See https://blindbitcoin.com/ or http://bitcoinlaundry.com/ , but would these sites not be illegal if you consider its laundering activities? 

Does http://www.bitcoin.org/ provide any anonymity?

Will you illegalize the ownership of cryptographic key pairs that entitles you to a right in a secure network (with its security measured in how hard it works)?  Is the trade in cryptographic key pairs that entitles you to a right in a secure network (with its security measured in how hard it works) legal?

If it is currently legal, will you be shutting down a lot of technological businesses that might currently make use of such cryptographic key pairs for rights to a secure network?

If you are biased and you generalize by attributing to a group, a subgroup or individual's actions:

Are you racist if you are biased based on race?
Are you sexist if you are biased based on gender?
.
.
.
.
etc., etc.,

What will you be if you generalize by saying bitcoiners are launderers, when only a subgroup of bitcoiners are laundering bitcoins?  Could you be dubbed a bitcoinist?

Will each of the possible roughly estimated 600,000 world wide bitcoiners ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12574.msg174344#msg174344 ) appreciate a statement like that?

If you are biased and you generalize by attributing to a group, a subgroup or individual's actions:

Are you racist if you are biased based on race?
Are you sexist if you are biased based on gender?
.
.
.
.
etc., etc.,

What will you be if you generalize by saying bitcoiners are launderers, when only a subgroup of bitcoiners are laundering bitcoins?  Could you be dubbed a bitcoinist?

Will each of the possible roughly estimated 600,000 world wide bitcoiners ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12574.msg174344#msg174344 ) appreciate a statement like that?

If you are biased and you generalize by attributing to a group, a subgroup or individual's actions:

Are you racist if you are biased based on race?
Are you sexist if you are biased based on gender?
.
.
.
.
etc., etc.,

What will you be if you generalize by saying bitcoiners are launderers, when only a subgroup of bitcoiners are laundering bitcoins?  Could you be dubbed a bitcoinist?

Will each of the possible roughly estimated 600,000 world wide bitcoiners ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12574.msg174344#msg174344 ) appreciate a statement like that?

How is there a connection between Sam and John on paypal?  If Sam paid socks - and it's proxy delivered to John how does paypal know about the connection between Sam and John?  If John pays for a Skype number's credit and hand the password to Silk Road and Silk Road delivers drugs to Sam, how does paypal know about the connection between Silk Road and Sam?

Isn't the problem with laundering bitcoins, and not with bitcoins?

How is there a connection between Sam and John on paypal?  If Sam paid socks - and it's proxy delivered to John how does paypal know about the connection between Sam and John?  If John pays for a Skype number's credit and hand the password to Silk Road and Silk Road delivers drugs to Sam, how does paypal know about the connection between Silk Road and Sam?

Isn't the problem with laundering Bitcoins, and not with Bitcoins?

How is there a connection between Sam and John on paypal?  If Sam paid socks - and it's proxy delivered to John how does paypal know about the connection between Sam and John?  If John pays for a Skype number's credit and hand the password to Silk Road and Silk Road delivers drugs to Sam, how does paypal know about the connection between Silk Road and Sam?

Isn't the problem with laundering bitcoins, and not with bitcoins?

Will it be known from the paypal account details that Sam bought drugs at Silk Road?
Will there be a connection between Sam, John and Silk Road from the paypal account details?

And if Sam and John decided to use bitcoins, didn't they bought their bitcoins from some taxreporting company or individual?

Can't even paypal be used for laundering?  If Sam buys socks for John, and John buys drugs for Sam at Silk Road by paying Silk Road's Skype account, haven't they just been laundering paypal credit?  Should paypal be banned if it enables people to buy drugs anonymously?  Or should paypal credit laundering be banned?

Can't even paypal be used for laundering?  If Sam buys socks for John, and John buys drugs for Sam at Silk Road by paying Silk Road's Skype account, haven't they just been laundering paypal credit?  Should paypal be banned if it enables people to buy drugs anonymously?  Or should paypal credit laundering be banned?

You said Bitcoins is anonymous.  Is that true in its standard form or is it true when someone takes the willful decision to launder his bitcoins?  Isn't this anonymous/pseudonymous property that people so freely add to bitcoins (your entry/exit point to bitcoin is known if it is a company or tax reporting individual and there's a blockchain recording every transfer!!), unfairly harming bitcoins (as bitcoin exists in its standard form, not a derived laundered form)?

Are you not jumping to conclusions?  

Isn't Silk Road (not Bitcoin  ) the illegal business called for to be shut down?  Is a person not within his rights when he trades freely for a pair of cryptographic keys of which one is publicly recognizable? Is money (cash) laundering or another medium of exchange laundering (bitcoins) not a willful act?  Is Bitcoin laundering part of the standard system / bitcoin client?  Or do you need to be willfully laundering Bitcoins?  Wouldn't it do Bitcoin's reputation good if authorities can get to Silk Road using the Bitcoin blockchain in their investigation?  Just one misstep somewhere?  Will it not be an easier investigation than tracking conventional cash transactions? If investigators ask questions, will you not be required to just prove where you got your Bitcoins from?  If you did not get them from bitcoin laundering, and you bought/trade them for legitimate goods/services/other and can prove it, are you not on the right side of the law? Wouldn't you just begin your investigation at sites like this http://bitcoinlaundry.com/ (and connect the dots) ?


source:  

Shouldn't MtGox be fine as long as it complies with AML and KYC regulations for US customers?  AML (Anti Money Laundering) and KYC (Know your customer) is not airlines chicken fast food outlets, b.t.w.    Isn't it regulations that stemmed from the Patriot Act following 9/11?

Oh, thanks - on the long term graph at http://bitcoin.sipa.be/ it looks reassuringly organic exponential - seems like the prior dip we recently saw is causing the distortion on the short term graph shown on http://www.bitcoinwatch.com/ .  Better safe than sorry I suppose?    Great uptake b.t.w ! 

 

Could be, could be not?  

Geolocating the newly added nodes' ip address should be telling?  Does anybody have that at hand?  I know there were map implementations of that.  If that can be combined with hash rate it will be really telling.

Luckily "other" showed up as less than 50% - for now that is.  Until the geolocation of this new source of hash rate is known, and how dispersed it is, it will be a cause for concern.

Bitcoin's hash rate pie chart on bitcoinwatch.com shows a sudden "other" group that was added to the hash rate that increased dramatically.  Are these nodes ip addresses' geolocation dispersed as would be expected by a broadly take up of the wide public or is it concentrated?  (Like "Suggested" here http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=57.msg175165#msg175165 and here http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=57.msg175245#msg175245 ).  Is the growth really this organic?  It seams like the hash rate climbed upward out of its exponential growth curve? ( http://www.bitcoinwatch.com )

Maybe all of the estimated 600,000 average daily visitors to bitcoin.org ( http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=12574.msg174344#msg174344 ) is " ... cool, webby, free, and niche ..." (May 18, 2011 http://www.slate.com/id/2294980 ), or " ... criminals, online poker players, tax-evaders, pornographers, drug dealers, and other unsavory types tired of carrying around a Vermeer ... " (May 18, 2011 http://www.slate.com/id/2294980 ) or now Silk Road customers (June 5, 2011 http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/technology/silk-road-the-ebay-for-narcotics-57274.html )?  Or maybe most of them just want a universal, user friendly, medium of exchange (June 6, 2011 https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade ) for their goods/services/credits/contracts/other?  Doesn't the media just love sensation and shouldn't we just get over that?

Wouldn't it do Bitcoin very good if Silk Road can be sniffed out through the blockchain where just one misstep were taken by them or one of their customers?  Wouldn't the investigation surely be easier than an investigation where conventional cash transactions took place?

And really, isn't the Bitcoin market place distancing itself from all illegal trade (at least in the US and Japan https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Trade ), and don't you need to be actively laundering Bitcoins to launder Bitcoins as the bitcoin.org Bitcoin client / system doesn't do this for you?

So isn't Bitcoins a tool like anything else in life that can be used for good (very good - near instant, frictionless transfers, spanning the globe of a digital medium of exchange) or bad (very bad - in this instance distributing drugs that are destroying people's children's lives, etc., etc.)?

Doesn't Bitcoin in its standard form (you can prove with the blockchain where you got it from) provide no anonymity - and isn't it actually very, very transparent?  If you launder Bitcoins (you can not prove where you got it from) however - that's another story?

Doesn't cash in its standard form (you can prove with receipts where you got it from) provide no anonymity?  If you launder cash (you can not prove where you got it from) however - that's another story?

It maybe gets supplanted or develops into an even better trading system requiring no medium of exchange, based only on a trust reputation system and people adopt this alternative to bitcoin system?