Topic: The PATRIOT Act comes to cryptocurrency - page 5. (Read 2102 times)

Does anyone know what the impact of such a law (if passed) would be on the forum? I found that they are citing some of the reasons that prompted them to do so at ---->  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/03/09/ fact-sheet-president-biden-to-sign-executive-order-on-ensuring-responsible-innovation-in-digital-assets/
If we search, we will find that some of the mixing service providers accused in the above list are present in this forum, and according to the page --->  https://bitcointalk.org/privacy.php,

But I think it is worth knowing that monero is also adopted to some extent, despite the pressure from governments of many countries, and exchanges that delisted it.

There was a time monero was $0.2
In March 2020, monero was $25
In May 2021, monero had all-time-high, which was $519. Despite that many altcoins were existing long time ago but they did not had  all-time-high.

Monero price as of today is $157.5 which is 3 times lower than all-time-high. Unlike most altcoins that are 10 time or more lower than the highest price they got to in 2021

Monero has a marketcap of $2.89 billion and the 24th (as of today) on the lists of coins with the higher marketcap.

Definitely. That is why converting bitcoin to monero and back to bitcoin on decentralized exchanges is advised as one of the means of mixing bitcoin. You can see mixer like mixero.io having monero bridge used to mix bitcoin in advanced mode. No coin is existing that gives this benefits.

I will quote you by enumerating what you said:


Sounds good to me!!!

Sounds like monero has achieved what they wanted.

Sounds like "Monero above all", when it comes to privacy.

Who knows? Maybe because it doesn't promise 1000% returns like most of the scam shitcoins people buy. There are no shitty ICOs or tokens or ordinals or other nonsense built on Monero. Or maybe because people who use Monero aren't super vocal about it. And there is zero media presence for Monero - governments and blockchain analysis companies don't like it, so centralized exchanges won't advertise it and the big sponsored crypto sites don't talk about it. And there was no pre-mine for the creators to splash on advertising campaigns or similar.

Personally, it's the only coin other than bitcoin I own and use.

I downloaded monero (not the full blockchain), out of curiousity. I used it through coin exchange in order to get rid of some UTXOs. My question remains: why is monero not very widespread? I would argue, according to all the comments and posts I have seen, that monero is a "good" coin.

Yes. The US government posted bounties of $625,000 for cracking Monero, which were not claimed, and no blockchain analysis company advertises Monero breaking services. The government (so far) are unable to break Monero, provided you use it properly.

Yes and nothing, but they are still required to respond to negative comments, particularly any that can cite relevant laws explaining why this proposal is a crazy overreach.

Bitcoin was clearly created with the assumption that the government will try to do something like that. Bitcoin community got too relaxed, too reliant on the centralized ecosystem. So yes, it will greatly shake the current ecosystem and community, it will be ugly, but ultimately Bitcoin will survive, and hopefully the ecosystem will become more decentralized and resilient to such moves by the government.

Surely that’s a Draconian policy but by some means, the centralized exchanges have got a place in the cryptospace. Not just about there ease of operation but, these exchanges bridge the gap and resolve a simple issue of trust between both parties in a p2p trade with them serving as escrow. They also ensure you remain anonymous to the other party in a p2p trade but, not to them if I must make that clear.

There need to exists within a jurisdiction places them under certain laws which demands compliance at all level and as much as that is bad for business in the cryptospace, it’s something really useful to the government. I’m the absences of proper subsidiaries, it’s hard not to use.

Out of curiosity.
Will positive comments about the proposed regulation also be taken into account and what stops the government from sponsoring comments encouraging it inorder to counter any criticism that it gets?

Quote from the article:

Ok so Samourai is top notch in terms of privacy. I love Samourai when it is connected to my own node, even if I don't use it regularly. We should note however that Samourai is not a panacea and if it is not properly set up, it can be bad for privacy.

Is monero as private as everyone says? I am surprised it is not that widespread since it is mentioned too much in privacy related posts and articles.

The price on a DEX is what you make it. The price usually favors the maker, because the maker posts an offer for other people to accept. If you don't see a price you like, then post your own offer and wait for other people to accept it. You'll potentially get lower trading fees as well depending on the platform by being the maker rather than the taker.

---

Looks like the first couple of comments are now starting to show up:

---

Any further nonsense from franky1 will be deleted. Please keep this on-topic.

Did you attend the same business school as Donald Trump?  The similarities are mounting.   

Just because it's in your nature to be deceitful and dishonest, doesn't mean other people are.  There are numerous problems in founding a business under false pretenses like that.  How do you market your service to your target audience without giving the game away?  When your business is audited, how do you explain the unusually high percentage of refunds?  Why would anyone who isn't a criminal found a company on the basis of a lie?  Such a company may not have to register as an MSB, but they'll still have to answer to some form of regulatory body, depending on what industry sector they pretend to serve, and they'll likely still be subject to whatever AML requirements are enforced by those regulators.

The sensible people in the room are campaigning to ensure legitimate day-to-day interactions are not lumped in with illicit activity.  But you're just there at the back shouting "hAvE yOu TrIeD oPeNiNg A bUsInEsS tO cOmMiT mOnEy LaUnDeRiNg?".  That's completely moronic (even for you).  If you were truly smart, you'd realise that real life doesn't match your fevered daydreams.  You can't just go telling people to open a "front" to commit money laundering and act like you've solved the issue.

Simple fact is, all these mixing services you so clearly despise actually operate under a greater level of integrity than you do.  They are open and honest about the service they provide and the principles they uphold.  You have no such principles.  All you do is lie and deceive.  You're disgusting.

many things even in fiat are not declared as being a MSB/MTS

ordering a taxi is not a money service business even though people deposit money into a taxi app and the taxi company then sends funds(minus commission) to the driver at the end of shift

a taxi company head office does not do any driving of cabs itself and just facilitates the payments of journeys. yet they get to define themselves not as a MSB but as a transportation service.

so think outside of the box of the definition of money service business and create a service that is described as something else but still produces end result as another withdrawal address gets funds from a different deposit address.. BE SMART.

when you want privacy dont advertise people should use a mixer. tell them to use a driverless car transportation service that offers 99% refunds if the car does not turn up(a lame example)

ive hinted enough without spelling it out. but lets see who is smart enough to do something and work out other methods to get the results they want without being considered a MSB

Powerful, this is what every serious minded bitcoiners should first seek after to know and understand the difference between these and otherwise, some will be using bitcoin yet feels unsecured thesame way they have been dealing with using the fiat economy system and currency, if you're interested in bitcoin, then know this and have a perfect peace with your entire investment in bitcoin without any risk or fear of missing out.


Maybe this will also let he governments or regulatory bodies take actions over every other centralized exchanges or organizations that take advantage of bitcoin to colonize others without offering the same privacy and decentralization function people should enjoy from bitcoin, if governments were also found in this mess, then all they were after is a chase after air.

This matter of Governments trying to control bitcoin in their different countries is getting complicating every day and night. But the matter what they can't win the war, when the matter has gotten out of hand then p2p will be fully implemented. And one thing I also discovered the centralized exchange prices of bitcoin is higher than decentralized exchange platforms. I have been checking this for a long time now and it still the same. Op, I click on the last link you provided on the Op and I make some comparations, men the Gap is very big but that is not withstanding, from all the links and articles you provided shows that the issue is very serious. And one thing I will also say about privacy is that, privacy is when you have not given your identity to anyone and once you do then it is no longer privacy. Like the all the people that are using centralized exchange platforms now is no longer anonymous because KYC has been given to the exchange and the only thing for them to do now is to abandoned the accounts and they should not send bitcoin to those accounts again. Even at that their information are still there but it will not have any effect on them because they are not using the accounts. Personally, I have been looking for a good price Decentralized Exchange DEX platform since but I have not seen and that was why I am using CEX, but with this serious warning, I have to look for a better DEX platform to be used.

The government will surely go to any length to make sure they control what they don't control and this is the case here with Bitcoin, after seeing that they can't ban it or is difficult to ban it totally, now they have to employ a strategy of control by passing bills or laws that will pressure Bitcoiners to left with a tiny option than likely cooperate with those laws if possible.

This is a fight for privacy and freedom, So as the government is doing everything to get us on our knees, we must employ our strategy to try to avoid those traps they are setting up to get us on the knees,  totally avoiding the use of centralized exchanges if possible.

It's standard protocol. No way the US government is going to let unmoderated comments be posted live to one of their websites. They should be posted once they've been checked for inappropriate content.

And because the majority of people complete KYC without a second though. Bitcoin wasn't designed so you can just comply with the same old fiat rules and regulations you've been complying with your entire life. The whole point of bitcoin is to remove the ability of faceless third parties to control you.

Because bitcoin takes power away from the government and gives it to the people, and the government will never accept that.

If FinCEN are able to enact this, many countries will follow suit with their own such bullshit regulations. Don't think you are safe from this just because you aren't American.

For many reasons, I'm happy that I don't live in the US, and I guess this is now one of them. This proposal is extremely unfair. First, there's still a ton of cash people use without going through any KYC, right? Second, the vast majority of money laundering is occurring with the traditional banking systems with fiat currencies, not with cryptos, so it's unreasonable to impose the rules that don't seem to work and attack the crypto market while turning a blind eye to traditional money laundering. Oh, and as for terrorism sponsorship, which is mentioned in the article, I think that making things hard for everyone just because some people use cryptos to finance terrible organizations is totally uncalled for. And I love how the article shows how little the government has been actually trying to prove regarding the scope of illicit activities.
What's giving some comfort is that it's a proposal, so it's not enacted yet and there's some place for hope that it will be rejected.

The way things are unfolding, it seems we're heading in that direction. Everything involving Bitcoin that the government can regulate, they want to intervene in. Exchanges and even gambling sites now require KYC, and this KYC requirement erases the anonymity that we intended to preserve. It's tough to accept that what Satoshi created for anonymous transactions and decentralization is becoming centralized, and anonymity is being stripped away due to KYC.

Why doesn't the government just create its own digital asset and let Bitcoin continue to function in our ecosystem? I'm sure the massive adoption we hope for could still happen even if they don't heavily regulate the market.

It is very clear that this piece of legislation has a hidden agenda behind it to give the banking giants, Paypal, and other Wall Street outfits even more bitcoins than they may already own right now. As well as pretty much every other cryptocurrency that has a worth. Why? To make trillions of dollars in more obscene profits which will make for fat paychecks for their executive staff.


I notice there are 48 comments on this document, and yet none of them are even visible. Looks like they are withholding comments for "review" or whatever that means.