Topic: Bitcoin mixing is NOT money laundering, per se - page 12. (Read 3983 times)

With the development of blockchain analyzers, including the use of artificial intelligence technologies, and the general development of the digitalization of society, bitcoin may in the foreseeable future be divided into three large clusters:
1. Bitcoins on verified bitcoin addresses that are uniquely associated with the identity of the owner, let's call them "white" bitcoins for definiteness.
2. Bitcoins without any history of miner rewards, let's call them "gray" bitcoins for definiteness.
3. Bitcoins with a dubious history, including those that have passed through the mixer, let's call them "black" bitcoins.

I think every member of the bitcoin community should ask themselves the question, what color is their current bitcoins, and what color bitcoins would they like to own when the difference between bitcoins of different colors becomes really significant?

Because the prospect is quite real when it may suddenly become clear that one bitcoin is not equal to one bitcoin. The favorite mantra of bitcoin maximalists "1btc = 1btc" does not work because the coins in the open blockchain are not fungible.

If a government doesn't ban bitcoin usage at all I see no worries if it can see any transactions. Why I see bitcoin mixing important is to hide my transactions from different kind of bad actors who can trace my transactions and take bad action against me. Even if now all I have is very few to have an interest in me bitcoin can go up and situation can change. I prefer less people know anything about my money. But I don't think any can hide their money from gov as gov has enough resources to trace everything in blockchain if they want.

Is what I wanted to say just like how @Similificator described, the difference between those two are so thin that it is enough to be mistaken as what we commonly call illegal by government standards. We arr all aware that mixing wasn't made by the purpose of doing something illegal, but it has to be expected that it can be exploited due to its nature or the process as how it works. We are also aware that those who had bad records before mixing are the ones causing massive problems while dragging those innocent users on their way.

I still believe that it all depends on how the user wanted to use the platform not that a platform was initially like that, and to be more precise their major customers like what happened at CM are the ones doing those laundering activities, and even if they will revise their own rules, they will probably lose credibility since what they had promised is different than what they can afford to deliver.

Centralized mixing services don't stance a chance against the government. But with non-custodial (decentralized) mixers, that's another story. These will be the ones that will ultimately survive as governments will be unable to take them down for good. But be aware that you can still get targeted by the government if it discovers you are using a decentralized mixer.

After all, governments don't want you to gain true privacy and finacial freedom. Therefore, we should expect tougher days ahead for crypto mixers and privacy coins alike. As long as decentralization wins, there should be nothing to worry about. Just my thoughts

Indeed, Bitcoin mixing and money laundering are two different things. But the problem here is that the line that separates both is very thin. Plus the fact that the goal of these two are somewhat the same which is hiding traces or origins of the funds through a variety of ways. Thus, giving the government and authorities the sweet excuse to pin down such services as much as they can. It doesn't even matter whether the reason is just or only for the sake of personal gain of certain individuals. As long as there is a chance for it to be used by criminals, the authorities and government will always take advantage of their justification of protecting the people to give Bitcoin mixing service providers a hard time in every way possible. The only thing we ordinary people can do is to support these type of services in our own ways and look for workarounds that would help us keep as much as we can of whatever control and privacy there is that we still have left.

Tell that to mainstream governments who usually come up with excuses to stop people from getting true financial freedom. They make everyone believe mixers are used for money laundering and tax evasion just to keep Fiat currencies afloat. We should expect more crackdowns on crypto mixers and privacy coins as crypto/Blockchain tech becomes more popular.

I'm glad there are decentralized (non-custodial) mixers aimed to give people the financial privacy they need without fear of censorship from the government. You can see how Tornado.Cash is still being used, despite the US sanctions. Now there's a new alternative called Privacy Pools using the same tech as Tornado.Cash. The revolution simply can't be stopped. Who knows if all centralized mixers disappear for good due to fierce government crackdowns? Just my opinion

Not all Bitcoin mixer users are into money laundering, there are many people that take privacy very seriously and nobody can stop such people from using mixers for their transactions, they believe this is the real way to be two steps away from the government and powerful centralized commodities, I can't blame them but, indeed, there are also some people that are using Bitcoin mixers to move illegal funds and launder money, this is also a fact.

I don't want to be caught up between what's good and what's bad but whatever we use for the good purposes can also be use by bad people, the government have every right to try stopping this, terrorists around the world can benefits a lot from mixers, they can move illegal money around with mixer to purchase weapons and bombs, they are going to use this to take lives of innocent people.

Mixers are beneficial for the good and the bad but I don't know what to say or do about it because there is no way to stop bad people from using Bitcoin mixers.

As much as I want to agree with you here, I have to disagree.  Most of the tracking has been accepted by you once you agreed to all sorts of Terms and Conditions when setting up your phone.  Or your computer.  Or, when you bought a SIM card.  We blindly agree to so many Terms and Conditions almost every day.  Open up a web page and you have to click 'I Consent' or read a 10 minute long text to understand what you have to consent for proper functioning of the Website.  No body ever reads this for every single website they go on.

Of course.  Most of these Terms are overwhelmingly long for the average human to read, comprehend and link together.  But it all lays down there in the Terms.  One Google app records your voice (Assistant) continuously.  The other (Photos) stores your gallery stuff.  Another one (Messages) stores SMS.  Most of them do not work without the weird GSF and the other apps required by these apps to work.  You download other apps to identify unknown phone numbers.  WhatsApp has your contacts.  Tinder knows what kind of people you like and how you flirt.  Et cetera.  They have it all and when it is all linked to a single business owner (say Google which knows most of the stuff about you), it is so easy to analyze your person and monitor you.

Then you have a lot of apps mentioning in some way they will sell information to Third Parties.  Here is where the thing links all together.  Either they work directly with the Government or Third Parties buy and sell information to them if needed, indirectly making these corporations work with the Governments.  Because what is easier to do, pay/ask Google for some information about Synchronice or find, collect and analyze the information by yourself?

The door to Governments is open as soon as there is a 'we will report to the Government if there is a suspicious action or we will hand them out the information in case they ask us for it' clause in the Terms.  Same goes with Centralized Exchanges.  As soon as there is this clause that your money will be frozen and seized if they think something is suspicious about you.  There are SO many things that can go wrong.  Free Wallet uses this clause to seize your money and ask for so many personal documents with the promise that your money will be handed back to you if you send it, but this never actually happens.  You end up sending them all you got on you and they keep asking for more.  They now have your money and an unimaginable amount of your personal documents.  So there is theft for one and a potential for identity theft in the future.

So if you start being MUCH more cautious about the way you handle things.  And start de Google-ing your phone, get rid of Windows, use a dumb phone with removable battery for your mobile carrier interactions, use Mixers to break links, use an encrypted e-mail provider for e-mail communication, use Open Source encrypted communication applications instead of WhatsApp, remove your Facebook and Instagram accounts et cetera.  Once you do that, maybe they will try to watch you closer.  But there is not much they can watch any more.  What will they do if they are now unable to collect much on you anyway.

Now start arguing that crime will be on All Time High levels if every body did this.  Do we all forget the things I mentioned in the above paragraph did not really even exist 50 to 100 years ago and crime was still a thing.  I do not see crime going into inexistence thanks to severe monitoring of humans.

What franky does not get is that I am in the highlights for using Mixers BECAUSE every body else is scared of using them.  Had Mixing, using Proton Mail and encryption at every single corner been the common way of using technology, not only would they not be a highlight any more but Governments would have a very hard time keeping up with controlling and monitoring.

Am I criminal for using Cash at a store?  Why, if my bank note can not be traced down to the source.  If I am not, then why is Mixing money laundering.  Some body above my post posted the definition of Mixing as obscuring the trail back to the source of funds.  Cash is the same, is it not.  Intentionally or not, you are obscuring the trail back to the source of funds by using it.  In fact.  You are obscuring the trail so much better by using a bank note than by using a Mixer.  I can go to a self paying checkout point in a store with a large bill and buy the cheapest thing in the store.  I now have a new set of bank notes, minus a 'fee' (the thing I bought).  How does the Government keep up with this kind of 'money laundering'?

To me it is also a sort of psychopathic pleasure to know that a Government has a hard time keeping up with the monitoring of my person.  I really dislike being watched like I was in a cage at a Zoo they were visiting for some weird study.

The problem is that people aren't as smart as you think. If people were smart, they wouldn't believe lies from government but people are dumb, majority of them, so, don't expect dumb people to understand the importance of privacy. I've actually met a lot of people who say, why do you need privacy if you don't do something illegal? So, government knows what I do and then what? What can say do? Will they arrest me, kill me? I'm clear. This is definitely a wrong approach, people ignore that every information they gave away, including their transactions, strengthens the power of governments and strengthens the power of companies like Apple, Google, Walmart, they understand your behavior, know what you do and when, you are just in their claws. Because of that, it's getting almost impossible to compete with these firms and soon, I think, there will be a total monopoly in many business niches.

Now, it's pretty clear for me that majority of people think that bitcoin mixing is only for money laundering, because government tells them so and that's what they learnt from people around them. Should we try to talk again about this task? Definitely, the more we let the light shine, the more people will see it in the dark but so many people still don't learn basics like not your keys, not your wallets, I'm sad.

If cops say it's crime to wear pink hoody, should we all agree about that without asking a logical question, what's wrong with pink hoodies?
They say that bitcoin mixing is an illegal act but how the hell is it legal act to track me and learn and analyze my every activity? How legal is it to read all of my messages and track all of my phone calls? Oh, it's done to prevent crime and illegal activities? C'mon man, that's not true and you can see it in everyday life. Government it self is a huge group of criminals that don't let other criminals to step in their game. They are brainwashing people and only adjust attention on one specific thing, that they want.

You are watched anyway! Let's make it more difficult for them. If you are partly anonymizing yourself, like using a mixer to receive coins on your main exchange wallet, log-in in your bank account via ProtonVPN and ProtonMail, then yeah, you are watched but if you do things a little bit different, you won't be their main target.

In a recent article about how the brother of the creator of one of the mixers stole funds already under arrest from him, they talk about two mixers against which law enforcement agencies took action. In both cases, they are talking about the connection of mixers with criminals.

According to them, Helix (exactly the mixer whose founder's brother stole the money) partnered with several shops from the dark web. And Tornado Cash worked with the hacker organization Lazarus Group.

Perhaps not every mixer has partnerships with criminal organizations, but mixers are closed precisely for this.

I would argue that if you don't see the point in mixing your bitcoins, it's highly likely that you don't need to mix your bitcoins. There are not too many cases where someone needs to increase the level of privacy when using bitcoins. At least if you are a bona fide owner.

Some criminals think that they can hide their bitcoins from government using mixers. I'd say it is a popular misconception: transparency of bitcoins blockchain makes it nearly impossible even if to use most modern mixers. Government will find out what it needs anyway. But until criminals caught they think they do everything better than others who are already caught. Well, I'm not so sure about that.

If Bitcoin Mixing is not any of what you have mentioned, so can you give us a clue of what mixing actually tells us? What is the need for mixing if the fund we are holding is not going to put us in problem. Although I don't really cares what those mixers are for but I think mixing coin is unnecessary for me. Those that are using them enjoy using the service and they don't complain.

First off, let me express my gratitude for your clarification on the dissimilarity between Bitcoin mixing and money laundering. It's imperative to comprehend that blending of coins doesn't equate to engaging in illegitimate activities. However, my skepticism towards Bitcoin's anonymity remains intact, and its traceability to the source is a matter of concern. In my view, it's essential to safeguard one's privacy, but simultaneously, one must adhere to the cryptocurrency-related laws and regulations.

I truly believe that people have the right to keep their personal stuff private and should be able to prevent anyone from snooping around where they don't belong. But you know what? With all the hackers and cybercriminals running amok, we gotta find a way to balance privacy and security. It's not gonna be easy, but we gotta do what we gotta do to keep everyone safe.

It's funny how it's you who plays with semantics now. Yes, in that post you mention that money had never had privacy (which is completely false, but let's ignore that for the sake of the topic); you're clearly not in favor of privacy, your intentions reveal so.

Look, there isn't much point talking with you. Any forum reader with minimum intelligence who's been reading your posts can acknowledge not only that you're against privacy, but you don't even understand it to begin with. You think that "waving a flag" that you used a mixer makes you traceable. Doesn't even pass the laugh test.

So, if someone uses a car to ram and murder people, cars should be treated like murder weapons. In 2017 in Charlottesville some guy run his car into a crowd killing 1 person and injuring over 30 people, but cars weren't banned because of it.
Bitcoin itself, without mixers, combined with a no KYC exchange, can also be used to launder money. Should we ban bitcoin, or p2p exchanges?
Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

From my understanding, what I know that while Bitcoin mixing itself may not be illegal or used for money laundering, it can be used for those purposes. However, privacy is the most important thing in financial transactions, and anyone should have the rights to use something like Bitcoin mixer if it is protecting their personal information.
And as OP explained, it is not the same concept as money laundering. So there's no point of mixing them both together. Things are bad only when we chose to look at it from a perspective which makes it bad.

This must be the umpteenth time you avoid the counter-arguments and keep cycling through the same bullshit. So you're going to completely ignore my arguments for once more, and blame me for being financially biased? Convenient path, but any adult who's been following the conversation can acknowledge you're ridiculous. The moment someone discredits you for being incorrect, you change the subject. At least show some dignity and admit you've been contradicting yourself throughout.

Even franky1, the individual who believes money should not have privacy, is more conscious than you; he has clarified he's against. You're somehow in favor and against privacy simultaneously, and the moment someone questions you, you ignore. Childish.

Whatever you believe if Bitcoin mixing is used to launder money then it is.  It is not about Bitcoin but the service that uses Bitcoin to launder money.  Bitcoin mixing is not an act of money laundering itself but the purpose of using it to launder money is alarming to the authority.  I know many of us are knowledgeable enough about how money laundering happens.  So anyone that has a malicious intent of laundering fiat currency by converting it to Bitcoin and using Bitcoin mixers to wash the traces and then reconverts Bitcoin to fiat currency, then it can be considered as money laundering, yes?

Before cryptocurrency, it was really easy to define money laundering, but then, when Bitcoin came out, we were reading various articles that tried to prove that bitcoin is not money.

"Whatever Bitcoin is, it’s not money.
We use money to buy products and services. The dollar, for instance, is like a claim check on a car, a coat or a ticket to an event—only, in the dollar’s case, it can be used to purchase or sell anything.
Money works best when it has a stable value. While there are stories of vendors being willing to accept a cryptocurrency like Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies will remain curiosities until their value is stable."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2021/02/02/bitcoin-is-not-money-yet/
This is one of many examples.

We have to remember that if you receive bitcoin from someone that bitcoin is anonymous. It's the same with bitcoin mined by yourself or received from faucets, or other anonymous users on this forum.
It's like cash in the electronic form. What happens when you take $100 to a store, buy a chewing gum for $1 and pocket the rest? Is it an act of money laundering?
Concealing the transaction may, or may not be money laundering, just as my post in this matter may, or may not be influenced by my signature. I've spent years on this forum and just a week advertising this mixer. A few dollars that I got from it wouldn't be able to change my mind.

My opinion is as follows: messing with bitcoin transactions is not money laundering. Bitcoin is classified as commodity, not security and not money. It's called digital money but it doesn't tick all boxes. If I buy a gold OTC and decide to turn it into gold bullion, is it money laundering? IMO it's not.

And even what happened to Chipmixer is totally different from what the advocates that  are saying, because of what happened to Chipmixer they took all mixers as scam or money launders and that is wrong, you can't accused an innocent Mother because of what the son did out. Everyone had their own race. And from what I read and understand Chipmixer company (the company itself) was not involved but the owner of the company was the money launderer, and the company was seized because the owner was involved in the crime.