The US government is targeting mixers. Are BTC mixers next?

[edgycorner]

it lists
"whether it uses mainnet or the use of embedded layering or other scaling
solutions), or the additional services that the platform potentially incorporates
(such as a mixer or tumbler or other potential features for obfuscation)"

so thats not only moero, liquid, but LN and mixers, and tumblers. and other things too

Yea, that's everything. Not just LN or monero. You can literally pick any coin and find a way to fit that definition.

According to your shitty source,
Being anonymous=being criminal. How about they prosecute all cash spenders and Vanila gift card holders too? Since these modes of payment "enhances" anonymity. 

Like I said, you know shit about money laundering. It's a process of cleaning your dirty money. If I want to hide my spendings, it doesn't make my money dirty. There's no logic here 

[darewaller]

Makes sense though, I mean mixers are there for one reason and that reason is to make sure that you do not follow where the bitcoin was or where it goes. Makes it harder to track, still not impossible because there are many data companies who are great at following where the money came from and where it is going etc etc, but it is definitely harder this way.

What I mean is that if you could ban all of these and make it illegal then you are protecting the citizens. If there is a big hacking to binance or coinbase or whatever, then mixers will be the first places that will get that money so it wouldn't be traced easily, why it is looking like people are trying to make it illegal.

[OgNasty]

The Tornado Cash developer was just arrested. This feels like the beginning of the fight against mixers to me. I know if I was one of the chipmixer devs I’d be a bit concerned at the moment. Event those advertising for the obviously illegal money laundering service might be wise to take a step back before they get caught up in this. I wonder how long this fight against anonymous coins will continue and what the next attack vector will be.

Imagine being arrested for developing an open source code  
I am 100% certain that they will make exchanges drop Monero from supported coins pretty soon. But where will they stop? Will they ban bridge swaps too?

it will just make bitcoin less used.
and yep thats what the silly idiots want. bitcoin to be less used.
their premise of the certain group of the same dozen idiots.. is to try to tarnish bitcoins natural utility of just transacting daily and normally.. to try to BS the community into fearing using bitcoin normally. scaring people into thinking bitcoin is not fit for purpose. and then advertising to scared people that they would be better off using another middleman service or altnet instead.. even when its the very same service or altnet which they advertise  is the cause where normal people would get red flagged

Are you targeting LN? You certainly are the village idiot lol

no where on a bitcoin blockchain will you find a note inside a tx that tells everyone what product you bought that day.

Are you living in 2010? Ever heard of chain analysis and address labelling? You are delusional bro.

but idiots want you to believe that bank notes do tell governments this so people need to use a casino to mix their bank notes..

Now I am convinced, that you are definitely a troll lol
You are talking about money laundering in a condescending manner when you don't know jack about it.

The idea of being arrested for working on open source code does suck, but there are laws in place and as the lines between software and money are blurred, there will be consequences for those who are made an example out of. The Wild West days of crypto seem to be in the past. There may be a few things that have been grandfathered in, but it’s going to get harder and harder to enter the space with new financial innovations.

[franky1]

According to your shitty source,

the source was a simple google search for the financial action task force's definitions of what THEY find suspicious to cause red flags..
the source was the FATF also known as the regulators (commonly called the finance police)

dont cry to me.
if you want to know what regulators define things as. guess what. you go check regulators definitions
i am not a regulator. i just dont fear things. when i want to know something i research it and find the source.
i dont play ignorant and get angry at people that provide information hoping ignorance makes rules/logic and reality not apply..

so thats just what i did.
linking you the source means you get to learn to. so now.. take a moment to take a breath. and realise what the rules are.. and then start looking at who you should actually be angry at.

i simply linked the regulators list of what they consider suspicious...
cry to them. or go cry to the DCG who are the crypto businesses that pretty much run most of the services that are regulated and lobbied for and against this stuff

but i do laugh how people when they get told that the world is not flat, think that its the human that told them's fault. and to blame the human for how the world works.
sorry but humans did not make the world round. basic logic of billions of years of 'spin' caused it. so blame physics and time and space.

..
heres another real world lesson to learn
bitcoin was great 2009-2014 it was not defined as currency and instead had the same freedoms as trading pokemon cards or colectables.
but as soon as it 'mainstreamed where governments defined it as currency. the negative effect of that is that currency laws then applied to crypto..

and as ognasty said the wild west days of crypto evolved where some things got grandfathered in. like accepting bitcoin as legal,where as other things like monero got considered by regulators currency policies as anonymity enhanced and thus suspicious
as are anonimity enhancing tools like mixers and also altnets that advertise themselves as enhancing privacy. which include (according to THEIR definitions)
"whether it uses mainnet or the use of embedded layering or other scaling
solutions), or the additional services that the platform potentially incorporates
(such as a mixer or tumbler or other potential features for obfuscation)"

thus liquid, LN and other networks that bridge to bitcoin that have features or promoted as obfuscating things
so yea that will include networks that use taproot
..
we dont have to like it. but atleast understanding it is the first step to knowing how to work around it or fight it.

and one funny lesson to learn
the main business services that lobbied for regulation(legitimisation) so that they can work legitimately in the crypto industry are:

coinbase-->DCG  https://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
kraken->DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#k
bitpay->DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
circle->https://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
ftx -DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#f
(exchange list goes on for a dozens of prominent exchanges)

and the main businesses that do the tracking and reporting
chainanalysis-> DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#c

are the same group that pay the developers of
bitcoin core (blockstream ->DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
monero (blockstream dev created the confidential code that underpins it) -> DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#b
Lightning network ->DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#l
liquid -> DCG https://dcg.co/portfolio/#l

so if you want someone to get angry at for their lobbying efforts. go speak to DCG

[franky1]

The idea of being arrested for working on open source code does suck,

if your talking about the "tornado" saga

he was not arrested for just being a developer
he was arrested for being involved in(law: aiding and abetting) "concealing criminal financial flows and facilitating money laundering"
he was not arrested for making software.. being a developer is not a crime.

lets not go into the ignorance land of conspiracy and fear. and instead stick to research

lets not start last years silly games of pretending any/all software developers will get arrested
(like how the social group of fans of DCG tried to say how 2021 euro laws about money transmitters was aimed at developers/miners(which it wasnt) the rules were about exchanges,mixers and things like LN routing and liquid "federations") that get paid a fee/commission for facilitating the transfer of value on behalf of other people

oh.
and to those that shout "its unconstitutional"
sorry have have to give another reality check and a obvious lesson to learn
the constitution is "american"
the arrests were done in the netherlands. where the constitution does not apply

The Wild West days of crypto seem to be in the past. There may be a few things that have been grandfathered in, but it’s going to get harder and harder to enter the space with new financial innovations.

yep i loved the wild west days of 2009-2014 before a certain group(DCG) got their fingers deep into crypto.
those days wher bitcoin was treated more like a product. where trading it and swapping it was more of the rules of pokemon cards or product/merchant sales and auction houses. that allowed more freedom to doing things

yet the lobby group of big industry(DCG) lobbied for the legitimisation of bitcoin by declaring it a currency by governments.. and the negative effects of that action is now that bitcoin is a legitimate currency... currency laws now apply to crypto.

dont shoot the messenger. just learn from it

[BlackHatCoiner]

but there are laws in place and as the lines between software and money are blurred, there will be consequences for those who are made an example out of.

Again, the same can be said for cryptography, computers, networks, digital cash, everything; there will always be people who'll abuse it and break the law. Those who design the underlined technology should face no lawsuits or have their repositories removed, just because it makes it easier for criminals to get away with.

Mixers are no different, they protect your privacy, in the same way strong encryption for communication does. I don't understand why most see another thing.

[franky1]

making software is not a crime
but being involved with facilitating criminals, especially wilfully knowing, is criminal (aiding and abetting)
there is a fine line.. distinctiual difference. which then gets messy where only solution ends up to arrest, charge and then let the suspect defend himself in court to defend himself.. which in of itself is a headache too far for some to want to step into

....
anyway, moving the topic along..

this is not about defending fiat or elitists. this is fact of life stuff.. with things people should think about. using rational thought not conspiracy/anger

money, value, wealth has never been a protected right under privacy.
so knowing certain people use the word "privacy" actually end up looking suspicious when using privacy tools
(a hard notion for people to understand.. but its a fact of life)

shouting out you have a right to privacy in regards to money. is a losing game when it comes to courts, regulators, governments.

so think smart.. think:
"property rights" - a different name. but it has advantages
"Property rights give the owner or right holder the ability to do with the property what they choose. That includes holding on to it, selling or renting it out ..."

create tools that are not branded "privacy enhancing".. thus evade the regulations that oppose privacy.
and instead make "property rights" protection tools

that way not only can you get the same end result of protecting yourself, but you then have some legal standing to legally uphold your rights

..
think of how people can create NDA's and private contracts, etc, which even courts cant easily invade.
property rights have had a long history back thousands of years. much better protected right than the fantasy belief people have thinking they have modern economic privacy rights

by calling things by names known to be suspicious/illegal in regulation such as privacy enhancing/mixers. you are allowing them control and losing your control. by causing people that create and use these tools to be considered suspicious

be smart. think about the loop holes of regulation
..
much like UBER avoided calling their service a taxicab service. thus stepped around the regulations of taxicabs

so stop advertising or pushing everyone to use "privacy enhancing tools" which get people into regulatory trouble
instead create and advertise "property right protection" tools.
as a step forward in using the loopholes.

..
when bitcoin was legally declared a currency. circa2014, yes the positive was more recognition, but the negative was having currency laws applied to crypto. yep it was no longer thought of as property and instead as currency where different laws apply

so. take back and flip the jurisdictional control. to keep regulators out of certain things. redefine things back to the good old days of 2009-2014 where features of property ownership were the virtues and features of bitcoin

"mixers" like money mules are about laundering/shuffling money.
yes they are used to remove tracking. but their main purpose is to avoid economic tracking. something that economic laws dont perceive as a right.

so dont play into government/regulators games of doing things that they list as worthy of investigating
much like how the FATF and SEC do not regulate pokemon cards. because pokemon trading. or card shufflers are not described as privacy tools. even though what they do functionally is to swap ownership without requiring ID or tracking

playing into the jurisdictions of governments by defining a blockchain as:
crypto-currency: then allows an entry by governments to apply currency laws to it

however by starting to think of a blockchain/subnet(not the units/property inside a blockchain/subnet)as:
res nullius: (Open-access property is owned by nobody), and then describe the units inside a rus nullius blockchain as "private property" sets a blockchain and units of account .. under a different path outside the currency jurisdiction..

in short. think about bringing back the good old days of 2009-2014, before currency laws got involved

[cryptosize]

BTC was not considered a currency before 2014? 

Even though Satoshi himself called it electronic cash since day 1?

And despite the fact it reached $1000 ATH back in 2013?

[franky1]

BTC was not considered a currency before 2014?  

Even though Satoshi himself called it electronic cash since day 1?

And despite the fact it reached $1000 ATH back in 2013?

regulatory defined it as currency
which allowed them to have the SEC regulate businesses that operate with btc
it kinda started around 2014 with the 'bitlicence' getting involved and started the regulatory financials systems of fiat to start getting their grubby hands on the businesses that operate at the edges of bitcoin.

they are also now trying to convert it to being a 'commodity' so that the CFTC can regulate businesses and services that operate with btc*

by knowing these things and then learning the regulations, you can then learn the loopholes to work around things

EG
SEC/FAFT have regulations where they list mixers as a suspicious tool
so the secret is STOP ADVERTISING MIXERS.

instead create a new tool which functions as a "property rights protection" tool... thus not applicable under their suspicious tool list

by continually using the terms/words/tool of what regulators deem should be restricted. you then allowing that feature/tool to become restricted

again much like how uber never called themselves a taxi company
or how facebook called itself a social media, instead of an advertising company

common sense says obviously uber is a taxi company and facebook is more of an advertising company. but by those companies avoiding the use of those words in describing their functions, the taxi/advertising regulations didnt impede those companies as much

..
*bitcoin because of the new locks(2017 feature) now allows bitcoin to be seen as a raw base item that can produce other things from it(sidechains, subnets, coloured coins, and many other things)
(like commodities where a raw material is used to create secondary products)
thus now due to all the sidechains and subnets. bitcoin is from a regulatory prospecting becoming defined as a commodity by which the CFTC can get their grubby hands around the edges.

there are 3 sides to it.
there are those that want secret 'cash like' system that is private property which no one should be able to confiscate or steal for any reason and the owner of the private property has full control of

there are the mainstreamers that want it to be a currency anyone can use including financial institutions that manage pension funds (which requires accountability and clean utility without criminal exposure going to far)

there are the other group that want to create new derivatives and subnets and new products backed by btc

the issue is i see the first group.. pandering to the second group by using the second groups terminology, thus losing the features the first group wanted. (hense i said stop using/calling things mixers to pander into having your control taken away, create property right protection tools, which are outside the remit of SEC/FATF)

the issue i see is when the second group. instead of just offering "exchanges" (currency laws) start to say and advertise they offer "futures options" they are then allowing the commodity laws to apply to those businesses.
(Commodity Futures Trading Commission | CFTC)

so if you learn what the regulations are. and then find out what is not in their lists.. you find the loop hole by which you can then make tools for, that are not regulated or required to be regulated

[buwaytress]

Just occurred to me right now actually, to my knowledge Switzerland has the strongest privacy laws (though even that has been chipped away with the weakening of banking secrecy laws over the past 2 decades) -- would the same privacy laws allow for unfettered development of mixers there, the way VPNs and email providers have been operating legally over there, or does Bitcoin and crypto's financial aspects exclude them I wonder?

[franky1]

Just occurred to me right now actually, to my knowledge Switzerland has the strongest privacy laws (though even that has been chipped away with the weakening of banking secrecy laws over the past 2 decades) -- would the same privacy laws allow for unfettered development of mixers there, the way VPNs and email providers have been operating legally over there, or does Bitcoin and crypto's financial aspects exclude them I wonder?

each country has its own laws
thre is not really a big international financial law and financial "police"/taskforce

EG EU financial laws and US financial laws are separate
where EU exchanges follow EU laws and US exchanges follow US laws

since ~2014 a few exchanges moved away from the us and set up in south america to escape the grubby hands of having to comply with US laws.

but here is the easiest thing
because EU and US laws dont like businesses that call themselves mixers... simple solution.. stop calling them businesses mixers.
get smarter about how you define such tools. much like how uber escaped the US regulations of taxi cab's while still offering a service that does a function that taxicabs do

take facebook
everyone knows what facebook does.
but how they define themselves helps them control what rules apply to them
EG in america they delare themselves as a social media. to escape the advertising and financial regulations of facebooks advertising/financial features. and also defend themselves under "free speach" by saying they are a social media company

in ireland (no tax) they define themselves as a financial service

and in other countries they define themselves as a advertising company. in countries that have lax advertising restrictions

that way if america wanted to sue facebook for some advertising thing. they have to file that in the country thats defined as the advertising arm of facebook. where that jurisdiction has no/not many laws that facebook could be in breach of and thus cant really be found guilty

its why all the funds and profit sit in ireland so that america cant claim tax on the profits.

[Rabi3]

Tornado cash(ETH mixer) has already been forced to shut down (giving a 404 https://tornado.cash )

Going by Secretary Blinken's tweet, they seem to be on a hunt and anyone could be next.
https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1556677862345801728

What are the chances of coinjoin and chipmixer getting in their scope? No service can judge a user and their intention for using their mixer.

Anyhow, we will always have BTC LN for enhanced privacy if you are worried due to this recent news

there is nothing stopping them from attacking bitcoin mixers, and the fact that they banned tornado cash github account shows how they are in control of everything, now people can't write and open source code without the fear of getting in trouble if the government decided to, I don't think I can trust using any mixers now, and attacking bitcoin mixers is most likely to happen.

[DooMAD]

shouting out you have a right to privacy in regards to money. is a losing game when it comes to courts, regulators, governments.

(...)

that way not only can you get the same end result of protecting yourself, but you then have some legal standing to legally uphold your rights

The whole idea of Bitcoin is that you don't require any legal standing to uphold your rights.  If you think you need a court of law or a government to rule in your favour when it comes to anything, you've completely missed the point (as you so often do).  That's what we do in this space.  We build technologies that mean we don't rely on centralised entities for anything.  And we are building privacy tools whether you like it or not.  This isn't empty shouting, this is backed by action.  An enforcement of will enshrined in code.  Unstoppable and unrelenting.  Progressing with continual steps forward.  Often at a pace which exceeds the regulators' ability to keep up.  And none of your constant whiny nonsense will halt that progress.  

And, let's be honest, you're in absolutely no position to talk about a "losing game" when that's all you've been talking since 2016.  I mean, really.  Do you even listen to yourself?  

by calling things by names known to be suspicious/illegal in regulation such as privacy enhancing/mixers. you are allowing them control and losing your control.

be smart. think about the loop holes of regulation
..
much like UBER avoided calling their service a taxicab service. thus stepped around the regulations of taxicabs

so stop advertising or pushing everyone to use "privacy enhancing tools" which get people into regulatory trouble
instead create and advertise "property right protection" tools.
as a step forward in using the loopholes.

Try to pick an argument and stick with it, you self-contradicting loony.  You can't simultaneously argue that advertising something as a mixer will trigger the regulators to look at you whilst simultaneously arguing that regulators will be looking at LN when that isn't advertised as a mixer.  Which one is it?  It can't be both.

so. take back and flip the jurisdictional control. to keep regulators out of certain things. redefine things back to the good old days of 2009-2014 where features of property ownership were the virtues and features of bitcoin

"mixers" like money mules are about laundering/shuffling money.
yes they are used to remove tracking. but their main purpose is to avoid economic tracking. something that economic laws dont perceive as a right.

so dont play into government/regulators games of doing things that they list as worthy of investigating
much like how the FATF and SEC do not regulate pokemon cards. because pokemon trading. or card shufflers are not described as privacy tools. even though what they do functionally is to swap ownership without requiring ID or tracking

playing into the jurisdictions of governments by defining a blockchain as:
crypto-currency: then allows an entry by governments to apply currency laws to it

however by starting to think of a blockchain/subnet(not the units/property inside a blockchain/subnet)as:
res nullius: (Open-access property is owned by nobody), and then describe the units inside a rus nullius blockchain as "private property" sets a blockchain and units of account .. under a different path outside the currency jurisdiction..

in short. think about bringing back the good old days of 2009-2014, before currency laws got involved

Ah, I see where you're going with this now.  It's all nudge-theory with you.  You're trying to convince everyone it's in their best interests to adopt your definitions of what Bitcoin is and what the "good old days" supposedly were.  Yeah, no one's falling for that.  It's not a case of people needing to avoid "playing into government/regulators games", it's actually a case of avoiding playing your stupid game, which would be to usurp Bitcoin and strip out as much freedom and privacy as you possibly could.  But that's never going to happen because people now recognise you for the totalitarian headcase you are.  Only fascists would accept your totally fucked up definitions of what Bitcoin is.  


franky1 hates freedom, hates privacy and is an enemy of Bitcoin.

[coinsrider]

Mixers are made to increase privacy and keep the transaction anonymous to keep them away from getting tracked by the governments, so, that's very normal to see the governments and not only the US government targeting mixers, because they want to track people as much as they can and mixers are agaist it, that's why it's not surprising to see governments are trying to shut down the bitcoin mixers soon. Generally, it's not new to see the government of the USA is against the mixers.

Thats's right I too would say the same.

[franky1]

everyone knows doomad(and his pals) ass kisses the guys at DCG

yep see whos at the list of
https://dcg.co/portfolio/#c
chainanalysis, cambridge blockchain, civic, cognito, coinmetrics,Custos Media Technologies

https://dcg.co/portfolio/#e
Elliptic

https://dcg.co/portfolio/#n
Norbloc

https://dcg.co/portfolio/#s
Suade


also doomad knows that no matter what he buys before or after using a mixer.. using a mixers gets people put on a watchlist.

yet instead of arguing with DCG and regulators
he wants to point fingers at franky1 for pointing out and summarising the rules so that people are aware of what to watch out for

poor doomad on his pals want people to ignore the rules and just use the services they want..

funny part is i have not told anyone to use a service.. yet they have

its funny that the same dozen people came out in anger for me pointing out something everyone should actually know
so because i laugh at them fools and instead think people should know things outside of the groups ignorance,here it goes again:

oh and i made it colourful.maybe it will get people to realise what it is actually telling people and makes them read it

this is from the FINANCIAL ACTION TASKFORCE where i simply showed a few examples of what people should know and be aware of:

https://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/recommendations/Updated-Guidance-VA-VASP.pdf
VA = Virtual Asset - VASP = Virtual Asset Service Provider - AEC = Anonymity-Enhanced Cryptocurrency

4
In particular, the virtual asset ecosystem has seen the rise of anonymity-enhanced
cryptocurrencies (AECs), mixers and tumblers, decentralized platforms and
exchanges, privacy wallets, and other types of products and services that enable or
allow for reduced transparency and increased obfuscation of financial flows, as well
as the emergence of other virtual asset business models or activities such as initial
coin offerings (ICOs) that present ML/TF, fraud and market manipulation risks.
Further, new illicit financing typologies continue to emerge, including the
increasing use of virtual-to-virtual layering schemes that attempt to further obfuscate transactions in a comparatively easy, cheap, and secure manner.

shhh dont tell certain people but LN is listed in the quote above, along with mixers and things like monero and liquid

AML/CFT regulations will apply to covered VA activities and VASPs, regardless of
the type of VA involved in the financial activity (e.g., a VASP that uses or offers AECs
to another person for various financial transactions), the underlying technology
(e.g., whether it uses mainnet or the use of embedded layering or other scaling
solutions), or the additional services that the platform potentially incorporates
(such as a mixer or tumbler or other potential features for obfuscation)

shh dont tell certain people but altnets like LN, liquid are also deemed as suspicious, but shh dont tell then or the will cry and get angry

174
In the context of VA and VASP activities, countries should ensure that VASPs
licensed by or operating in their jurisdiction can manage and mitigate the risks of
engaging in activities that involve the use of anonymity-enhancing technologies or
mechanisms, including but not limited to AECs, mixers, tumblers, privacy wallets
and other technologies that obfuscate the identity of the sender, recipient, holder,
or beneficial owner of a VA. If the VASP cannot manage and mitigate the risks posed
by engaging in such activities, then the VASP should not be permitted to engage in
such activities.

304.
Further information on red-flag indicators for VAs that could suggest criminal
behaviour are set out in the FATF’s Virtual Asset Red Flag Indicators of Money
Laundering and Terrorist Financing. These indicators help VASPs and other obliged
entities to detect and report suspicious transactions involving VAs. Key indicators
include:
a. Technological features that increase anonymity - such as mixers, tumblers or
AECs

[DooMAD]

this is from the FINANCIAL ACTION TASKFORCE where i simply showed a few examples of what people should know and be aware of:

https://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/recommendations/Updated-Guidance-VA-VASP.pdf
VA = Virtual Asset - VASP = Virtual Asset Service Provider - AEC = Anonymity-Enhanced Cryptocurrency

4
In particular, the virtual asset ecosystem has seen the rise of anonymity-enhanced
cryptocurrencies (AECs), mixers and tumblers, decentralized platforms and
exchanges, privacy wallets, and other types of products and services that enable or
allow for reduced transparency and increased obfuscation of financial flows, as well
as the emergence of other virtual asset business models or activities such as initial
coin offerings (ICOs) that present ML/TF, fraud and market manipulation risks.
Further, new illicit financing typologies continue to emerge, including the
increasing use of virtual-to-virtual layering schemes that attempt to further obfuscate transactions in a comparatively easy, cheap, and secure manner.

shhh dont tell certain people but LN is listed in the quote above, along with mixers and things like monero and liquid

AML/CFT regulations will apply to covered VA activities and VASPs, regardless of
the type of VA involved in the financial activity (e.g., a VASP that uses or offers AECs
to another person for various financial transactions), the underlying technology
(e.g., whether it uses mainnet or the use of embedded layering or other scaling
solutions), or the additional services that the platform potentially incorporates
(such as a mixer or tumbler or other potential features for obfuscation)

shh dont tell certain people but altnets like LN, liquid are also deemed as suspicious, but shh dont tell then or the will cry and get angry

174
In the context of VA and VASP activities, countries should ensure that VASPs
licensed by or operating in their jurisdiction can manage and mitigate the risks of
engaging in activities that involve the use of anonymity-enhancing technologies or
mechanisms, including but not limited to AECs, mixers, tumblers, privacy wallets
and other technologies that obfuscate the identity of the sender, recipient, holder,
or beneficial owner of a VA. If the VASP cannot manage and mitigate the risks posed
by engaging in such activities, then the VASP should not be permitted to engage in
such activities.

304.
Further information on red-flag indicators for VAs that could suggest criminal
behaviour are set out in the FATF’s Virtual Asset Red Flag Indicators of Money
Laundering and Terrorist Financing. These indicators help VASPs and other obliged
entities to detect and report suspicious transactions involving VAs. Key indicators
include:
a. Technological features that increase anonymity - such as mixers, tumblers or
AECs

So you aren't going to respond to a single argument and instead just repeat the same thing you've said before?  What a surprise.  

Let's have a look at your little crayon colourings, then.  The best you can come up with is that it looks "suspicious".  Okay, cool.  But you'd be surprised how quickly the definition of "suspicious" can change.  If I walked into a bank pre-covid with my face covered up, people would have deemed that suspicious and likely suspected that I was about to rob the place.  Now I can walk into a bank wearing a face covering and it's deemed perfectly acceptable.  So how about we don't resort to petty fear-mongering about how a particular group of people thinking we're doing something suspicious should supposedly make us less entitled to do it.  

Also, I don't think you understand what a "layering scheme" is within the context of financial crime.  Maybe look that up before you continue cross-posting something that makes you look completely misinformed.  But no, you had to get triggered by the word "layer" (again) and assume the regulators were talking about the Lightning Network.  Poor delusional franky1 and his delicate sensibilities.  So fragile.  If anyone dares to utter a "bad word", he just goes off on a delusional rant about complete nonsense and then tells everyone he's just here to keep them informed and aware.  

It would be funny if it wasn't so utterly pathetic and sad.  I know mental health services in the UK are under a lot of strain at the moment and maybe that's why you haven't received the help you so desperately need yet, but I hope you get some support soon.

[tadamichi]

poor doomad on his pals want people to ignore the rules and just use the services they want..

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.

[franky1]

poor doomad on his pals want people to ignore the rules and just use the services they want..

I can just point out one flaw in the 'following all rules' strategy.

its not about following the rules.. stop being naive like the ignorant group you have been recruited into

escape their mindset as it is dragging youdown to their level

one more time its not about following the rules.its about learning..its about researching.its about knowing the rules so that you can then find the loop holes and methods to AVOID the things the rules list

please escape following the crowd of people like doomad and blackhatcoiner, because you are sounding like them more each day

So you aren't going to respond to a single argument and instead just repeat the same thing you've said before?  What a surprise.   Roll Eyes

Let's have a look at your little crayon colourings, then.  The best you can come up with is that it looks "suspicious".  Okay, cool.  But you'd be surprised how quickly the definition of "suspicious" can change.

real people that want real privacy dont want to appear on a SAR...
so they look at what causes can get them put on an SAR
guess what the S stands for

im not the one making the rules.. im not defining things.
its a simple bit of research anyone can do

i am not the one making things up. its the financial task forces words found via a 20 second google search
if you cant even have the courage to do research,dont cry about it and dont point fingers at people that do research.
i just supplied the info which anyone can find via any search engine or directly from the regulators

there is no point questioning me.. because i am not the rule maker!!
if you want to cry about someone

GO TALK TO DCG who are the ones that helped make the rules when they lobbied government for legalisation and the ones that have services that comply with the rules

it is funny how you want to point the finger at "franky1" while you are trying to tell people to ignore the actual regulations and rules of services and regulators(not treat the highlight as a warning, not treat it as advice of what to avoid). and you are instead trying to tell people to go use the exact services that wil get people put on a SAR

yep and thats why i call you group of a dozen ignorant idiots, vile!