money laundering

[Febo]

Small amounts of bitcoin is easy to launder and tough to track. Large sums of bitcoin is probably impossible to launder in one go, it will have to be split up into hundreds of smaller packets (just like fiat) and it will take time.

I think that small amounts of fiat is much easier to launder and thought to track then small amount of bitcoin. And block chain is here to stay so they can catch you even 100 years from now with technology we cant even imagine today.

[Razick]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

[Amph]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

they are coming with a new cash that is traceable, there was a discussion about it

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1070180.0

actually it is good that they are aiming at this, will only make bitcoin stronger, because more people will move to it

[Light]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

they are coming with a new cash that is traceable, there was a discussion about it

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1070180.0

actually it is good that they are aiming at this, will only make bitcoin stronger, because more people will move to it

I don't really see how this isn't thwarted by the same thing as unmarked bills? Unless the bank knows exactly which bills were stolen and all of them have this new technology - you're not going to see a difference. Not to mention if they just spent it, unless the merchant their spending it had the ability to discern the difference it would pass through unnoticed. This technology would require literally everyone to be on board - something that is incredibly unlikely to occur.

Not to mention that this does't deal with the bigger issue of organised crime money. Nowadays, money isn't illegally gained by robbing banks but rather illegal drug operations etc.

[dinofelis]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

they are coming with a new cash that is traceable, there was a discussion about it

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1070180.0

actually it is good that they are aiming at this, will only make bitcoin stronger, because more people will move to it

I don't think it will make bitcoin stronger: untraceability is not one of its strong points to say the least !  But it might make anon coins stronger.

[deisik]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

Then no government emitted currency (i.e. fiat) is any good with this approach. Even paper money has serial numbers printed on it which makes it quite traceable. Besides that, I've heard rumors that some serial number ranges of the US dollars are illegal in the US, among them the dollars the US government paid to terrorists freedom fighters in various parts of the world...

[Amph]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

they are coming with a new cash that is traceable, there was a discussion about it

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1070180.0

actually it is good that they are aiming at this, will only make bitcoin stronger, because more people will move to it

I don't think it will make bitcoin stronger: untraceability is not one of its strong points to say the least !  But it might make anon coins stronger.

bitcoin is more anon than many think, but you need to work with something like coin-join, project like  this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919116.0, could potentially turn the table on the anonimity issue about bitcoin

[deisik]

Cash is much less traceable than Bitcoin, not to mention that anonymity is an important trait of a good currency. A good currency should allow individuals to trade without the government tracking every transaction. It's not their business and AML is just a bad excuse for regulations that don't work and significantly encroach on individual rights.

they are coming with a new cash that is traceable, there was a discussion about it

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1070180.0

actually it is good that they are aiming at this, will only make bitcoin stronger, because more people will move to it

I don't think it will make bitcoin stronger: untraceability is not one of its strong points to say the least !  But it might make anon coins stronger.

bitcoin is more anion than many think, but you need to worlk with something like coin-join, project like  this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919116.0, could potentially turn the table on the anonimity issue about bitcoin

Instead of wasting valuable resources on something that 99% of people don't care for, bitcoin developers (or whoever is concerned) had better spend their time on dealing with real problems that are now dogging Bitcoin (pun intended). I mean frustratingly slow confirmations, just to name a few...

[dinofelis]

bitcoin is more anion than many think, but you need to worlk with something like coin-join, project like  this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919116.0, could potentially turn the table on the anonimity issue about bitcoin

The problem with something like that is that it is not systematic.  So if you do it, you are suspect from the start.  If not many people use it (because you have to take the initiative to do so), the anonymity offered by it is very limited.

No, the biggest problem in bitcoin it the linkability of transactions.  Coinjoin only makes the links somewhat more involved but doesn't unlink them.  It tries to blur them by adding cross links between unrelated transactions.  But the real links are still there (muddled with other, unrelated ones).  If not may people use coinjoin, the links will be blurred somewhat, but you don't have true anonymity.

In fact, if tainting becomes a way of refusing coins, one would become reluctant to use coinjoin, because your coins might get tainted that way.

I like dash (formerly darkcoin) more, because at least, the coinjoin mixing is systematic.  So one can hope that you don't find the trees amongst the wood any more.  Nevertheless, the links are still present between transactions - they are simply confused with a lot of other links.


A true anonymous system is something like zerocoin.  I think that cryptonote is also close to achieving anonymity (although I'm not entirely sure I fully understand all details of it).

[Amph]

bitcoin is more anion than many think, but you need to worlk with something like coin-join, project like  this https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=919116.0, could potentially turn the table on the anonimity issue about bitcoin

The problem with something like that is that it is not systematic.  So if you do it, you are suspect from the start.  If not many people use it (because you have to take the initiative to do so), the anonymity offered by it is very limited.

No, the biggest problem in bitcoin it the linkability of transactions.  Coinjoin only makes the links somewhat more involved but doesn't unlink them.  It tries to blur them by adding cross links between unrelated transactions.  But the real links are still there (muddled with other, unrelated ones).  If not may people use coinjoin, the links will be blurred somewhat, but you don't have true anonymity.

In fact, if tainting becomes a way of refusing coins, one would become reluctant to use coinjoin, because your coins might get tainted that way.

I like dash (formerly darkcoin) more, because at least, the coinjoin mixing is systematic.  So one can hope that you don't find the trees amongst the wood any more.  Nevertheless, the links are still present between transactions - they are simply confused with a lot of other links.


A true anonymous system is something like zerocoin.  I think that cryptonote is also close to achieving anonymity (although I'm not entirely sure I fully understand all details of it).

yeah zero-knowledge proofs, is what we need, but in the case of zerocoin there is this some small problem related to space, transactions are quite big, so you need to use it only when it is needed, also the problem of indistinguishable, it's not that good, if there are people with large transactions and other that do small transactions

[Rub3n]

Use some bitcoin whash services and it is somewhat untracable. Depending on how much effort and resources the tracking opposite party has available, its never 100% clean.

[Pab]

Big banks   know much better way to launder money,stock market,offshore banks accounts,forex
gold market,bitcoin market is to small ,to much complicated and to much transparent