I don’t want to ignore it. Im just unsure here, if it’s a service that is open to anyone and he couldn’t know who uses it, then to me it’s not participating actively. If he actually knew, then it’s another story. If he knew profits are stolen he should’ve never used them and actually inform law enforcement about it. Im just asking myself what a service that is truly private could do in a situation like this(tornado cash probably wasn’t), when they actually couldnt know about their service being abused, but it would still count as helping in crimes. Because then the problem arises that it would become mandatory to not allow full privacy for customers, when offering services.

Who ever said this? Also tornado cash is developed on ethereum i think. That people get alert in a case like this is just obvious, especially when there’s so much room for speculation and only little confirmed information yet.

To me it seems like this case could set a precedence tho, so it’s not just about him.

Let’s wait for the actual case then, because none of this is stated in the official press release¹. Apparently 7 billion dollars passed trough the service, with 1 billion being of criminal origins. Then the question remains if he actually participated actively or passively(by running a service criminals abused). If simply providing this service will be judged as illegal then my point remains as above. If he actively was part of this and gets judged individually then you’re right.

¹ https://www.fiod.nl/arrest-of-suspected-developer-of-tornado-cash/

I was gone for 2 weeks and still the same exact bs, you deserve the medal of cognitive dissonance and a better leash from the state after your service. Good boy franky.

By the governments logic, someone who builds bombs and kills people for them is a hero, and someone who writes tools to protect privacy against a more and more overreaching state is someone who assists crimes and should be jailed. Following this logic leads to nowhere in the end.

Criminals can use any service or tool, builders shouldn’t be responsible for their userbase, otherwise by this logic we would have to start jailing large parts of companies, because criminals use their products to facilitate crimes too. Why don’t they go after their ISPs now? This whole logic is simply complete bs and just applying it to specific scenarios doesn’t make it just. Mixing itself is not a crime, so it’s just people that gave up their principles of what’s really right, for a jungle of useless laws that have no touch to reality anymore, who would want mixer devs jailed or think it’s right to do this.

These tools aren’t made for criminals, they get caught with or without them. Otherwise we wouldn’t even know that a minority is using them. It proves that privacy doesn’t interfere with the abilities of law enforcement to a meaningful amount. There is enough other traces, so that it doesn’t matter if a mixer was used or not. It is the use of privacy itself that is being criminalised slowly, in a context where the government would like to archive every single penny you’ve ever spent, where it actually has a negative economic + societal impact when a braindead entity gets too many capabilities over their citizens. So either we bow down to some nonsense bureaucrats are trying to introduce again, or we actually stick to principles that we know are right and push back against it. That is actually our constitutional right to do, if people woke up and actually used it. Your call for people to follow the false roads the same entity that doesn’t even have the guts to calculate inflation correctly is trying to lead us to, will simply lead to negative outcomes for everyone. Comply for tyranny and broken economies/ societies?

So it’s nothing more than an unproven idea that you don’t know yourself how to implement, and when property rights wouldn’t protect privacy you would still not change your opinion. It’s too predictable.



Still the same fears of a hidden agenda and putting words into peoples mouth they’ve never even said or thought. Paranoia and projection.

Nah something legal, simple and funny, like if a large amount of customers kept depositing and withdrawing small sums from privacy tools for example. This is about privacy and not becoming criminals, it would be funny if they had to report a lot of their customers, because it would show how broken the process is and that it isnt feasible to suspect everyone a criminal for wanting privacy. If they get bombarded with SARs of non-criminal users they might consider removing some bs triggers off that list, if they dont want it to become unusable.


Its not a bad idea, but im not sure if they would let it count in practice and if so for how long. Also how would it get past chainanalysis? For this the type of your business doesnt matter, theyre analysing transactions. In the end they dont have any incentive to create fair rules for Bitcoin, so sooner or later we will get put trough more and more absurdities and will have to face it at some point.


If peopler never fought for their rights, we wouldnt have any. More and more surveillance is bad economically and doesnt prevent criminality, the reasons for it are actually based on weak defences.

If you’re really concerned about privacy and financial sovereignty, you should be more concerned about the current criminalisation of privacy and abolishment of freedom principles, than you appearing on some useless list that can do nothing against you in the end, because we’re not criminals.

The correct response would be all of us triggering SARs with useless information on purpose, so they see that their tactics don’t work again us. But as most people get scared of lists, the punishment of privacy advocates and let themselves be divided easily, they rather let themselves be controlled. All it would take for us is to use our brains collectively just once to stop this nonsense. Divide and rule always outsmarts the sheep tho, because it doesn’t take much to do so.

The irony and hypocrisy, you’re advertising for a service that is programmed to mathematically guarantee that their userbase is losing more money than they’re making from it and have the audacity to judge a privacy tool as bringing in something bad and that it serves bad purposes. Modern humans are the perfect idiots, they make it so easy. Wake up sheep and think before you call for banning things. Touch your own nose first.

I can just point out one flaw in the 'following all rules' strategy. It will lead to nowhere. We have two different entities with completely contradicting goals. Governments in its current form are completely self-serving and create/ ignore rules to favour their chosen groups, while Bitcoin is trying to introduce fair, not-bendable rules to everyone. It doesn’t make sense to follow more and more rules that are meant to make disfavoured groups lose and slowly try to break the fair game.

The only way to win a game that is designed to make you lose, is by not playing it. We should focus on ourselves instead and simply abandon any corruptible service there is, it doesn’t make sense to fight over the rules a clownshow entity with criminal records bigger than your local prison is trying to introduce. It just leads to separation again and will make us weaker. Let’s not fall for divide and rule between Bitcoiners, even if not all of us like each other and have different opinions.

Sooner or later the two will clash anyways, it doesn’t matter if we act like submissive bunnies and follow everything they tell us. You can try, but sooner or later you will come back to the realisation that it’s pointless. Anyone who was at the bottom of the ladder once and has seen the whole game from bottom to the top, knows that your actual abilities and how well you follow the rules doesn’t matter in this system. Once you’re a threat to the power/ resources of people above you, they will try to make you fail. It’s just some useless bs that determines positions in hierarchies. It doesn’t matter if we followed all rules perfectly and Bitcoin turned everyone into a saint, we’re threatening the monopoly over money. Our actions/ history won’t matter. They will keep throwing rocks at us and try to corrupt it into their favour. Sooner or later things will get more and more absurd, and we will have to decide if we keep playing this game or do what’s necessary to win. Getting distracted by hamster wheels will lead us nowhere.

The threat isn’t knowing what people bought, this information will be revealed in most online transactions anyways. It’s also not that interesting, except for advertisers. The threat is about the state knowing individuals complete financial flows and preventing certain demographics from having their money accepted on services/ making it easier to unjustly seize things when this information is completely transparent. The actual problem is linking sensitive data to it, making it mandatory on most services and the introduction of blacklists. Its not Bitcoins fault, but if no one pushes against it, then how will we know it won’t happen? It’s a social issue, not a technical one. It seems like governments are unwilling to accept no taint tho.

I get this viewpoint, but we also need to use these services less. And like i said above the real threat is what i described above, which you couldn’t just escape by flying under the radar.

---

Im aware of that, i just don’t get how they’re so compliant without ever contesting anything in court. It’s about profits and not Bitcoin for them.

If what you’re saying is true, then how would you achieve privacy tho? The only way is to stop using centralized services, but how realistic is it that most people will follow? I also don’t get your problem about self-hosted LN, it’s more reliable/ usable than doing offchain transactions on paper.

How ik the people here they never just argued in sake of profits, but it was actual arguments related to real problems.

They don’t need that many employees to do it anymore, data science will suffice for any nefarious scenario there is. Especially if sensitive data is linked to an open ledger that can’t be manipulated easily.

I never advertised for a mixer, im talking about the taint that centralized services are introducing and that we shouldn’t accept it no matter what, this is bigger than just mixers. Because in my opinion best practice for a currency is no taint, no matter what.

It’s always brought up what criminals are using(who are a minority), so let’s ban mixers, shun everyone who uses it and not accept their coins anymore, then what? Criminals just use another platform and we just lost a piece of freedom again and are forced to be controlled harder again. In our fight in "saving the world", we should maybe once think about how these measures actually affect us. It’s weird that the proposed solution to every problem is always the same, less privacy, less freedom, more controls.

We’re becoming completely transparent and have to justify every single step we’re making, are forced to share sensitive data to companies, to just use the simplest services. The only barrier they still have are some data protection policies, but if you’ve ever looked behind the curtain and seen how employees/ companies actually handle it, i wouldn’t put too much weight on it. So stop acting like regulation equals real practice, execution is a whole other topic. If mixers put people on watchlists this easily, then people should be warned beforehand and then they can still decide for themselves. But let’s not act like we’re not already, just because a spaghetti law promises so.

I didnt know much about schiff before, but i didnt expect him to be that sketchy.

Possible, seems like hes trying really hard to not talk about his activity and more interested in useless talk, acting clueless or putting his bank into good light. Not a person whose words i would trust.

The problem is that more and more coins get solely acquired trough kyc, what is preventing them from doing it? They benefit from it and i think we don’t need anymore proof if mass surveillance is happening or not, it has become clear over the last years. We should think of what we can do against it, before things are getting really bad. And it would be hard to get this information out of closed circles, we’re always lagging behind in getting to know about surveillance measures.

Expected, but doesn’t change anything.

If all of your hoard would’ve been acquired trough kyc, all of a sudden there would be a lot more potential attack vectors on you. If everyone goes completely trough kyc for all of their hoard in the future, we might have a problem.


I don’t hate you franky and i still don’t have anything against you personally. Our opinions just differ on this.

I wouldn’t dox you even if i had the ability to. Because i respect your privacy and revealing yourself should be your decision only.

It’s not broke, but the practice of linking more and more sensitive data to it and making it mandatory for more and more people, is risky.

So by your logic it’s more privacy preserving that all transactions are kyc linked and surveilled by default, than breaking this connection as much as possible trough mixers etc and simply avoiding using government-simping services that never had the courage to do what’s right for Bitcoin.

It seems the right path going forward is less centralized services in the first place, so if most people chose option B the result is looking more promising in the end(it’s enough if they don’t use centralized services already, mixers are optional for whoever sees a benefit for themselves, but let’s not act like using a mixer is a shady act, that’s ridiculous too, it’s ridiculous that 3rd party companies get access to sensitive information and that people are almost powerless against it, stop bashing mixers or other privacy services, start with why your beloved government allows this to happen in the first place). It will be harder to stop Bitcoin if we stop using services of soft ass ceos that want Big Brother to govern them harder, because they’re scared of losing their bag. With option A we already lost in the long run, more P2P and decentralized services would be unstoppable on the other hand. It will probably take a lot of pain tho, before people realise that going into the bed with the government will only lead to bad outcomes and absolute mass surveillance down to the last penny leads to dystopia and dysfunctional economies.


It’s actually not that hard to make a link between purchasing behaviours and stances on blockchain surveillance. The color of underwear of most authoritarian surveillance loving control freaks is pink mixed with kittens. Maybe chain analysis should hire me so we can do some targeted marketing to government officials, ceos and the bunch of useful idiots that comply while loving it. Sales will go trough the roof.

Lmao, is there a place to see the psychotic breakdown?

Definitely, my domestic currency is already starting to lose value against the dollar heavily. For non-dollar users this effect is even more huge. Just because i went into Bitcoin prior to this date, im mostly unaffected by all the bs that was happening in the last years.

*waits for franky to explain us, how absolute compliance is true freedom, that mass surveillance doesn’t apply to conformists and that victims of tyranny just didn’t read the guidelines well enough and should take their tinfoil hats off.*

I’ll probably never understand how people stay so ignorant about these issues, maybe they fall for the illusion that it can never hit them individually, until it happens.

Nice try, what did i advertise?

You dont understand that most newbies are already on a watchlist trough kyc. All their funds can be tied to their real identities. So whats their choice? Either they sell them all and acquire them again on a dex or theiy try to break the kyc trough other methods. Youre completely ignoring the problem/ surveillance that Big Brother is starting to introduce. Does it sound like a good future where most funds could potentially be linked to real identites and all services have blacklists and taint controls built-in? Dont you see any tyranny and abuse potential here? If you had the possibility to acquire a huge stash before this nonsense, it might not matter to you, because you can still selectively reveal which funds you send trough this process. But for others it will, when its all their wealth that will be fully traceable on one ledger with spend restrictions being enforced. The problem is people starting to introduce tyranny and youre defending this nonsense, not Bitcoin. The simple solution is to treat each coin the same, and youre saying the solution is to comply to tyranny and surveillance to stay under the radar. Youre the perfect example for that it could be a lost hope to try to make people cooperate on privacy and that you literally have to take the ability for discrimination away, so they will stop doing it. Youre making the case for protocol level changes by your own actions, if you didnt get it yet. If people simply wake up and take enough responsibility and agree to that its necessary for society to treat each unit of a currency the same no matter what, to achieve a free and prosperous society, none of this is necessary. Adult life and kindergarten is not that different it seems.


No one blamed bitcoin. Stop reflecting bs that only exists in your head onto other people.

It doesn’t matter, if centrally controlled currencies had it or not. The freedom to transact is one major component of freedom. Economically speaking it’s the only sane way to handle money too.

Let’s keep listening to regulators about what is good for prosperity and freedom, while both are eroding worldwide for more and more people. If you open the door to taint, you open the door to tyranny. The possibilities are endless for abuse. It needs to be fought right from the start, not when it’s too late. It doesn’t matter what reasons are brought up for it, because the result will be the same in the end.

People are. For the 1000th time. The only person saying this is you, that’s the irony.

You’re the one defending and cheering on for people that have no clue how Bitcoin works, but try to weaken it trough useless bs regulations.


It
Doesn’t
Matter.

The point is that you’re already under surveillance, you don’t have any privacy. Your identity is always revealed by using kyc services, therefore you had no privacy in the first place. No matter how well you read the guidelines and fly under the radar, everything is archived. Every step can be held against you, while innocent and you would need to prove you’re not guilty. If barely anyone cooperates on privacy, we won’t have it. It’s that simple. If adults want to devolve to kids and control every step their fellows make, the only way choice left could be taking the ability to separate between coins away. You probably still don’t understand why these behaviours and practices are a problem for everyone, not just the users you try to shun for wanting privacy.


You sit back and have a black coffee.

People simply doing legit transactions using privacy services, franky:

Do you start to get the notion that its people themselves that cant handle transparency and try to separate between coins for unproven accusations? The only consideration to build privacy by default is because fools like you literally cant handle it, to simply treat each coin equally. Its so simple, but youre starting to make voodoo out of which coins to accept and which not. We have adults fighting over which money to accept and claiming that censorship and surveillance is beneficial. Are we in a kindergarten?

Why is every post about these topics i read from you, caring more about/ defending some stone age/ surveillance loving regulators interest, than caring about Bitcoin/ its users? Theyre laughing about fools like you that buy into this nonsense, that goes against their own interests and still defend it and push this agenda for free.

Its certain people that are broken, not Bitcoin. Youre differentiating between coins yourself, using words like clean and shady peoples coin. Words from the fascist toolkit, that tries to separate people into good and bad. Even tho these people are simply making use of their rights without any evidence of crime.


Governments found the perfect fool with this one. Keep barking your nonsene, chihuahua. It wont change reality. Im not sure how you were smart enough to get into Bitcoin, but then have complete cognitive dissonance in other topics.

Has anyone ever seen their own face? How do we know its actually us in mirrors, reflections and cameras, if we have never seen it ourselves? That is the kind of silly questions youre asking again, i will stop wasting my time on it.

What happens, when i go to porsches/ some car dealers website pick 5 porsches and leave my garages address and a payment method(that could be Bitcoin) there? They will magically get delivered to my garage(if i had one), but the whole process just went trough databases that collected numbers and letters.