Pages:
Author

Topic: Bitcoin mixing is NOT money laundering, per se - page 5. (Read 4125 times)

legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
Basing on different payment freezes and account bans made by centralized services I can say that they don't really need a significant trigger to do so. They don't like p2p in general. They prefer you to use their service and only their service and even that will not prevent them to act against you. If not that bitcoin hardly ever was anyhow popular. So it is not a surprise that interacting with any centralized service is a risk each time. If you use centralized services you should take that risk into account. And as long as they don't disclose the way they evaluate the "dirtiness" of the translation, you can only guess what will trigger them.

its actually written in regulations, which money service businesses(MSB) and virtual asset service providers(VASP) follow, which says those services should look out for mixer users and flag them as risk/suspicious .. end of story.. no ifs or buts

mixer mixer promoters want to pretend regulation dont exist or regulations dont state to treat mixed coins differently.. but REAL WORLD FACT regulations do exist and do apply to specifically want to flag mixer used funds.. no if's or but's about it.

the guys in this topic deny it because it hurts their affiliate income if they cant recruit users, the people in this topic in denial are not posting using common sense or logic or stating facts that would help users avoid being flagged/monitored. all they care about is lulling people into a false narrative that mixing is harmless.. trying to recruit more victims to cause those victims more trouble just so the promoters can get paid or use victims clean coins while stinging the victims with the promoters dirty coin

if these promoters actually cared about REAL PRIVACY they would actually want to read the regulations. learn what is and isnt described and think outside the box for solutions not even using the word "mixer" "obfuscation" "anonymity" and instead be creative with a new service that gives the privacy end result but in a way thats not stipulated in regulations

its like uber doesnt call itself a taxi service, to get around taxicab regulations
its how homoeopaths and nutritionists get to play doctor selling snake oil without needing a doctorate, because they are creative with the description of their service
its how supplements can get away with health claims without needing FDA approval, because they are creative

if even now after so much time of mixers knowing their service is on a list. if they just continue as they are just trying to promote they are mixers. they dont care about their customers privacy they just want the commission


there are many many many things in many regulations about mixers, ill give a short example

https://www.fatf-gafi.org/content/dam/fatf-gafi/guidance/Updated-Guidance-VA-VASP.pdf  (made in 2021, so plenty of time to read)
Quote
Risk factors relating to VAs and VASPs
42
Elements relating to VASPs
j. The specific types of VAs that the VASP offers or plans to offer and any unique
features of each VA, such as AECs, embedded mixers or tumblers, or other
products and services that may present higher risks by potentially obfuscating
the transactions or undermining a VASP’s ability to know its customers and
implement effective CDD and other AML/CFT measure


85. AML/CFT regulations will apply to covered VA activities and VASPs, regardless of
the type of VA involved in the financial activity (e.g., a VASP that uses or offers AECs
to another person for various financial transactions), the underlying technology
(e.g., whether it uses mainnet or the use of embedded layering or other scaling
solutions), or the additional services that the platform potentially incorporates
(such as a mixer or tumbler or other potential features for obfuscation)

174. In the context of VA and VASP activities, countries should ensure that VASPs
licensed by or operating in their jurisdiction can manage and mitigate the risks of
engaging in activities that involve the use of anonymity-enhancing technologies or
mechanisms, including but not limited to AECs, mixers, tumblers, privacy wallets
and other technologies that obfuscate the identity of the sender, recipient, holder,
or beneficial owner of a VA. If the VASP cannot manage and mitigate the risks posed
by engaging in such activities, then the VASP should not be permitted to engage in
such activities.


Mitigating the ML/TF Risks
240. The FATF Recommendations require supervisors to allocate and prioritize more
supervisory resources
[/u] to areas of higher ML/TF risk. This means that supervisors
should determine the frequency and intensity of periodic assessments
based on the
level of ML/TF risks to which the sector and individual VASPs are exposed.
Supervisors should give priority to the potential areas of higher risk, either within
the individual VASP (e.g., to the particular products, services, or business lines that
a VASP may offer, such as particular VAs or VA services like AECs or mixers and
tumblers that may further obfuscate transactions
or undermine the VASP’s ability


304. Further information on red-flag indicators for VAs that could suggest criminal
behaviour are set out in the FATF’s Virtual Asset Red Flag Indicators of Money
Laundering and Terrorist Financing. These indicators help VASPs and other obliged
entities to detect and report suspicious transactions involving VAs. Key indicators
include:

a. Technological features that increase anonymity - such as mixers, tumblers or
AECs;

they are not saying "mixing is illegal" they are saying that mixing is a higher risk that requires a higher amount of supervision and flagging it as suspicious

notice 85.. it also talks about subnetworks like LN. so LN is on the list too. just not as big a supervisory risk as mixers

if privacy service operators want to stay in business and not cause issues for their customer. they need to become more creative or find out that they and their customers get blacklisted/flagged/supervised at best or banned from other services at worse
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 3049
if you realised the coin you receive if you used a mixer with your clean coin. that what you get could trigger services to deny you access to  services. you would want to charge them a extra for the risk. EG 1.2 dirty coin for 1 clean coin

Basing on different payment freezes and account bans made by centralized services I can say that they don't really need a significant trigger to do so. They don't like p2p in general. They prefer you to use their service and only their service and even that will not prevent them to act against you. If not that bitcoin hardly ever was anyhow popular. So it is not a surprise that interacting with any centralized service is a risk each time. If you use centralized services you should take that risk into account. And as long as they don't disclose the way they evaluate the "dirtiness" of the translation, you can only guess what will trigger them. Most people use mixers don't complain on any further problems. Many who complain about centralized services never use mixers. So you can never be sure anyway.
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
if all the people in this topic truly believed all btc was fungible and there was no difference between one bitcoin vs one bitcoin... they would not be also trying to promote that people should use mixers

if the coin you have had nothing bad about it and was no difference. why need to change it

Because I want nobody to know how many coins I own. Simple as that.

Mixers don't erase history. Mixers make it impossible to tell for sure which input is linked to Which output.

mixers dont make you private.
read regulations. just using a mixer makes you get higher recognition. services actually then go and seek out more information about the inflows and outflows of mixers to gain more information about mixer users and where they get their funds from and where those funds end up

as for blackhatcoiner
fungibility not about privacy.. true and false
but why try to talk about fungibility in a mixer topic if you think they have nothing to do with the "purpose of mixing"

fungibility. is not also limited to 'blacklisted' its linked to many many things that alter the perception of uniqueness or exactness, including tax treatment and other things.. its not a simple yes no answer

yes you might find someone that does 1:1 but someone else may see differences. welcome to the world of speculation
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 1060
if all the people in this topic truly believed all btc was fungible and there was no difference between one bitcoin vs one bitcoin... they would not be also trying to promote that people should use mixers

if the coin you have had nothing bad about it and was no difference. why need to change it

Because I want nobody to know how many coins I own. Simple as that.

Mixers don't erase history. Mixers make it impossible to tell for sure which input is linked to Which output.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
I don't like deleting posts, but you've fundamentally misunderstood fungibility. If you continue derailing this with this false perspective, expect deletion.

Privacy ≠ fungibility.
legendary
Activity: 4424
Merit: 4794
if all the people in this topic truly believed all btc was fungible and there was no difference between one bitcoin vs one bitcoin... they would not be also trying to promote that people should use mixers

if the coin you have had nothing bad about it and was no difference. why need to change it

again the real reason is.. those promoting other should use a mixer is because the ones already using it are noticing their cauldron of coins in the mixer are more dirtier, than previous years. they want fresh coin in the mix. they want the clean coin and leave new people with the dirty coin
for years they have seem people mixing the same coins over and over and over again. with less fresh clean coin coming in to swap with

they pretend no coin is dirty to fake trust that people are not going to be harmed when handed dirty coin.. but if no coin was dirty. there would be no need to do these swaps

different bitcoins are treated differently
coins in a custodian are treated differently then coins on someones own private key
satoshis stash of coins is treated differently then an equal 1.1m coins in a CEX
satoshis stash of coins is treated differently then any other coin
mixed coin is treated differently than unmixed fresh mined coin

the mixer fanatics will want to tell you its 1:1 because they dont want to free market their de-valued crap. they want 1clean coin for 1 of their dirty coins. even though a freemarket would want a premium to take a dirty coin for a clean coin

if you realised the coin you receive if you used a mixer with your clean coin. that what you get could trigger services to deny you access to  services. you would want to charge them a extra for the risk. EG 1.2 dirty coin for 1 clean coin
sr. member
Activity: 1666
Merit: 310
BSV doomsayers... how cute!  Roll Eyes

Plz don't bite their bait...
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 1060
If a pool decides to censor a transaction, then another pool will sooner or later mine it. If lots of them start censoring, then miners will begin migrating elsewhere for the sake of the profit.

This absolutely true and exactly my point in this post:

What I do know is that 1ECeZBxCVJ8Wm2JSN3Cyc6rge2gnvD3W5K successfully moved to 16r7U7GqbVPeKukgfd3mUN9LCkuoKbfpXM in this block https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001bae714c1fbc509fcc40dac3ade7becff09ccd772a3f6 on ‎2023-09-21 06:59

The address 1ECeZBxCVJ8Wm2JSN3Cyc6rge2gnvD3W5K paid 16r7U7GqbVPeKukgfd3mUN9LCkuoKbfpXM again in this transaction https://mempool.space/tx/34e962671a1da560ada50c453e4f41443ca44cb084dda0d45799e2fbc7a84128 on 2023-10-12 05:07

Bitcoin is ok after all. Let them try harder!
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 7340
Farewell, Leo
If you think that tainted coins and addresses will have the same value with clean coins then i don't know what to say .
There are decentralized exchanges which don't enforce this nonsense, and where you can exchange any bitcoin with fiat or other cryptocurrencies. All bitcoin are equal in value.

It would be like accepting to exchange your cash for cash with blue paint ( not a good idea , don't try it ) .   
Except that the bitcoin cannot be counterfeited.

If someone offered you to buy all the usdt that's in banned addresses would you buy it at 1/100 of it's real value ? or would you consider those wasted money ?
Except that the bitcoin is not a centralized shitcoin under the control of one company.

You probably don't realise that this is starting to happen at pool level . If pools decide to ban addresses or reject blocks from pools that contain those , things will start to get rough .
If a pool decides to censor a transaction, then another pool will sooner or later mine it. If lots of them start censoring, then miners will begin migrating elsewhere for the sake of the profit.
legendary
Activity: 994
Merit: 1089
You probably don't realise that this is starting to happen at pool level . If pools decide to ban addresses or reject blocks from pools that contain those , things will start to get rough .
I am aware, but again, for this to escalate into a major problem, the censoring mining pools have to control 51% of the hashrate to totally blacklist tx's from being mined, and if they don't have that much control, other pools that do not censor tx's will pick up the tx's that they rejected and add it into their own block to be mined. Take note too that when a mining pool goes down the censoring lane, individual miners would leave such pools and their hashrate would drop.
hero member
Activity: 1114
Merit: 588
If you think that tainted coins and addresses will have the same value with clean coins then i don't know what to say .
Surely they have the same value, the problem here is centralized exchanges and services, and whatever they do doesn't reflect the nature of BTC. Centralized exchanges and services can blacklist certain utxo's whenever it enters their addresses, but it does not mean that BTC isn't fungible, the network is not responsible for what services like Binance does. You should store your funds in self custodial wallets, make use of privacy tools and p2p exchanges and services.

Take note that the idea of tainted coins is a way for the government to attack BTC's fungibility, and if bitcoiners used more of p2p exchanges and services, just the way BTC was supposed to be used without a third party, then maybe these centralized exchanges would not have become this 'powerful' in trying to 'control' the network alongside the government.
You probably don't realise that this is starting to happen at pool level . If pools decide to ban addresses or reject blocks from pools that contain those , things will start to get rough .
legendary
Activity: 994
Merit: 1089
If you think that tainted coins and addresses will have the same value with clean coins then i don't know what to say .
Surely they have the same value, the problem here is centralized exchanges and services, and whatever they do doesn't reflect the nature of BTC. Centralized exchanges and services can blacklist certain utxo's whenever it enters their addresses, but it does not mean that BTC isn't fungible, the network is not responsible for what services like Binance does. You should store your funds in self custodial wallets, make use of privacy tools and p2p exchanges and services.

Take note that the idea of tainted coins is a way for the government to attack BTC's fungibility, and if bitcoiners used more of p2p exchanges and services, just the way BTC was supposed to be used without a third party, then maybe these centralized exchanges would not have become this 'powerful' in trying to 'control' the network alongside the government.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 1060
If you think that tainted coins and addresses will have the same value with clean coins then i don't know what to say.

Yes! I do think these coins have the exact same value!

No worries, I don't want you to say anything. Keep doing what think is best. Cheers!

Only a fool would pay to get those coins .

Ok!

If someone offered you to buy all the usdt that's in banned addresses would you buy it at 1/100 of it's real value ? or would you consider those wasted money ?

What is USDT?

Edit: You mean Tether.

Quote
Tether is a stablecoin pegged to the US Dollar. A stablecoin is a type of cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to another fiat currency like the US Dollar or to a commodity like Gold.

No I wouldn't buy this anyway. I would only accept it as a gift, only if I could convert it to BTC.
hero member
Activity: 1114
Merit: 588

This is a potential threat that some miners comply with the "rules" that organizations and governments try to apply in order to hold Bitcoin back.

What I do know is that 1ECeZBxCVJ8Wm2JSN3Cyc6rge2gnvD3W5K successfully moved to 16r7U7GqbVPeKukgfd3mUN9LCkuoKbfpXM in this block https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001bae714c1fbc509fcc40dac3ade7becff09ccd772a3f6 on ‎2023-09-21 06:59

This has nothing to do with fungibility. The recipient received many inputs of 0.0002 BTC. All of them are equal. The difference is that some miners will comply with the regulations that authoriarian governments make.

It's not a problem though.

The address 1ECeZBxCVJ8Wm2JSN3Cyc6rge2gnvD3W5K paid 16r7U7GqbVPeKukgfd3mUN9LCkuoKbfpXM again in this transaction https://mempool.space/tx/34e962671a1da560ada50c453e4f41443ca44cb084dda0d45799e2fbc7a84128 on 2023-10-12 05:07

Bitcoin is ok after all. Let them try harder!

If you think that tainted coins and addresses will have the same value with clean coins then i don't know what to say . Only a fool would pay to get those coins . It would be like accepting to exchange your cash for cash with blue paint ( not a good idea , don't try it ) .  
If someone offered you to buy all the usdt that's in banned addresses would you buy it at 1/100 of it's real value ? or would you consider those wasted money ?
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 1060
Well , i don't think so . Reality shows the opposite https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/?t
Mined bitcoins that never moved or newly minted are not the same as the ones that have a transaction history . There will be a huge demand for those in the future as more and more cases like the OFAC one come forward .

This is a potential threat that some miners comply with the "rules" that organizations and governments try to apply in order to hold Bitcoin back.

What I do know is that 1ECeZBxCVJ8Wm2JSN3Cyc6rge2gnvD3W5K successfully moved to 16r7U7GqbVPeKukgfd3mUN9LCkuoKbfpXM in this block https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000001bae714c1fbc509fcc40dac3ade7becff09ccd772a3f6 on ‎2023-09-21 06:59

This has nothing to do with fungibility. The recipient received many inputs of 0.0002 BTC. All of them are equal. The difference is that some miners will comply with the regulations that authoriarian governments make.

It's not a problem though.

The address 1ECeZBxCVJ8Wm2JSN3Cyc6rge2gnvD3W5K paid 16r7U7GqbVPeKukgfd3mUN9LCkuoKbfpXM again in this transaction https://mempool.space/tx/34e962671a1da560ada50c453e4f41443ca44cb084dda0d45799e2fbc7a84128 on 2023-10-12 05:07

Bitcoin is ok after all. Let them try harder!
hero member
Activity: 1114
Merit: 588

Bitcoin is fungible. I can send you 0.1 BTC and you can send me back 0.1 BTC and it will be exactly the same.


Well , i don't think so . Reality shows the opposite https://b10c.me/observations/08-missing-sanctioned-transactions/?t
Mined bitcoins that never moved or newly minted are not the same as the ones that have a transaction history . There will be a huge demand for those in the future as more and more cases like the OFAC one come forward .
legendary
Activity: 1974
Merit: 3049
We know about criminals wanting to remain anonymous that's why they use mixers. So what you're saying to ppl is just because a service exists for average bitcoiners to obfuscate their trades it doesn't mean the service's invented for criminals or they're welcomed to use it. You're right but if mixer owners get arrested they've got to have best legal teams in the world to defend their position or else it's going to end badly for them in courtrooms.

Criminals who want to remain anonymous already know that bitcoin is not a right place for illicit activities. If we look at the data from Chainalysis, only 0.12-0.24% of all transactions in Bitcoin are probably connected to crime and more than 90% of bitcoin mixing transactions are made by law-abiding users who just want to increase the level of own anonymity. And the illicit activity percentage in bitcoin falls with years.

So, right, same tools can usually be used for good and for bad, but if we talk about bitcoin it becomes more and more suitable for honest and respected and not for criminals. And mixing bitcoin is also what is needed for honest and respected users as well, so criminal share in it falls like in all bitcoin transactions.
sr. member
Activity: 504
Merit: 378
The great city of God 🔥
But in other words it is also another means of criminal to remain anonymous. And use it for atrocious dids. One thing is for sure, everything that has an advantage also has disadvantages. So we can not deny the fact that it can be use for money laundering. Its just like gun, there is a popular saying that "Gun dont kill people, people kill people" because gun can not on it's own kill a human, except it is use for such.

Of course it can be used for money laundering. Of course it can be used for illicit activities. So... ?

It doesn't matter what other people do with their money, just do your part and everything will be allright.

Any type of money can also be used for illicit activities with various techniques. It doesn't matter at all. You are not a criminal if an $100 bill that has been used for illegal actions 5 years ago ends in your hands. You can't know. You don't have to know!

Definitely sure! Me talking about the disadvantages of it, doesn't change the facts about bitcoin mixer. There is nothing I and anybody else can do or change anything about that. All that we can do is to take advantage of it rather thinking of the negative side of it.

Whatever criminal has don to tanish the image of mixer, doesn't change anything rather making people to know more about mixer, just like the way bitcoin was painted bad. And people still see the brighter side of it. And continue adoption.
full member
Activity: 896
Merit: 193
web developer for hire
We know about criminals wanting to remain anonymous that's why they use mixers. So what you're saying to ppl is just because a service exists for average bitcoiners to obfuscate their trades it doesn't mean the service's invented for criminals or they're welcomed to use it. You're right but if mixer owners get arrested they've got to have best legal teams in the world to defend their position or else it's going to end badly for them in courtrooms.

But in other words it is also another means of criminal to remain anonymous. And use it for atrocious dids. One thing is for sure, everything that has an advantage also has disadvantages. So we can not deny the fact that it can be use for money laundering. Its just like gun, there is a popular saying that "Gun dont kill people, people kill people" because gun can not on it's own kill a human, except it is use for such.
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 1060
But in other words it is also another means of criminal to remain anonymous. And use it for atrocious dids. One thing is for sure, everything that has an advantage also has disadvantages. So we can not deny the fact that it can be use for money laundering. Its just like gun, there is a popular saying that "Gun dont kill people, people kill people" because gun can not on it's own kill a human, except it is use for such.

Of course it can be used for money laundering. Of course it can be used for illicit activities. So... ?

It doesn't matter what other people do with their money, just do your part and everything will be allright.

Any type of money can also be used for illicit activities with various techniques. It doesn't matter at all. You are not a criminal if an $100 bill that has been used for illegal actions 5 years ago ends in your hands. You can't know. You don't have to know!
Pages:
Jump to: