Topic: Mixing coins through exchanges - page 3. (Read 1135 times)
Point to where in their Terms they say they are funding blockchain analysis companies like Wasabi does.
Indeed. I should be doing that. Thanks for pointing out, and I'm honestly concerned how I hadn't done my self-criticism about that yet. It's easier to pinpoint strangers' mistakes than ours, apparently. I'll be resigning the signature campaign at the end of this week.
My morals are worth more than that.
My morals are worth more than that.
I'll hold my applause until I see what you replace it with.
o_e_l_e_o - You are supporting blockchain analysis and censorship by promoting [banned mixer] which you say a direct attack on Bitcoin itself, have you contacted MixTum to tell them to shut down their service or is your paycheck stopping you?
By definition they are pro-censorship and therefore anti-fungibility. This is a direct attack on bitcoin itself.
The correct thing to do would be to shut down their centralized coordinator and work towards setting up decentralized ones.
Exchanges, services, and other exchangers do not revolve around bitcoin alone. You speak from the point of view of a bitcoin maximalist, but I am used to evaluating absolutely the entire crypto industry, especially that part of it that has real utilitarian features, and not just speculation.
How do you evaluate a cryptocurrency? I don't want to be called the Bitcoin maximalist, I feel more like an altcoin opposist, but I want to be as objective as possible. To me, a cryptocurrency is valuable if it fulfills at least the following criteria:- It's decentralized, permissionless, censorship-resistant and robust.
- The network can continue working without a company or an organization.
- There is no premining.
If you follow those standards, then you'll find less than five valuable cryptos.
Shouldn't you be offended and recommending to avoid it?
Indeed. I should be doing that. Thanks for pointing out, and I'm honestly concerned how I hadn't done my self-criticism about that yet. It's easier to pinpoint strangers' mistakes than ours, apparently. I'll be resigning the signature campaign at the end of this week. My morals are worth more than that.
What difference does it make to the victim who lost all their money?
To the person who lost their coins, none. To the person who still uses it to gain privacy, it says a lot. Centralized entities frequently face shutdowns, which is precisely why we have bitcoin in the first place. Yet, the very act of confiscating them demonstrates that these entities are indeed useful.Har har, the same could be applicable to mixer that, eventually, bows and scrapes before government's whims and wishes.
Do what you want with your money. The fact is that a mixer (or at least, a good mixer) is a service specifically designed for that purpose. It guarantees you privacy. 
I'm not saying you are wrong by any mens, but I have not experienced this personally.
You may have had, and you don't know. I have come across lots of merchants, one of which was sending me addresses to deposit, and until I asked, they were using Binance. So, I do have sent coins to exchange. Well. Let's clarify. A man sends over TOR/VPN his coins to exchange which doesn't require him to go through KYC procedure. Which private details could be revealed in this case?
Which part of "it isn't designed to offer privacy" don't you understand? Of course and you can make an account anonymously, but that isn't my point. Your coins could be confiscated for either being "tainted", or your account could be terminated for using a "banned IP address"Har har, the same could be applicable to mixer that, eventually, bows and scrapes before government's whims and wishes. Anyway, the discussion has started from the point of privacy (which was the main concern of OP) and slithered to safety. Mixers are not safe at all. Whirpool is case in point. Exchanges and mixers are equivalent in regards of their commitment as to safety of clients money, IMHO.
I'm being paid to promote it, but that doesn't mean I use it or I recommend it, just as I don't oppose it as service. Neutral stance, just as with any other advertised mixer here.
Why is your stance "neutral" to MixTum? Shouldn't you be offended and recommending to avoid it? It's an indication of their disrespect and dishonesty towards you for being so arrogant to think they are ethically superior:
Would you use a privacy-preserving software whose developers don't respect your right to privacy? Not only I would not, but I would even feel offended, and would recommend to avoid. Especially at the very moment when there are software developed with better intentions.
Or just not use their software altogether as an indication of disrespect for their dishonesty towards me, and for being so arrogant to think they are ethically superior.
The previous mixers advertised in this place also confiscated the coins of their users.
Nice strawman, but I never argued mixers don't get confiscated. I'm merely saying they weren't blacklisting anyone. What difference does it make to the victim who lost all their money?
Of course, this cannot happen, because DEX is not an absolute analogue of CEX, everything is different there.
If you really think about it, though, the difference in between, is that the CEX comes with shitcoins. If you're concerned about multi-platform services, then you want to trade shitcoins. If you're concerned of converting cryptocurrencies and doing off-chain swaps, then you want shitcoins. If you don't find enough liquidity on DEX, then you want shitcoins. I have been buying and selling bitcoin with absolutely no problem, and with sufficient bitcoin liquidity all the time in DEX. Yes, you are: You are promoting Mixtum in your signature, avatar, and personal description. You could not be trying any harder to endorse it.
I'm being paid to promote it, but that doesn't mean I use it or I recommend it, just as I don't oppose it as service. Neutral stance, just as with any other advertised mixer here. The previous mixers advertised in this place also confiscated the coins of their users.
Nice strawman, but I never argued mixers don't get confiscated. I'm merely saying they weren't blacklisting anyone. I'm not endorsing anyone to using this particular mixer.
Yes, you are: You are promoting Mixtum in your signature, avatar, and personal description. You could not be trying any harder to endorse it.
There is another difference: the mixer acts as the liable entity for tumbling everyone's coins together. You don't gain this from an exchange.
This is wrong. The Bitfinex hackers were arrested after Alphabay's data was seized by authorities, Alphabay did not absorb their liability.
The previous mixers advertised in this place did not have the same privacy policy and never blacklisted anyone.
The previous mixers advertised in this place also confiscated the coins of their users.
Chipmixer:
I'm curious about that too. Many people used ChipMixer for privacy, which (still) isn't illegal. But if you're going to claim your vouchers back from the German authorities, your privacy will be gone.
Privacy is secondary. If I had vouchers, which I fortunately don't, I'd just want my property back. Whirlwind.Money:
Is there a chance some really big shit is going on in their lives, and they are incapable of going online? For like... A month? I really can't believe this is an exit scam. The service seemed legitimate.
I'm really pissed off, and not because I lost money; fortunately, I had grasped that "don't leave coins to third parties" cliché. I'm so pissed off because I've been advertising and recommending this shit for months, in such a way that I'm practically part of this scam. And it's just feels awful.
It makes you question the integrity of the service you're currently carrying in your signature.
I'm really pissed off, and not because I lost money; fortunately, I had grasped that "don't leave coins to third parties" cliché. I'm so pissed off because I've been advertising and recommending this shit for months, in such a way that I'm practically part of this scam. And it's just feels awful.
It makes you question the integrity of the service you're currently carrying in your signature.
Did you take the time to read the privacy policy of the mixer you are using?
You're correct, and yes, I have taken the time to read their privacy policy, which is why I'm not endorsing anyone to using this particular mixer.Your mixer says it can confiscate your coins or terminate your account, so the only difference between using an exchange and using your mixer is that exchanges have a larger user base. It is not suitable for the purpose of gaining privacy.
There is another difference: the mixer acts as the liable entity for tumbling everyone's coins together. You don't gain this from an exchange. This is why you should absolutely not be recommending mixers to the OP as an alternative for exchanges.
The previous mixers advertised in this place did not have the same privacy policy and never blacklisted anyone. Which part of "it isn't designed to offer privacy" don't you understand? Of course and you can make an account anonymously, but that isn't my point. Your coins could be confiscated for either being "tainted", or your account could be terminated for using a "banned IP address". Can you gain privacy from such service? Perhaps. Is it suitable for that purpose? No.
The mixer you advertise is also not designed to offer privacy. How do you not understand that? Your mixer says it can confiscate your coins or terminate your account, so the only difference between using an exchange and using your mixer is that exchanges have a larger user base. It is not suitable for the purpose of gaining privacy.
The real question is why would you ever want to do that? The exchange isn't portraying itself as a mixer, and if you take the time to read their privacy policy, you'll quickly figure out that you have no privacy.
Did you take the time to read the privacy policy of the mixer you are using?
Quote from: [banned mixer
]3. Quality scoring of incoming transactions
We run a thorough background check of incoming funds through a proprietary algorithm.
We run a thorough background check of incoming funds through a proprietary algorithm.
Quote from: [banned mixer
]2.1. Privacy Policy
Please refer to our Privacy Policy to get an understanding of our confidentiality obligations. You consent to the collection and use of information as described in the Privacy Policy.
2.2 Suspension or termination of services
[banned mixer] reserves the right to suspend or terminate access to services at any time at its own discretion, with or without reasons, with or without notification assuming no responsibility whatsoever.
For example, services may be suspended or terminated due to the following reasons:
an actual or suspected violation of these Terms and Conditions;
use of the service in such a manner that is conducive to the legal liability of [banned mixer] or Service malfunction;
planned or unplanned maintenance, etc.
2.3 Unacceptable use
You agree that you personally will not commit, encourage or support the committal of:
use of any unauthorized means to access the [banned mixer] service or use of any automated process or service (for example, spider, crawler or periodic caching of information stored or generated by [banned mixer]) except for the functions described in our API, as well as distribution of instructions, software or tools with this aim in view;
modification, change, distortion or any other interference in work of the [banned mixer] service;
disturbing or interference in operation of servers or networks used by [banned mixer] to deliver the Services;
disabling, overload or degradation of [banned mixer] performance (or any other network connected to the service);
use of the [banned mixer] service or website for any other purposes other than those specifically provided by these Terms and Privacy Policy;
any illegal or fraudulent activity, as well as use of this Service in order to legalize illegal income, financing of terrorism, participation in schemes of phishing, forgery or other such falsification or manipulation;
unauthorized spamming, pyramid schemes or any other activity duplicating unwanted messages should they be commercially oriented or of other nature.
2.4 Service updates
At any time and at its absolute discretion [banned mixer] can carry out unscheduled works related to the service modification, update and enhancement. We are liable to add or remove functions and cease activities of the service and website.
2.5 License and restrictions
[banned mixer] provides you with a personal nontransferable nonexclusive license to use the Service as it is stipulated for you by [banned mixer]. This license is provided under conditions and restricted to the provisions, stipulations and constraints stated in these Terms. Therewith, such license is intended for personal, noncommercial use. You may not copy, modify, create a derivative work of, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the service or any part thereof, exclusive of data permitted by law, or expressly allowed by the [banned mixer] platform (use of templates, API, etc.). You may not reassign (or grant a sublicense of) your rights to use the service, or otherwise transfer any part of your rights in accordance with these Terms. These Rules do not provide you with any license or permission to copy, distribute, change or otherwise use any applications programming interface despite any provisions to the contrary. No property rights or ownership rights related to the Service are not granted to you according to these Terms. [banned mixer] reserves all rights that have not been expressly granted.
Please refer to our Privacy Policy to get an understanding of our confidentiality obligations. You consent to the collection and use of information as described in the Privacy Policy.
2.2 Suspension or termination of services
[banned mixer] reserves the right to suspend or terminate access to services at any time at its own discretion, with or without reasons, with or without notification assuming no responsibility whatsoever.
For example, services may be suspended or terminated due to the following reasons:
an actual or suspected violation of these Terms and Conditions;
use of the service in such a manner that is conducive to the legal liability of [banned mixer] or Service malfunction;
planned or unplanned maintenance, etc.
2.3 Unacceptable use
You agree that you personally will not commit, encourage or support the committal of:
use of any unauthorized means to access the [banned mixer] service or use of any automated process or service (for example, spider, crawler or periodic caching of information stored or generated by [banned mixer]) except for the functions described in our API, as well as distribution of instructions, software or tools with this aim in view;
modification, change, distortion or any other interference in work of the [banned mixer] service;
disturbing or interference in operation of servers or networks used by [banned mixer] to deliver the Services;
disabling, overload or degradation of [banned mixer] performance (or any other network connected to the service);
use of the [banned mixer] service or website for any other purposes other than those specifically provided by these Terms and Privacy Policy;
any illegal or fraudulent activity, as well as use of this Service in order to legalize illegal income, financing of terrorism, participation in schemes of phishing, forgery or other such falsification or manipulation;
unauthorized spamming, pyramid schemes or any other activity duplicating unwanted messages should they be commercially oriented or of other nature.
2.4 Service updates
At any time and at its absolute discretion [banned mixer] can carry out unscheduled works related to the service modification, update and enhancement. We are liable to add or remove functions and cease activities of the service and website.
2.5 License and restrictions
[banned mixer] provides you with a personal nontransferable nonexclusive license to use the Service as it is stipulated for you by [banned mixer]. This license is provided under conditions and restricted to the provisions, stipulations and constraints stated in these Terms. Therewith, such license is intended for personal, noncommercial use. You may not copy, modify, create a derivative work of, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the service or any part thereof, exclusive of data permitted by law, or expressly allowed by the [banned mixer] platform (use of templates, API, etc.). You may not reassign (or grant a sublicense of) your rights to use the service, or otherwise transfer any part of your rights in accordance with these Terms. These Rules do not provide you with any license or permission to copy, distribute, change or otherwise use any applications programming interface despite any provisions to the contrary. No property rights or ownership rights related to the Service are not granted to you according to these Terms. [banned mixer] reserves all rights that have not been expressly granted.
This is why you should absolutely not be recommending mixers to the OP as an alternative for exchanges. You are trading one trusted custodian for another without solving the issue of privacy.
I'm not saying you are wrong by any mens, but I have not experienced this personally.
You may have had, and you don't know. I have come across lots of merchants, one of which was sending me addresses to deposit, and until I asked, they were using Binance. So, I do have sent coins to exchange. Well. Let's clarify. A man sends over TOR/VPN his coins to exchange which doesn't require him to go through KYC procedure. Which private details could be revealed in this case?
Which part of "it isn't designed to offer privacy" don't you understand? Of course and you can make an account anonymously, but that isn't my point. Your coins could be confiscated for either being "tainted", or your account could be terminated for using a "banned IP address". Can you gain privacy from such service? Perhaps. Is it suitable for that purpose? No. Well, correct , exchange operates with investors' coins, but the coins of the same time will be send back to a man from my example.
The user does not interact with an exchange that might deem his coins as "tainted". That's enough of a service to me. Now, if you want to know the procedure, make a reply in their ANN thread. A man sends his coins to exchange E and receives different coins C after a while. In your opinion, this is a bad practice
Yes, because an exchange isn't designed to offer on-chain privacy.Well. Let's clarify. A man sends over TOR/VPN his coins to exchange which doesn't require him to go through KYC procedure. Which private details could be revealed in this case?
On the other hand, if a man sends his coins to a dedicated mixer M, and M sends those coins to the same exchange E, getting the same coins C back and then sending them back to the man, you consider it good practice.
MixTum says they're mixing your coins with investors' coins. I'm not sure about the exact procedure they follow, I don't believe they're just randomly selecting an exchange and sending your coins there, under their full name. You can ask them that question in the appropriate thread. I am not obligated to provide an answer, nor am I able to.Well, correct , exchange operates with investors' coins, but the coins of the same time will be send back to a man from my example. I think you have glossed over the issue you have faced and turned blame on MixTum.
Every year, services that freely accept bitcoins are becoming less and less.
I'm not saying you are wrong by any means, but I have not experienced this personally. It might be because I have never used centralized exchanges which require KYC or any service using payment processors such as BitPay which also require KYC or perform blockchain analysis in the first place. Certainly the places I spend bitcoin in person locally all tend to accept it directly and without a third party payment processor.In the end, it all turns into a complete headache, because if, as you say, we leave those services that implement such checks and look for alternative ones, then we start to face other problems. For example, alternative services do not have the products that we need, or they are available, but not as good as they were in the service that we had to abandon.
That's kind of my point though. If we all continue to use these privacy invading services just out of convenience, then they will grow, dominate the ecosystem, and force out their competitors. If you want privacy respecting entities to thrive, then you need to actively seek them out, use them, support them, and encourage others to do the same, despite any initial inconvenience. If everyone moved from centralized exchanges to Bisq, for example, then the most common complaint Bisq gets about liquidity would simply cease to exist. 
There is huge chance for you to clean your BTC through the strategy you posted but if you must do the process make sure the exchange is DEX,
I don't like the term "clean your BTC" because there is no clean, dirty or tainted BTC, all BTC's are the same and this terms are created by centralized anti-BTC institutions to attack the network. Mixing or CoinJoining coins is a means to maintain or improve privacy, not to 'clean' your coins.I am sure he has a positive purpose behind the pronunciation of the word "Clean your BTC" and does not intend to say dirty bitcoin that needs to be cleaned using external services because there are two types of mixer services, the first type is centralized and the second type decentralized.
There is huge chance for you to clean your BTC through the strategy you posted but if you must do the process make sure the exchange is DEX,
I don't like the term "clean your BTC" because there is no clean, dirty or tainted BTC, all BTC's are the same and this terms are created by centralized anti-BTC institutions to attack the network. Mixing or CoinJoining coins is a means to maintain or improve privacy, not to 'clean' your coins.However, I will advise you also make use a privacy wallet just in case there's a lagging which could expose your privacy.
Privacy wallet for BTC? To achieve privacy you have to run your own full node and verify everything locally. Let's say you use an spv wallet like Electrum without connecting to your own Electrum server over tor but you use a third party server, your privacy is exposed to the server you connect to. It literally was my initial warning
Correct, but you have also said that it links your transactions no matter what, and that transaction links are created by Whirlpool coinjoins, both of which are incorrect. It links your transactions no matter which coin you consolidate it with
I continue to quote the post where I traced the Whirlpool transaction you provided because people need to be aware of the transaction links created by Whirlpool coinjoins that can be avoided by using WabiSabi coinjoins.
Now please can we stick to the point and not to semantics?
I am sticking to the point and not semantics: Whirlpool produces toxic change, and toxic change can be used for tracking future transactions. Your claim that "You can't track coins until they are spent" is already completely contained within this statement.
hero member
Activity: 2786
Merit: 657
Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me
It is possible to mix coins through exchange ?
If i deposit from my wallet BTC to the exchange and then withdraw them to another btc address, will my coins be tracked?
There is huge chance for you to clean your BTC through the strategy you posted but if you must do the process make sure the exchange is DEX, have good record, and you must also read their privacy policy to prevent future issue. However, I will advise you also make use a privacy wallet just in case there's a lagging which could expose your privacy. If i deposit from my wallet BTC to the exchange and then withdraw them to another btc address, will my coins be tracked?
It literally was my initial warning
Correct, but you have also said that it links your transactions no matter what, and that transaction links are created by Whirlpool coinjoins, both of which are incorrect. It links your transactions no matter which coin you consolidate it with
I continue to quote the post where I traced the Whirlpool transaction you provided because people need to be aware of the transaction links created by Whirlpool coinjoins that can be avoided by using WabiSabi coinjoins.
Now please can we stick to the point and not to semantics?
A man sends his coins to exchange E and receives different coins C after a while. In your opinion, this is a bad practice
Yes, because an exchange isn't designed to offer on-chain privacy.On the other hand, if a man sends his coins to a dedicated mixer M, and M sends those coins to the same exchange E, getting the same coins C back and then sending them back to the man, you consider it good practice.
MixTum says they're mixing your coins with investors' coins. I'm not sure about the exact procedure they follow, I don't believe they're just randomly selecting an exchange and sending your coins there, under their full name. You can ask them that question in the appropriate thread. I am not obligated to provide an answer, nor am I able to. I'm all in for mixing coins coming from exchanges. I'm against using exchanges as mixers.
Well, let’s make this as simple as possible.
A man sends his coins to exchange E and receives different coins C after a while. In your opinion, this is a bad practice.
On the other hand, if a man sends his coins to a dedicated mixer M, and M sends those coins to the same exchange E, getting the same coins C back and then sending them back to the man, you consider it good practice.
So, what has that mixer M done aside generating profits for itself?
They do create toxic change, but that wasn't your initial warning.
It literally was my initial warning:
I would warn users again using Whirlpool since it creates "toxic change" that can be used for tracking future transactions and reveals common input ownership:
Okay then, why don't you reveal how to not create toxic coins when using Whirlpool coinjoins then since you claim that individuals themselves are consciously doing this?
I rephrased that particular sentence. I meant that the individuals themselves link transactions, and it's not fault of the whirlpool coinjoins. They do create toxic change, but that wasn't your initial warning. Jump to: