Topic: Mixers to be banned - page 18. (Read 23908 times)

Merchants cannot expect from their clients to do blockchain analysis. To me, that understands to neither appreciate, nor disregard. Simply, neutral. Be it ChipMixer chips, Samurai whirlpool coinjoins, coinbase rewards; they all are acceptable, otherwise Bitcoin falls apart as currency.

Maybe I shall repeat it once more, just in case you think I haven't answered for the 4th time: I don't feel it harms the vendors.

Blame me for not have drunk coffee yet, but what do you mean by "doesn't amount to money laundering"? Just because Monero is private by the protocol, it does not mean you cannot launder money. Anyone using it can be subjected of being part of a pool with large anonymity set, just as with mixers.

Two questions:

- Why is a mixer user considered purposely laundering funds but a Monero user not?
- Why is a mixer user considered intentionally obfuscating the coin source but a Monero user not?

(BTW, I completely disagree that a mixer user is absolutely some sort of evil prick that is purposely laundering funds.)

No, it is fantasy; an unreasonable piece of mind. Using Monero or mixing decentrally (e.g., Joinmarket) should be rightly considered a very intentional action of obfuscation the source.

I'm all in for a private protocol, and that's why I recommend and use Monero and coinjoin. However, I do believe that someone might want to use a mixer for the pricing or the comfort that comes with it, as I have used them for the same reasons in the past.

---

And since no one knows the truth, the safest approach is to not engage in bareless speculation.

The data, it's a huge asset. Chipmixer owner could probably use the data to analyze how effective the mixer was and improve mixing even further. You know address that deposits, address that receives, address that sends, then you move coins from one address to another and so on. By the way, 7TB can be a speculation to frighten people and make them believe that no mixer follows its no-log promise and they are all dangerous. Makes sense, right? But no one knows the truth.

What if get the bill from a cashier that someone used to snort cocaine? Will I be in trouble because someone found coke's traces on that? No, right? So, why should merchants get caught up in criminal investigations? Doesn't make sense, they receive money what their customers give to them, since when is it merchants' duty to check the source of money? 514 billion USD was laundered through JP Morgan? Who got in trouble? Why didn't government got in trouble? What are they doing? They aren't doing their job, it's not a good job when billions of dollars are laundered in your country. Why aren't all the JP Morgan, US Treasury and FED staff in prisons? Why doesn't government staff get pushed for their mistakes?

Billions were laundered through JP Morgan. Should merchants accept payments done via that bank?

That's a good point but we still and probably will rely forever on developers, miners, node runners and so on.

You still didn't answer my question...  You think vendors appreciate you sending them obfuscated funds from a known money laundering operation?

Using a private protocol doesn't amount to money laundering just because it's private.  Isn't that your whole argument for mixers in the first place?  This is called talking in circles.

Accepting funds that have been illegally obtained is illegal.  You talking about blockchain analysis and expectations doesn't change this.  Purposely laundering the funds and having them sent to vendors is quite different from someone not knowing where their funds came from and spending them.  In a court of law this would be the difference between unintentional ignorance and intentionally obfuscating their source, which is illegal.

I do believe that privacy can come from using a private protocol.  That removes the "intentionally obfuscating their source" by users, which is what makes using mixers money laundering.  This isn't fantasy, it's reality.  Thinking you can intentionally obfuscate your funds using a 3rd party legally to protect your "privacy" is fantasy.

I don't even understand why you're against making a private protocol instead of relying 3rd parties.  Just so you can get paid to spam here?  Relying on 3rd parties is against everything Bitcoin represents in my opinion.  The exact opposite of self sovereignty.  

You have created a new account just to share your opinion? I'm quite sure this is someone's alt account as it's strange that the account has one post and that's only to suggest Theymos to ban the signature campaigns.

I'm not sure why but I think you don't know that the gambling platforms and other platforms are spending money in order to gain exposure on this forum and for that reason they're accepting the members who may help them in marketing of their services. Those platforms also spend money on marketing their services or platforms on social media sites where the members doesn't get any share as most of the money is kept by the platforms.

I don't think that anything is wrong with signature campaigns on this forum and the members who are promoting those platforms aren't doing anything wrong. The members who give their precious time to the forum by making valuable information available to public are getting some rewards by applying those signatures on their profiles and I believe everyone should support those signature campaigns instead of going against them. let's be genuine with your opinion and post the opinion from your original account instead of using a new account.

How many casinos have you seen that were seized by FBI or other financial agencies? It doesn't happen often. The casinos have regulations guiding them which they try to abide by. Most casinos have KYC system which has the real time data of gamblers and they have wagering policies which combats money laundering and more. So, they aren't threats to the forum.
On the second part, mixers ban is because of the mixers themselves and not the promoters.

This shouldn't be a problem to theymos. I think he should even be happy that his forum is helping people to earn.

This forum is a huge part of bitcoin. By God's will, it should last as long as BTC lasts

Because, according to you, unless every transaction is private by the protocol, nobody should try to enhance their privacy as that would "leave the unknowing recipient take the fall for their privacy". Which, needless to say, is a ridiculous idea.

Because... facilitating money laundering on the protocol is completely legal. Lol.

I already told you. Merchants cannot expect from their clients to do blockchain analysis, and nor should they as it is evidently inaccurate. Instead, merchants should expect that the bitcoin can come from any kind of activity, just as with cash.

If you believe that there should be no privacy in the world unless there is a universal consensus and enforcement, then you are the one indulging in fantasy.

So, You opened a new account to write this. I'm interested in whose signature you wear on your main account...

Theymos why don't you ban casino signature campaigns too? These signature campaigns are the cancer of this forum, 90% of "writers", specially in Meta and Gambling, are just here for the signature money, yamming and creating drama, writing about nothing, bashing others so they can meet their signature quota.

 They are no different from poor shitposters from third world countries, just have better grammar and write more elaborate.

There is no innovation, there is no new influx of quality discussions, just people trying to earn money and drain as much BTC from this forum as possible.

Let this forum die in it's natural death, it is time to acknowledge it as part of history, archive it if it dies and move on.

If you have more, it will be for sure posted before the 28th of August  

So I went back and fixed above ⬆️

Looking for more.

I will be removing the signature in a few days.

Why are you forced to use Bitcoin with ridiculous levels of privacy? Nobody forces me to do anything… Not every transaction has to be private and there are other coins that do provide privacy without you having to launder money. If you want financial privacy right now without jumping through hoops, Bitcoin is not the right coin for you. If you want it to provide privacy without jumping through hoops or facilitating illegal behavior like money laundering, that needs to be done at the protocol level. I don’t make the laws. Your perspective is that of fantasy.

I noticed you didn’t answer my question about what you are doing to vendors and how you think they feel about it.

Right. As far as I know, some have reported that their Chips are “empty”.

To be honest, I'm really confused about this whole private key thing. On one hand, they did display the following text in their FAQ:

Going from "keeping the private keys" to "working closely with the government by doing blockchain analysis" is quite of wild jump, don't you think?

Why would they brag about something that could jeopardize the investigation, which probably hasn't ended yet? It is obvious that CM did not do what they said they were doing, and for some reason they kept not only the vouchers but also the private keys - and if you ask me how I know this, I already wrote that my funds were swept away from private key which was old more than a year. Therefore, there is no reason not to justifiably suspect that the logs are part of what they got their hands on.

That's right. 7TB was the total size of disk images from their hosting server. It's never been specified what kind of data it actually is, and I assume that most of that capacity is actually empty space, because that's how full disk image backups work.  I have not come across any indication that they kept the logs or that the FBI got them, so I'm not sure where Lucius is getting his information.

It has been that long since I posted about Chipmixer, I was relying on memory that was why the 7GB/7TB error could happen. You are right it was 7TB of data but having said that, it was never made public as to what was actually found on the disk.

Going back to the period when Chipmixer was seized, it was commented as possible that the disk size was 7TB yet the actual data on it could have been (and most probably would be) much less. The logs (as you stated) would not have taken up a lot of space therefore much is shrouded in mystery.

Terabytes.

Yeah, we have no idea what was there. The blockchain is not even 10% of that. Logs don't take up more than a couple of megabytes.

If I recall correctly, when the news broke about Chipmixer getting seized it was mentioned that a disk with 7GB of data was recovered. It was never stated by an law enforcement agency what was contained in that 7GB of data.

That is also my understanding, I cannot recall it ever being announced as to what was found to be on the disk (if anything) but if anything on the contrary has been stated I would like to be corrected. An operating system could have been part of that 7GB, we simply do not know.

I get your point, and it is truly sad, but if we are to trade this for the survival of this place, it is definitely worth it. I see it as a compromise for the best, and also as an incentive to push people into superior, decentralized alternatives like coinjoins and Monero.

Remember that this place is a central point of failure, just as mixers.

We know that it kept private keys and 7 TB of data in total, but that's all we know. I don't remember the feds bragging about logs, can you give me evidence of "absolutely everything"? (Vouchers were pretty reasonably kept in their database)

I'm surprised that you wrote something like this, considering that we established a long time ago that CM kept absolutely everything, from logs to private keys and vouchers, and that everyone who kept their funds on those PKs and vouchers lost their BTC. If my memory serves me well, the official information is that 7 GB of data was seized.