Topic: Mixers to be banned - page 46. (Read 23006 times)

It would be more honorable to tell us, either STFU, or GTFO. No need to post a wall of sad excuses. This is not about getting paid or not getting paid, you are betraying us!
We do agree that we should not use or promote darknet mixers, but they are a BITCOIN service, if you are banning a Bitcoin service, then YOU are the ENEMY of Bitcoin. simple as that.

Why don't you fuck off to Craig Wright's foxhole.

its not like i havnt been telling the mixer folk for months in their many topics, they need to think outside of the box about the way mixers function and brand themselves to not poke at regulations and business policy

Not only casinos, exchanges started the same way: some Bitcoin enthousiasts created something new, then it quickly grew over their head, and eventually they disappeared or matured. Bitcoin is growing up, and growing up comes with regulation.

Their number is on their website. You can ask them

Bitcoin still exists! That's the biggest win, and it's still growing in popularity. No government can stop it.

I am no lawyer, but I think that message is just to show compliance and to free theymos/the forum from any liabilities related to mentioning mixers here, but he clearly stated


Reading the "Google ASDFmixer" in contexts gives a clear comprehension of the intent, there is a huge difference between replying to someone who is asking "What mixer should I use" and then you reply with "Google ASDFmixer" and another post where people discuss, the risks of using mixers and you say something like " Bad things could happen, be careful, Google ASDFmixer", the former is an obvious violation, the latter is probably not.

But belive me, there one entity truly decentralized from over 14 years and getting more decentralized day by day called Bitcoin which sufficient enough but the services cant be decentralized it has been proven time to time.

Bet 1% of your bankroll 300 times and at the end you'll have 3x rollover and your original deposit minus house edge, give or take some variance, not too different from mixing with variable fees/donations.

I hope this doesn't get me banned.

Nope, Satoshi is still strong, back in 2010 he felt alone when he saw the swarm of giant hornets coming his direction because Bitcoin was 1 year old, but now we can see theymos is dropping the sword after seeing a tiny little bee, so I'd say if Satoshi was here, we'd be popping open the bottles in the middle of the wall street by now.

---

I fixed it for you by adding the hidden features you forgot to add.

The terms of the casino won't allow the user to use it as a mixer. Because, casino doesn't allow the user to deposit and withdraw their coin without wagering the deposit 'X' times (X= 1, 2, 3, ...,10, ...). There is a high chance of losing small to big amount of the deposits during the wagering process. Moreover, the number of No-KYC casinos have decreased significantly as the regulations have increased widely in the crypto gambling industry. Even unlicensed casinos have the KYC and AML policy now to follow the local laws (to reduce the legal risks) of some countries.

However, it will be a mixer for sure if you see any new casinos with No-KYC rules advertising in Bitcointalk forum, (1) with the capability of processing large withdrawals, (2) without any wagering requirement.

Uncle Sam wins...Satoshi loses

This would be a great title for an article that I may write later, or I will leave it open source for anyone who wants to write it!!!

If saying "google xyz" is not allowed, I don't see how saying "xyz" in any context would be allowed, unless we think that everyone here is an idiot and wouldn't know you can google things if not specifically told to do so.

Like "hey I found this website xyz, is this legit", happens sometimes on this forum. If this is allowed, it's a loophole that will get abused.

Keep in mind that this is not just about services that are called "xyzmixer" but also sites that are "not primarily a mixer but has a mixer function". This puts a lot of burden on the user having to know if some site they link to or mention might have a mixer function.

Edit: theymos posted a revision of the new rules that allows mentioning a mixer (without a url) https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63255213

Decentralized DT  

These idiots were so proud of their decentralized DT - and now they've disgraced themselves

It turned out that there is nothing decentralized on this forum

I doubt it will be this much; warning about using x mixer isn't exactly the same as "pointing someone" to use it.

But I agree, this feels like it has gone too far, but at the same time, I understand that theymos wants the forum to be legally protected, and how is he going to show compliance without imposing such rules? This way he could just tell law enforcement, "See, I have done everything I can to ban the illegal services," anything short of that could be viewed by law enforcement as "lack of compliance," an excuse to attack the forum.


Well, I think we are already in such a campaign against everything "freedom": banning mixers on this forum, large pools imposing KYC, and some of them started practicing transaction censorship.

I can't blame theymos just as much as I can't blame some of those pools and exchanges who have no option but to comply with the governments. I think we as a community failed big time.

14 years have passed, and we have not built anything truly decentralized

- No decentralized forum/community platform
- No truly decentralized exchange
- No truly decentralized mining pool
- No truly decentralized mixer

Too much power/responsibility is put in the hands of a few, creating terrible single points of failure. It's only a matter of time before they start banning everything that contributes to users' privacy/anonymity on the blockchain. We need to start looking for alternatives to everything we use today, something truly decentralized by ownership.

MUAHAHAHAHAHA. "No one says this forum is decentralized"  

When someone is kicked out of the DT - then the forum is decentralized  
When the forum is pressured from above by authorities - then the forum immediately becomes centralized  



Soon all your gamblings and casinos will be closed. All exchange transactions between users will be prohibited

These news doesn't comes as big surprise, it looked like matter of time when this decision will be made. But it's still sad day in Bitcointalk history. Yeah, if I would be in place of theymos, probably I would do same. I don't even use mixers, but I concerned about this decision. You can say it's just mixers, but now we open precedent for further decisions. What if governments will start taking actions against decentralised exchanges, non-KYC casinos or something else? Will they get banned on Bitcointalk too? I hope that Bitcointalk won't turn into place like some social media when people constantly getting message that ''your post goes against community standards''...
And at the same time you can promote all kind of scams, illegal stuff and etc without any consequences.

I do not think this is a wise idea, because later, theymos and those that are behind this forum will be the government target as they will be seen as the ones promoting mixers.

Never mind I asked this. Did you read the OP?

No one says this forum is decentralized. It is actually centralized and we all know that.

So that is your decentralized forum?  

What I really don't get is why the problem is with mixers only. If so, this is literally the worst decision I have ever seen...

If you want to make sure the ads are of better quality in general, then you should ban every bullshit that is advertised, no matter what the advertised product is.

Banning only mixing services is absurd.

Jesus Christ, can someone ping @mprep to get the unofficial rules topic updated so we can get this sorted out?

The last thing we need is scores of people getting banned for typing the name of a mixer. Hell, even if a news article name-checks a mixer and you quote it, the rules are currently too ambiguous and easy to misinterpret for anyone to be able to follow them properly.

Yeah, it won't be long before it's going to be like present day Youtube around here, where posts are going to be like "Remember that m***r debacle?  Wasn't that insane??".  Unfortunately, I'm nearly certain even the big lobbyists for crypto--whoever they are--aren't going to be standing up for mixers, and I do understand Theymos's problem and why he took the action that he did. 

I'm not slamming him or the forum, just being a little salty that those all-powerful regulators have twisted their jackboot on the neck of the crypto space just a wee bit more.  Even if they didn't make the decision for Theymos directly, they definitely did it indirectly.