Topic: Mixers to be banned - page 28. (Read 23809 times)

Of course, they cannot prove 100% that this account is true. However, due to the proximity of the events, it became difficult to separate the two events.

Another point that should serve as reflection is that, if he was a hater, the probability of him having made more posts on this subject and even on this OP would be high. Or don't you think so?

The account continues to be accessed.

I was hoping they confirm being real. That would be interesting. I can't see how they'll "deceive" people here.

Risking his job indeed.

Add +31 (0) 6 ~. If it's government, they're not working in the weekend

It could be an insider (typist, editor, photocopier) who gained access to the information, but does that make it an official account? I'm talking about how this account might be used to deceive individuals.

Imagine an FBI editor creating an account and posing as FBI agent just because he gets inside informations. Risky

Agreed the red tag was a crossedline but neutral tag is appropriate.

The number on the website isn't connecting.... 

I can think of a reason: timing:
The account was created 2.5 hours before fiod.nl published this article, and posted about it 6 minutes after publication.

Ask them? Their number is on their website

theymos, what about this?

1) Some mixers already have a Know Your Transaction (KYT) policy, will they get banned? Is it enough to add the phrase “The mixer can collect KYC data” in the terms of use?

2) In terms of allowing decentralized services, TornadoCash defines itself as an open source, non-custodial, fully decentralized cryptocurrency tumbler however U.S. Treasury Sanctions Notorious Virtual Currency Mixer Tornado Cash

If you noticed, the issue revolves around the United States’ desire to limit the activity of the Lazarus Group^[1], so Tornado Cash, Blender.io^[2] Chipmixer^[3] and Sinbad^[4] were banned more than it was a ban on mixers.

Therefore, I hope that the restrictions regarding the definition of mixer will be reduced, or at least that they will not be worse than the current wording.

[1] U.S. Treasury Issues First-Ever Sanctions on a Virtual Currency Mixer, Targets DPRK Cyber Threats
[2] OFAC sanctions virtual asset mixer for the first time to combat North Korea’s Lazarus Group
[3] ChipMixer was one of a variety of mixers used to launder the proceeds of hacks perpetrated by North Korea’s Lazarus Group
[4] Feds Seize 'Sinbad' Crypto Mixer Used by North Korea's Lazarus

No, "the LN" can never be considered such a service, because: first, it isn't a "service" but a decentralized P2P network or software solution, and 2) it doesn't meet the criteria that "it" can steal property in the mixing process.

If I interpret theymos' rules correctly, then not even a LN node which advertises itself as a mixer could be considered one (according to this policy), because it cannot steal property if the user does everything right -> this means in the case of Lightning, that they control the channel and close it if the counterparty tries to post an old state.

This may be seen by some as a loophole but for me it actually isn't one: all Lightning nodes have these privacy-protecting qualities, and thus no mixer can really make a "business model" out of it (for example, charging higher LN fees). Of course, it's possible that many Lightning nodes collect data for blockchain analysis, but a node advertising itself as a "mixer" that "doesn't do that", can do that too, and as an user, you can't "see" the difference.

I'm not a CoinJoin expert but I believe with CoinJoin the situation is very similar.

---

Thanks for the clarification, I think I can live with that restriction if a discussion about mixers and thus at least user-to-user help (without mixer representatives being involved), either in a dedicated thread or in a general "thread about mixers" continues to be allowed. I can sort of understand your problem with mixer representatives; it could be a risk for the forum (even if I believe it won't, if advertising is strictly banned), so it's a classical tradeoff.

Maybe and maybe coinjoin.

But LN does not do much volume.

Also it is a bit harder to unravel.

Supposedly 50% of sinbad.io coins were bad.

I can't work out what you mean by theymos removed KYC for other services because he didn't say he's going to bring it to the forum. Who'd post here if KYC was compulsory. Your doomsday topics aren't necessary because bitcoin as we know isn't ending. There's too much exaggeration in this topic.

I edited the OP to reflect the updates I posted as a draft earlier.


It'd be OK in a post. In a signature it would probably not be allowed, as it would look like "promoting a mixer".


It's OK.


Sorry, but having official mixer representatives do that sort of thing is too problematic, so that won't be allowed. But a non-mixer-representative creating an "ASDFMixer discussion thread" would be OK.


Before, I didn't really understand your position on the KYC issue at all, but now I understand it a little better: You see KYC as fundamentally bad, and by "favoring" KYC services in any way, it supports the existence of "KYC-only zones", possibly diminishing "non-KYC zones".

I agree that KYC is bad, it'd be better for no service to have KYC, and KYC almost entirely exists because of real and threatened violence by the state. But I still use a few KYC services, and I don't see doing so as really "supporting the KYC ecosystem". If a big company like Coinbase created a KYC mixer, I could imagine myself using it in a few limited cases. True, a KYC mixer would only have value because of the evil of state-imposed KYC requirements, but it'd still potentially be useful. (In cases where I don't want anyone to be able to link my transactions, I wouldn't consider a centralized mixer in any case, KYC or no.)

I don't think that criteria 3 will really help any service very much, but if hypothetically removing criteria 3 would prevent KYC-mixers from existing anywhere on Earth, I still wouldn't do it. KYC-mixers would probably provide some value to some people. It's like: would you want to ban all patent-law lawyers just because you don't think that patents should exist (as I do)? Moreover, I prefer to ban as few things as possible, and this is something that doesn't need to be banned.

I did edit criteria 3 to make it clear that I'm not endorsing KYC.

Says a troll wearing a signature with 7 negative tags.  almighty diagram My friend, you should have posted this from your main account.

We didn't see any imbecile create an FBI account to announce the Chipmixer confiscation, yet here we are. The imposter has already left the forum. Those tags were only a preventive measures Imo.

It isn’t a free service you’re paying a fee so their business gets what they want that's where it should stop. If they’re supposed to make you anonymous you shouldn't give your ID to them. You shouldn’t have to give your ID for the right to use their anonymous services.

I'm not sure why both of you believe the impostor (mentioned account) is a real government agency without any type of verification. There was no way of knowing if the fool behind the account was a genuine FIOD agent. And why would FIOD create an account just to announce something that was already on blogs and news outlets?

I've changed tag to neutral and it stays that way until there is sort of verification.

I am just curious, since mixers are not illegal and are at some point in grey area or call whatever you want, like Kratom and research chemicals in the USA for example, have you thought about this: Allow mixers ANN threads and discussion unless mixer gets blacklisted. For example, Sinbad.io was blacklisted since day one, news websites had published about how Sinbad was created by Blender.io team. And Sinbad got seized because it was known they were laundering money but what about other mixers? Yomix, Mixtum, (for example MixerXer) and others for example? I mean, it's okay to allow these mixers on your website but once there is an article about (for example) MixerXer was caught in money laundering or North Korea group laundered money through MixerXer, then just blacklist MixerXer and remove their thread, promotions and so on. Usually there are articles written about how money was laundered through certain mixer before it gets seized.
What is the oldest bitcoin mixer? [banned mixer] as far as I know (correct me if I am wrong because I am not an old user). Has there been any article about [banned mixer] helped money launderers or something like that? No, and they haven't been seized too.

Do as you wish of course because I am not the one who has the responsibility of managing the forum but I still think that this solution sounds fair too but maybe it's too late, can't talk any further.

Maybe a stupid question, but can't the lightning network actually be considered a mixing service? 

No need to cry and act immature like your tough friend because I don't share your opinion, it's not the end of the world. And what you and your friend thinks don't touch me at all, you can't pure water on my back. Alt account? Please tell me what I am alt account of? Since you accusing me here I guess you have proof. I can assure you i am not here for trolling in any way.
By the way what's up with this fiction to call other users troll here? Is it what you say here when you really want to insult someone but don't know what to say?   "You don't agree with me so I ignore you and see you as a troll"
You really think you are so scary and important so I don't dare to use my real name against you? "Throw away account"... standard phrase I guess when you are out of words.

With such logic, suchmoon's feedback suits you well. 


No, you dont. You just like trolling with your throw away alt account. However, if you have any normal questions about my feedback, please feel free to ask. I will be happy to answer them.

Why the hell would I give my ID to a service whose purpose is to make me anonymous?

The rule says as follows,


Last two words.  A Service is called a Mixer by his definition unless they collect Know Your Customer type of information from ALL users.

If there was a case ever made for archiving threads then surely what is going to happen with mixers has to be a good example.

If I recall correctly, theymos stated he would archive the mixer threads but not delete them whereas new threads would be deleted. There is no ban on discussion surrounding mixers but historical data is part of the forum and there is no reason to have mixers threads deleted, they can sit somewhere in archives for nostalgic purposes.