but there are great minds here who could find a solution to this issue. That will be the next step to wipe out Bitcoin's negative fame.

If this forum bans all non-KYC exchanges I guarantee you that members are going to be doing a 180 and praising once-reviled exchanges like Binance and Coinbase and stuff.

Not me, though. I don't walk with the crowd.

pakhitheboss

hero member

Activity: 2156

Merit: 803

Top Crypto Casino

After reading all the replies can I say that there is a shadow ban on non-KYC exchange. My straightforward reasoning is that none of us know how to work out to find bad money in the form of Bitcoin. It might be an issue but there are great minds here who could find a solution to this issue. That will be the next step to wipe out Bitcoin's negative fame.

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

All this non-KYC talk here is bollocks. Do you guys pay attention to how they actually ask you for KYC? Here, I will give you a debreifing if you aren't already aware of it yet:

Quote from: https://bitmixlist.org/#aioseo-calls-for-bitcoin-regulation-ramp-up

See, I don’t really have a problem for regulation for buying and selling bitcoins. You gotta prevent money laundering you know.

The problem comes when said regulation requires you to provide identification for performing any kind of bitcoin transaction, whether with a bitcoin mixer or not. This benefits nobody, because inevitably, the regulation is implemented by 3rd party KYC providers who require not just your ID and bank statement, but any or all of the following:

Employment records as a proof of funds
A mugshot of you holding your ID
A picture of you holding your username and current date on a piece of paper
A live picture of your ID taken from a phone running iOS newestVersion or later
A live picture of your ID taken from a phone running Android almostNewestVersion or later
Ditto but a selfie of you choreographically moving your head
A video call

And even then your application can be denied for no public reason, leaving you stranded with no money, which is exactly what Bitcoin was created to solve. You see, nowadays you need one of the latest smartphones to perform any kind of verification, which is very silly – even banks don’t require that sort of thing!

If it was identification by sending a simple picture of your ID and or a bank statement, its fine. But verifiers make it so complicated to pass verification, by demanding the documentation be sent in certain ways, like in the quote I just pulled, by denying documents for arbitrary reasons, and let's not forget that these entities who verify us are not even governmental authorities, they are private businesses who have no interest in following the law properly as long as they are making a profit. So it is a net loss for users.

It is a quite sorry state of affairs when you have to post a mugshot of yourself holding a piece of paper with your name and random text in order for it to be considered as verification material. Even the banks themselves are not asking for this kind of information!

And that is after you consider the fact that almost all the financial services you would want to verify for are not available for US persons. So while these businesses are de-banking many sections of the world who want to use cryptocurrency (including many third world countries), why are we twerking for them in our recent posts here?

The reason why theymos banned mixers in the first place is because he does not want the forum to be subject to a federal investigation, not because he believes in the nonsense directives of non-KYC exchanges being somehow unsafe. So as long as there is no operation against exchange services, don't expect him to do anything about it.

Sandra_hakeem

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1045

Goodnight, ohh Leo!!! 🦅

Quote from: Poker Player on May 07, 2024, 09:31:05 PM

What if I use Bitcoin to exchange it for a shitcoin, and I use those shitcoins to buy Bitcoin again?

it doesn't really matter what coin you convert your "tainted" BTC into... The major criteria that a mixer possesses is converting whatever coin (dirty or not) into viable coins, and a nonKYC platform does the same - since every user's privacy is somehow guaranteed

Quote from: LoyceV on May 08, 2024, 04:06:18 AM

There will always be loopholes, and this may become a risk for lenders at some point.

Not just becoming a risk for lenders; It'll only make the governs rejiger thier privacy scrutiny... Fuckin' dictators!!

Quote from: TryNinja on May 08, 2024, 10:53:23 AM

Are cars, guns and knives under attack by the government just like privacy tools and crypto are?

The annual death rate statistics by guns and knives isn't as disturbing as the percentage of "dirty coins" that are laundered year in year out!

Quote

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

guns have been ingrained in the US already, mhan.

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: TryNinja on May 08, 2024, 10:53:23 AM

Quote from: LoyceV on May 08, 2024, 10:27:40 AM

Cars, guns and knives can be used to commit crimes, but as long as you don't talk about this = ok.

Are cars, guns and knives under attack by the government just like privacy tools and crypto are?

Like needing training, a license, insurance and MOT? I wouldn't call it an "attack", but it's strictly regulated.

Quote

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

Gasoline cares are already banned from some cities, guns are banned in general in my country, and knives aren't allowed to be caried in a growing number of cities either. I'm not sure now if it's the best comparison though: not many people will discuss online about replaying Death Race 2000 in real life. But we do have an ever growing government, and they won't volunteer to give back freedoms.

dkbit98

legendary

Activity: 2212

Merit: 7064

Quote from: TryNinja on May 07, 2024, 06:41:48 PM

An exchange that asks no KYC, lets you deposit BTC for trading, naturally lets you withdraw BTC. You deposit dirty BTC, you withdraw "cleaner" BTC. Is that ok? Is that a mixer? Is it only a mixer if they claim to clean dirty coins, like MrStork did? At what point is my non-KYC exchange considered a mixer?

This ''exchange'' blatantly cloned another reputable service that exist for years, but I am not sure if it fits directly to mixer category.
By that logic even Lending services between members should be questionable in bitcointalk forum.
Maybe word of advice for everyone is to avoid terms like ''dirty'' and ''clean'' bitcoins in future.
And we wouldn't be in this mess now if Bitcoin was full fungible Tongue

Quote from: TryNinja on May 07, 2024, 06:41:48 PM

@theymos, See what you have done?

I said before that he opened Pandora's box with latest change in forum rules, but he was probably forced to do it.
You can see that many services are now shutting down their non-kyc business that has any connection with US.

Quote from: TryNinja on May 08, 2024, 10:53:23 AM

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

They are banned in some countries (or soon will be), believe it or not, especially if cars run on gasoline.

TryNinja

legendary

Activity: 2758

Merit: 6830

Quote from: LoyceV on May 08, 2024, 10:27:40 AM

Cars, guns and knives can be used to commit crimes, but as long as you don't talk about this = ok.

Are cars, guns and knives under attack by the government just like privacy tools and crypto are?

Would you say cars, guns and knives are in risk of getting banned just like no-KYC services are?

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: TryNinja on May 08, 2024, 10:14:59 AM

So basically, talking/marketing about cleaning coins = banned.

No-KYC service *can* be used to clean coins but doesn't publicly talk about this = ok

This is my interpretation:
Talking/marketing about committing crimes = banned.

Cars, guns and knives can be used to commit crimes, but as long as you don't talk about this = ok.

Disclaimer: I strongly dislike the notion of taint. There are no bad Bitcoins, but there are bad people.

TryNinja

legendary

Activity: 2758

Merit: 6830

Quote from: theymos on May 07, 2024, 11:12:21 PM

So I'd lean toward banning this particular service even if they didn't meet the mixer definition. "Make your dirty coins clean" is not something that typical no-KYC exchanges advertise.

So basically, talking/marketing about cleaning coins = banned.

No-KYC service *can* be used to clean coins but doesn't publicly talk about this = ok

Is that it?

348Judah

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 521

I don't know what the era of this current government dispensation is going to work on the digital networks we have today and bitcoin the most, we needed our privacy, government aren't allowing for that, yet we are claiming that bitcoin is not going to be centralized or regulated, but the government are wining edges over the use of bitcoin in such a way that it does not work as expected for our privacy through such compliance, it's better that we consider the needs of everyone involved in bitcoin as to their privacy and freedom which fiat cannot offer and let everyone get to anonymize their use with bitcoin, every one of us will not be engaged in using such privilege for scam or fraud, it's all about our financial privacy.

Dr.Bitcoin_Strange

hero member

Activity: 770

Merit: 538

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Actually, when the new campaign was posted, the notification popped up, but by the time I scrolled down to open it, I discovered that the thread had already been moved to archive, which I wondered why.

Whether it's a KYC or KYC-free exchange, by right, an exchange is only supposed to trade an asset for another different asset and not the same asset for the same asset. If that exchange (Mrstorck) has the service to trade Bitcoin for Bitcoin, judging by what those who have tested the exchange are saying, then it's true it has a similar service as a mixer. For the record, non-KYC exchanges that don't offer such services are promoted here.

tranthidung

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 4085

Farewell o_e_l_e_o

Quote from: pakhitheboss on May 08, 2024, 08:26:34 AM

Ultimately it is @Theymos who banned mixer advertisements in the forum and it is his responsibility to decide whether a non-KYC exchange should be allowed to start a signature campaign.

The interpretation should be

"If a service is not allowed by forum rules, it will be banned here completely, not only restricted to a signature campaign or a banner advertisement (suspended about two years ago)."

Things are different nowadays because with new forum rules on privacy, mixers, non-KYC exchanges, both the service, their brand account and all types of advertisement in the forum, will be banned in batch.

pakhitheboss

hero member

Activity: 2156

Merit: 803

Top Crypto Casino

I was going through the replies and found most users are condescending to each other. The whole argument again stands on the point, how to find dirty money or how to recognize dirty money? Ultimately it is @Theymos who banned mixer advertisements in the forum and it is his responsibility to decide whether a non-KYC exchange should be allowed to start a signature campaign.

The Sceptical Chymist, argument meant that in the future an exchange like MEXC Global cannot start a signature campaign as they don't know the source of the payment. We know mixers will take Bitcoin and the payment will be in Bitcoin whereas a non-KYC exchange will allow withdrawal in other cryptocurrencies. The problem with mixers is that they allow dirty Bitcoin mixing to get legally white Bitcoin. The concept was always clear but we are making it confusing but now it has been made complicated and in the future, I feel that non-KYC exchanges will not be able to advertise in the forum.

EarnOnVictor

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 654

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: Hazink on May 07, 2024, 06:30:55 PM

Quote from: TryNinja on May 07, 2024, 06:41:48 PM

As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

It was not allowed for having too many similarities with a mixing service, the non-kyc part was not the issue.

In addition they also offers a mixing service indirectly, even as they claims not to be a mixer, any service which offers to take your dirty coins and give you a clean one can also be considered a mixer which such is part of the service they offer.

I never opened the website and neither did I take the campaign seriously because of the AML act they boastfully cancelled on their page, as it was no problem with their service. That can only tell you one thing, and that thing is "illegality." I think Bitcointalk has passed that already and kudos to Hhampuz to have painstakingly stopped the cooperation with them.

No service of that status will not mix your coin either directly or indirectly, thereby taking us back to the days when what we advertise here was being frowned upon by the law enforcers for one crime committed and the other.

Synchronice

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 792

Watch Bitcoin Documentary - https://t.ly/v0Nim

Overall, I don't know if you guys pretend things that don't exist or what's your intention but it's not necessary to make a fuss. At the moment only mixers are banned and they are banned because as governments state, they are used for money laundering and for hiding the trace of funds that are used for funding terrorist organizations. Whether this it true or not is another case but the fact is that that's the reason why mixers are banned. Even officials wrote on this forum and warned everyone to not promote mixers.
Money can be laundered via exchanges, casinos, vouchers, NFTs, Ordinals and so on but this doesn't mean that they'll get banned. No casino tells you to deposit Bitcoins on their platform and withdraw to improve your privacy and hide traces, no casino asks you to do that, even not no-KYC ones and even they have a Curacao license. So they are safe.

Just don't make a wrong conclusion. At the moment Bitcoin mixers are banned but soon decentralized exchanges and privacy enhancer wallets might be banned. Any company that runs a financial service without a license will be banned. Theymos can't control whether any institute, business or organization owns a license or asks for KYC documents but he definitely can prohibit marketplaces that sell illegal things and also mixers and privacy enhancer wallets that are entitled as money laundering tools by the government.

The Sceptical Chymist

legendary

Activity: 3528

Merit: 7005

Top Crypto Casino

An exchange that asks no KYC, lets you deposit BTC for trading, naturally lets you withdraw BTC. You deposit dirty BTC, you withdraw "cleaner" BTC. Is that ok?

What if you deposit "clean" LTC, for instance, and receive "dirty" BTC that you weren't expecting? All this time I've been in the bitcoin space and I don't even know how to tell if coins are on some government's shit list or the like (though I know there's a website somewhere where you can check to see). There are a lot of small, non-KYC exchanges based out of god-knows-where with god-knows-what kinds of ethics that might just not screen deposits. In any case, I think it's already been established that the issue here isn't the 'no-KYC' part.

I'm just really, really hoping there isn't a slippy-slide-slope that y'all have mentioned whereby it'll be decreed that no mention shall be made of no-KYC exchanges henceforth, nor signature campaigns to advertise same, nor ANN threads to draw attention to said exchanges and so forth. At that point, it would be clear the US government will have clubbed bitcointalk so badly that what's left will be a crippled, voiceless, and scared community--likely infiltrated by all sorts of alphabet agencies from around the world, too.

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: LoyceV on May 08, 2024, 04:06:18 AM

Quote from: alani123 on May 07, 2024, 06:47:14 PM

By the logic of this removal also maybe Bustabit should be banned because in their site they advertise mixing with just different words:

Who do they offer privacy from? Other players, random internet users, or governments? I assume the casino logs all transactions and winnings.

Any centralized service can claim to keep no logs while in fact they do. So logs or not is kinda besides the point.

The thing here is if you for example wanted to deposit to an exchange, companies like Coinbase tend to follow the trail of coins and if your transactions are tied to a "tainted" address (which may include casinos) then there's a high chance you might be asked questions or they might even close your account which could cause troubles. So for users feeling insecure depositing or withdrawing coins to a casino if they get their coins from an exchange like Coinbase then some basic mixing kinda helps ease the stress of potentially being caught and having your trade account shut down.

But as a side effect this can also be utilized with people that don't have as pure intentions as avoiding their trade accounts being shut down. It could also be indirectly used for people wanting too hide their tainted coins involved in trafficking and whatnot. You can never know really. With bitcoin being traceable these problems arise everywhere. You may be depositing coins to have some fun and if you end up winning and withdrawing profits, by the governments standards you could be partaking in a "money laundering operation".

LoyceV

legendary

Activity: 3290

Merit: 16489

Thick-Skinned Gang Leader and Golden Feather 2021

Quote from: alani123 on May 07, 2024, 06:47:14 PM

By the logic of this removal also maybe Bustabit should be banned because in their site they advertise mixing with just different words:

Who do they offer privacy from? Other players, random internet users, or governments? I assume the casino logs all transactions and winnings.

Quote from: Poker Player on May 07, 2024, 09:31:05 PM

What if I use Bitcoin to exchange it for a shitcoin, and I use those shitcoins to buy Bitcoin again?

You can do that. But if you'd offer such a service on Bitcointalk without KYC, it's part of theymos' "mixer definition", and not allowed. It's like the elephant in the room: everyone knows about it, but as long as you don't mention it, it's okay.

Quote from: Solosanz on May 07, 2024, 11:37:47 PM

What about lending? someone can use lending as a loophole to trade same coins.

There will always be loopholes, and this may become a risk for lenders at some point.

FatFork

legendary

Activity: 1624

Merit: 2594

Top Crypto Casino

Quote from: Solosanz on May 07, 2024, 11:37:47 PM

What about lending? someone can use lending as a loophole to trade same coins.

The same rules apply as for trading.

Solosanz

hero member

Activity: 952

Merit: 662

Too bad, if Mr.Stork Exchange remove BTC withdrawal, their service would be fine. Tongue

Quote from: Poker Player on May 07, 2024, 09:31:05 PM

What if I use Bitcoin to exchange it for a shitcoin, and I use those shitcoins to buy Bitcoin again?

It should be fine till now, currently the forum only restrict BTC to BTC trade.

Quote from: theymos on May 07, 2024, 11:12:21 PM

Second: If somebody posted on the Currency Exchange board and offered to trade your stolen coins for clean coins minus a fee, or linked to a website meant to effect such trades, that would definitely be disallowed due to the prohibition on illegal trades, even before the mixer ban. The service in question here does not use the phrase "stolen coins": they say "dirty coins", which is definitely different and could include some legally-sourced coins. But when I look at all of their marketing materials holistically, it all feels too close to the stolen-coins-trader example. So I'd lean toward banning this particular service even if they didn't meet the mixer definition. "Make your dirty coins clean" is not something that typical no-KYC exchanges advertise.

What about lending? someone can use lending as a loophole to trade same coins.

Let's say I had 0.5 BTC, but no one knows if I already have Bitcoin and I posted a genuine application on there, especially if my account have a good trading history and promise to pay high interest rate. I don't think there's no one will want to trade when I offered big return.

theymos

administrator

Activity: 5222

Merit: 13032

No-KYC exchanges, casinos, etc. are very intentionally not banned. This service is different in two important ways:

First, referring to the mixer definition, it "has a feature advertised for taking property, improving its privacy somehow, and then returning roughly the same type of property." It allows BTC->BTC "trades", which satisfies the "returning the same property" part, and it advertises itself as improving privacy of the returned coins. So it's a mixer. Most no-KYC exchanges neither allow BTC->BTC "trades" nor advertise their service as improving the privacy of your coins somehow, whereas a mixer would have to do both of those things.

Second: If somebody posted on the Currency Exchange board and offered to trade your stolen coins for clean coins minus a fee, or linked to a website meant to effect such trades, that would definitely be disallowed due to the prohibition on illegal trades, even before the mixer ban. The service in question here does not use the phrase "stolen coins": they say "dirty coins", which is definitely different and could include some legally-sourced coins. But when I look at all of their marketing materials holistically, it all feels too close to the stolen-coins-trader example. So I'd lean toward banning this particular service even if they didn't meet the mixer definition. "Make your dirty coins clean" is not something that typical no-KYC exchanges advertise.

darewaller

hero member

Activity: 2968

Merit: 640

Quote from: Poker Player on May 07, 2024, 09:31:05 PM

What if I use Bitcoin to exchange it for a shitcoin, and I use those shitcoins to buy Bitcoin again?

Such exchanges will not provide you 100% privacy from the point of government authorities when you are doing in an CEX with full KYC.

Quote from: Poker Player on May 07, 2024, 09:31:05 PM

In the end, legislation will prohibit any movement of funds that is not perfectly identified KYC, as a bank transaction, regardless of whether it is from Bitcoin to Bitcoin or with shitcoins in between.

Most governments started treating cryptocurrencies as virtual assets which means they will not have any problem if our coins sources are not from the suspected list; they just need tax. This is the situation of current scenario and what governments will do when we start using cryptos rather than just cashing out is still a mystery and I agree with you on that perspective.

Poker Player

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 2017

Quote from: _act_ on May 07, 2024, 08:28:22 PM

Quote from: icopress on May 07, 2024, 07:54:49 PM

The problem is not in "kycfree" or "only-Tor", with a 99% probability the thread was moved to the archive because the interface allows you to exchange "BTC for BTC".

I use the onion site again and wanted to use it to exchange bitcoin for bitcoin and I saw that you are right. The site would be said to be a mixer because of that. An exchange should be a platform that one coin can be exchanged to another and not the same coin. If it is the same coin it is a mixer.

What if I use Bitcoin to exchange it for a shitcoin, and I use those shitcoins to buy Bitcoin again?

Quote from: hd49728 on May 07, 2024, 08:36:45 PM

You can expand this to bridges that allow users to bridge from one cryptocurrency to another cryptocurrency.

So if the expansion is right in the concept, will cryptocurrency bridges, from one blockchain to another, from layer 1 to layer 2, will soon be classified as mixers in future.

I am very curious that will bridges become next targets of SEC. and DOJI.

This. In the end, legislation will prohibit any movement of funds that is not perfectly identified KYC, as a bank transaction, regardless of whether it is from Bitcoin to Bitcoin or with shitcoins in between. I have been saying this for a long time and have been barked at for it, but anyone who does not see the way this is going is willfully blind.

hd49728

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1018

Not your keys, not your coins!

Quote from: _act_ on May 07, 2024, 08:28:22 PM

I use the onion site again and wanted to use it to exchange bitcoin for bitcoin and I saw that you are right. The site would be said to be a mixer because of that. An exchange should be a platform that one coin can be exchanged to another and not the same coin. If it is the same coin it is a mixer.

You can expand this to bridges that allow users to bridge from one cryptocurrency to another cryptocurrency.

So if the expansion is right in the concept, will cryptocurrency bridges, from one blockchain to another, from layer 1 to layer 2, will soon be classified as mixers in future.

I am very curious that will bridges become next targets of SEC. and DOJI.

_act_

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1298

Lightning network is good with small amount of BTC

Quote from: icopress on May 07, 2024, 07:54:49 PM

The problem is not in "kycfree" or "only-Tor", with a 99% probability the thread was moved to the archive because the interface allows you to exchange "BTC for BTC".

I use the onion site again and wanted to use it to exchange bitcoin for bitcoin and I saw that you are right. The site would be said to be a mixer because of that. An exchange should be a platform that one coin can be exchanged to another and not the same coin. If it is the same coin it is a mixer.

icopress

legendary

Activity: 1456

Merit: 5874

light_warrior ... 🕯️

Quote from: _act_ on May 07, 2024, 06:37:45 PM

This will be the main reason. Also it is using Tor only because I noticed that the exchange has no clearnet? If clearnet is there and no mention of dirty and clean, it would have been allowed. I will be expecting the exchange to come in new way.

This is wrong.

The problem is not in "kycfree" or "only-Tor", with a 99% probability the thread was moved to the archive because the interface allows you to exchange "BTC for BTC".

PX-Z

hero member

Activity: 1554

Merit: 880

pxzone.online

Quote from: alani123 on May 07, 2024, 06:47:14 PM

Just see what TryNinja posted above me and he's 100% correct. By the logic of this removal also maybe Bustabit should be banned because in their site they advertise mixing with just different words:

I was actually in favor of mixers being banned here but if we aren't strict on what counts as a mixer then maybe lots of services should end up banned.

This will land on this category written by theymos. As long it's not advertised to enhanced privacy-enhancing then it's good to say its not mixer

Quote from: theymos on December 01, 2023, 05:45:25 AM

1. a. Even though you can sometimes use non-mixers to mix coins by depositing and then withdrawing, this doesn't make it a mixer because this is an incidental use of the service; the service isn't advertised as privacy-enhancing.

3. ...Non-KYC services of other types are still allowed, and in many cases they are a good idea.

About the gambling sites like bustabit or any casino, i don't think you can just deposit then withdraw without wagering because your account will be flagged or its not possible to withdraw until you wager XX amount.

Bitcoin_Arena

copper member

Activity: 2114

Merit: 1814

฿itcoin for all, All for ฿itcoin.

Personally, i think all services that are rubbing shoulders with regulators (that we consider privacy focused) are going to be banned at some point. I am seeing the trend and we are headed for that direction. This will include no KYC exchanges, coins like monero etc.

Just a matter of time.

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: PX-Z on May 07, 2024, 06:37:54 PM

I noticed that a thread for the promotion of a new exchange openly advertising as no KYC got moved to the archival board.
...
As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

Your quoted post of Hhampuz answers it all, it's because of mixer-kind of service that bitcointalk doesn't want to have here.

There are still lot of services who offered non-KYC is still here, even have paid and free to use signature campaigns, so it's not about those services.

Just see what TryNinja posted above me and he's 100% correct. By the logic of this removal also maybe Bustabit should be banned because in their site they advertise mixing with just different words:

I was actually in favor of mixers being banned here but if we aren't strict on what counts as a mixer then maybe lots of services should end up banned.

TryNinja

legendary

Activity: 2758

Merit: 6830

An exchange that asks no KYC, lets you deposit BTC for trading, naturally lets you withdraw BTC. You deposit dirty BTC, you withdraw "cleaner" BTC. Is that ok? Is that a mixer? Is it only a mixer if they claim to clean dirty coins, like MrStork did? At what point is my non-KYC exchange considered a mixer?

@theymos, See what you have done?

PX-Z

hero member

Activity: 1554

Merit: 880

pxzone.online

Quote from: Hazink on May 07, 2024, 06:30:55 PM

I noticed that a thread for the promotion of a new exchange openly advertising as no KYC got moved to the archival board.
...
As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

Your quoted post of Hhampuz answers it all, it's because of mixer-kind of service that bitcointalk doesn't want to have here.

There are still lot of services who offered non-KYC is still here, even have paid and free to use signature campaigns, so it's not about those services.

_act_

legendary

Activity: 1064

Merit: 1298

Lightning network is good with small amount of BTC

In addition they also offers a mixing service indirectly, even as they claims not to be a mixer, any service which offers to take your dirty coins and give you a clean one can also be considered a mixer which such is part of the service they offer.

This will be the main reason. Also it is using Tor only because I noticed that the exchange has no clearnet? If clearnet is there and no mention of dirty and clean, it would have been allowed. I will be expecting the exchange to come in new way.

alani123

legendary

Activity: 2422

Merit: 1451

Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform

Quote from: Hazink on May 07, 2024, 06:30:55 PM

As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

It was not allowed for having too many similarities with a mixing service, the non-kyc part was not the issue.

In addition they also offers a mixing service indirectly, even as they claims not to be a mixer, any service which offers to take your dirty coins and give you a clean one can also be considered a mixer which such is part of the service they offer.

By that logic pretty much any service that uses different inputs for withdrawals could be classified under the same category but ok, I understand that being promoted as a mixer is kinda too much.

Hazink

full member

Activity: 189

Merit: 120

As far as I know there's no official announcement of no-KYC services being banned in this forum. But perhaps it's coming?

It was not allowed for having too many similarities with a mixing service, the non-kyc part was not the issue.

In addition they also offers a mixing service indirectly, even as they claims not to be a mixer, any service which offers to take your dirty coins and give you a clean one can also be considered a mixer which such is part of the service they offer.

Hhampuz

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 6194

Meh.