Cash is far easier to launder. Open a nail salon. Hire employees. End of the day max out the till with your illegal drug money and claim them as services sold. Repeat if necessary by opening more nail and hair salons.
Now pay yourself out with legal business deposits and go buy Tony Montana sized mansions.
As for aiding fugitives you can also do that by dropping in a wad of cash in the mail and sending it to a drop, or one of their friends to pickup. That doesn't sound as sexy as "Bitcoin enables criminals from the future" so of course media won't report it.
Topic: Bitcoin is MORE anonymous than Cash (Read 1657 times)
The drug money that is laundered through traditional banks absolutely dwarfs the bitcoin economy.
Sigh. Thank you for that astounding revelation.
The point, people, the point:
Opponents say that Bitcoin will better facilitate drug economies and money laundering.
We say no, that cash already does this and is better suited for this because it is more anonymous.
Going by the argument of the OP(that cash is not more anonymous than Bitcoin transactions) - are we wrong? Is cash less anonymous?
Cash is much more anonymous than Bitcoin right now because it is not traceable. Bitcoins are completely traceable publicly by anyone and the only way to get rid of this problem is to mix transactions with change addresses so that network analysis can trace transactions without identifying with full confidence who is owning what. But that remains fragile as each individual not using Bitcoin properly is compromising their privacy and the privacy of the people they are transacting with. However, there is a lot of interest in improving users privacy, with zerocoin or CoinJoin or else, so I guess that we can expect that Bitcoin will be much more private in the future than it is right now for most users.
we know it is.... you dont see pepole face to face when trading bticoin
localbitcoins.com and the meetups say otherwise.
we know it is.... you dont see pepole face to face when trading bticoin
The drug money that is laundered through traditional banks absolutely dwarfs the bitcoin economy.
Sigh. Thank you for that astounding revelation.
The point, people, the point:
Opponents say that Bitcoin will better facilitate drug economies and money laundering.
We say no, that cash already does this and is better suited for this because it is more anonymous.
Going by the argument of the OP(that cash is not more anonymous than Bitcoin transactions) - are we wrong? Is cash less anonymous?
The drug money that is laundered through traditional banks absolutely dwarfs the bitcoin economy.
Sigh. Thank you for that astounding revelation.
The point, people, the point:
Opponents say that Bitcoin will better facilitate drug economies and money laundering.
We say no, that cash already does this and is better suited for this because it is more anonymous.
Going by the argument of the OP(that cash is not more anonymous than Bitcoin transactions) - are we wrong? Is cash less anonymous?
The drug money that is laundered through traditional banks absolutely dwarfs the bitcoin economy.
I am arguing that Bitcoin is more anonymous than cash and that's what I wanted your thoughts on.
Dread Pirate Roberts and the folks at The Silk Road seem to have developed procedures and come up with a system that's working out pretty well for them so far. Guess it all depends on how you use it and who you are transacting with.
This is kind of beside the point anyway. I was more interested on your thoughts about the effective criminal uses of Bitcoin.
When nonbitcoiners pull the "Bitcoin enables criminals" card out, we usually throw back "well you can do the same thing with cash" or "cash is better for criminal activities because it is more anonymous that Bitcoin".
I am arguing that Bitcoin is more anonymous than cash and that's what I wanted your thoughts on.
When nonbitcoiners pull the "Bitcoin enables criminals" card out, we usually throw back "well you can do the same thing with cash" or "cash is better for criminal activities because it is more anonymous that Bitcoin".
I am arguing that Bitcoin is more anonymous than cash and that's what I wanted your thoughts on.
Bitcoin is not anonymous. It can be made to be anonymous using secondary tools but is not anon right out of the gate, cash is. With cash you need to wash large amounts through some sort of system to make the money legit but that is a problem after the fact.
There is only one thing that truly "enables criminals" and that's the legal system. Without laws there's no crime. I could trade my wedding ring for a bag of coke. So I guess my wedding ring "enables criminals".
This is kind of beside the point anyway. I was more interested on your thoughts about the effective criminal uses of Bitcoin.
When nonbitcoiners pull the "Bitcoin enables criminals" card out, we usually throw back "well you can do the same thing with cash" or "cash is better for criminal activities because it is more anonymous that Bitcoin".
I am arguing that Bitcoin is more anonymous than cash and that's what I wanted your thoughts on.
When nonbitcoiners pull the "Bitcoin enables criminals" card out, we usually throw back "well you can do the same thing with cash" or "cash is better for criminal activities because it is more anonymous that Bitcoin".
I am arguing that Bitcoin is more anonymous than cash and that's what I wanted your thoughts on.
Quote from: Guitarbits
Drug cartels are worth about a trillion. Bitcoin is worth about a billion. If there was any serious money laundering going on, the market cap would be much higher.
In reality, drug cartels have laundered more money through just one bank that we know about (HSBC) than they could possibly launder through Bitcoin with its current market cap.
So the current state of the market, will be the future state of the market?
Strange, I am mostly used to non-bitcoiners making these arguments.
|The future of Bitcoin isn't certain..
Quote from: Guitarbits
Drug cartels are worth about a trillion. Bitcoin is worth about a billion. If there was any serious money laundering going on, the market cap would be much higher.
In reality, drug cartels have laundered more money through just one bank that we know about (HSBC) than they could possibly launder through Bitcoin with its current market cap.
So the current state of the market, will be the future state of the market?
Strange, I am mostly used to non-bitcoiners making these arguments.
Quote from: Guitarbits
Drug cartels are worth about a trillion. Bitcoin is worth about a billion. If there was any serious money laundering going on, the market cap would be much higher.
In reality, drug cartels have laundered more money through just one bank that we know about (HSBC) than they could possibly launder through Bitcoin with its current market cap.
I would be interested in your thoughts on this(from Reddit)
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kw7qw/economist_andrea_castillo_discusses_bitcoin/
TL;DR : An argument for Bitcoin being more anonymous than cash transactions and the perfect monetary system for criminal networks
EDIT : changed post title to address point more accurately.
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1kw7qw/economist_andrea_castillo_discusses_bitcoin/
Quote from: thewanderer5
I love her, let's be a little bit real though. Bitcoin DOES facilitate money laundering and criminal transactions far more efficiently than cash. Bitcoin can provide the same services at any distance instantaneously through multiple addresses/mixing services etc. For example you could not have the effortlessly global and anonymous reach of the Silk Road without Bitcoin.
But anyway - doesn't bother me none. Black market businessmen are some of the most pragmatic and careful in the economy, so of course they will migrate to the superior system and legitimate businessmen will follow their lead. Even if Bitcoin only captured the blackmarket, the price would still go through the roof, so again - doesn't bother me none.
But anyway - doesn't bother me none. Black market businessmen are some of the most pragmatic and careful in the economy, so of course they will migrate to the superior system and legitimate businessmen will follow their lead. Even if Bitcoin only captured the blackmarket, the price would still go through the roof, so again - doesn't bother me none.
Quote from: Guitarbits
I think her point was that cash is still more anonymous than Bitcoin. Federal Reserve Notes don't have microchips in them recording their history. Plus every type of criminal has always accepted legal tender. Does that mean we should ban government issued money?
The truth is the drug cartels aren't really interested in Bitcoin. Places like Silk Road threaten the drug cartel business model. They're not going to encourage something that's against their best interests.
Drug cartels are worth about a trillion. Bitcoin is worth about a billion. If there was any serious money laundering going on, the market cap would be much higher.
The truth is the drug cartels aren't really interested in Bitcoin. Places like Silk Road threaten the drug cartel business model. They're not going to encourage something that's against their best interests.
Drug cartels are worth about a trillion. Bitcoin is worth about a billion. If there was any serious money laundering going on, the market cap would be much higher.
Quote from: thewanderer5
Mm I disagree. People often repeat the line that cash is more anonymous than Bitcoin, but in a practical sense this is not true.
Yes there is no record of cash transactions, but the cash transactions between the buyer and seller are much less anonymous. To effect a cash a transaction you would have to physically hand the person cash or mail it to them, giving you far more information about the other party than in a Bitcoin transaction. This results in lots of trust issues, especially between criminals. Yes you could mail it to a PO box so that you wouldn't have to to know the identity of the recipient but this is really just psuedoanonymity - just like Bitcoin. Except in the mailing box case the anonymity would be provided by a government service - much riskier and less secure. The only way to effect a truly anonymous cash transaction would be a dead drop, and this is just not an effective business option because for a period of time the funds are out of control and can be stolen etc and this limited to geographic locality. Moving large amounts of cash is very clumsy as well.
Bitcoin solves all the problems of cash transactions perfectly. The psuedoanonymity is provided by an openly trusted service, the funds are always kept in control(Bitcoin transactions are basically a digital deaddrop), it can handle extremely large transactions, and you can do these deaddrops on a global scale, instantly. As she even said in the video, the value is that it alows the two parties to trust each other without knowing one another or involving a third party.
This makes Bitcoin the perfect monetary network for criminal activites as it provides a protective insulation between all parties. Something criminals dream of. And throwing off analysis of the blockchain is not hard, especially once the number of transactions really start to rise. Just some creative use of mixing services.
No the drug cartels haven't caught on yet, but I really do think it's only a matter of time. The benefits are too blindingly obvious to be dismissed for too long. Even if only used for transactions instead of stores of value.
Again, I believe in free markets so this really does not concern me, but other people need to realize this is the reality that Bitcoin provides.
Yes there is no record of cash transactions, but the cash transactions between the buyer and seller are much less anonymous. To effect a cash a transaction you would have to physically hand the person cash or mail it to them, giving you far more information about the other party than in a Bitcoin transaction. This results in lots of trust issues, especially between criminals. Yes you could mail it to a PO box so that you wouldn't have to to know the identity of the recipient but this is really just psuedoanonymity - just like Bitcoin. Except in the mailing box case the anonymity would be provided by a government service - much riskier and less secure. The only way to effect a truly anonymous cash transaction would be a dead drop, and this is just not an effective business option because for a period of time the funds are out of control and can be stolen etc and this limited to geographic locality. Moving large amounts of cash is very clumsy as well.
Bitcoin solves all the problems of cash transactions perfectly. The psuedoanonymity is provided by an openly trusted service, the funds are always kept in control(Bitcoin transactions are basically a digital deaddrop), it can handle extremely large transactions, and you can do these deaddrops on a global scale, instantly. As she even said in the video, the value is that it alows the two parties to trust each other without knowing one another or involving a third party.
This makes Bitcoin the perfect monetary network for criminal activites as it provides a protective insulation between all parties. Something criminals dream of. And throwing off analysis of the blockchain is not hard, especially once the number of transactions really start to rise. Just some creative use of mixing services.
No the drug cartels haven't caught on yet, but I really do think it's only a matter of time. The benefits are too blindingly obvious to be dismissed for too long. Even if only used for transactions instead of stores of value.
Again, I believe in free markets so this really does not concern me, but other people need to realize this is the reality that Bitcoin provides.
TL;DR : An argument for Bitcoin being more anonymous than cash transactions and the perfect monetary system for criminal networks
EDIT : changed post title to address point more accurately.
Jump to: