ㅤ

[ABCbits]

Well, and most importantly - what can they track that is so secret? Do you often conduct transactions that they describe as illegal? And there is a list of really very specific operations. Stop doing them and you will have nothing to hide!

Yes, i sell set of toothpaste and toothbrush to same person on Sunday on Rhode Island[1].

[1] https://www.aggressivelegalservices.com/rhode-island-laws-getting-update/

[DrBeer]

<Snip>

So if I own a shop and you come to my store to buy something, you wouldn't mind if I put all your bills under the microscope and also check to see if there are any traces of drugs, semen, explosives, and other illegal substances? If I find something I don't like, you will be reported to the police, then you can explain to them why you were trying to pay with a $50 bill that had DNA of a rapist who got imprisoned last week. I am exaggerating on purpose so you can understand how ridiculous this situation is.

After all that, would you say shopping at my store makes you feel safe, and would you recommend my business to friends and family?

No, that will not do. Why are you twisting and deliberately distorting the meaning? You, in the Wassabi wallet, before sending the transaction are not asked to hand over and sign it with your DNA code, passport data, neighbors' certificate that you live there and an extract from your place of work on income? If so, your example would be relevant. But we are talking about a black list, when in some online store, for example, you are trying to buy some product you really need, and this store is a scammer. This is where the blacklist, for example, of your bank, will not allow you to easily make a transaction, he will say - this online store is bad, there are already 100,500 complaints about illegal debiting of money, and not shipping goods. If you want - then check the box "I am notified of the negative rating of the store, and I am ready to lose my money." This is an objective example. But the fact that the forum has a rating of trust ratings does not bother you? Do you communicate here? And someone collects information about you - your email, your wallet address, for example, published somewhere, etc. and the police. How did you live with all this for so many years?

[Pmalek]

Well, and most importantly - what can they track that is so secret? Do you often conduct transactions that they describe as illegal? And there is a list of really very specific operations. Stop doing them and you will have nothing to hide!

They shouldn't be tracking anything if their purpose is to be a privacy oriented Bitcoin wallet. But since that is no longer the case, then censorship, lack of privacy, cooperation with government agencies is exactly what they should be doing from now on. They just have to mention that on their website and social media so everyone knows that their CoinJoin service stands against everything that Bitcoin stands for. 

[DrBeer]

Well, and most importantly - what can they track that is so secret? Do you often conduct transactions that they describe as illegal? And there is a list of really very specific operations. Stop doing them and you will have nothing to hide!

They shouldn't be tracking anything if their purpose is to be a privacy oriented Bitcoin wallet. But since that is no longer the case, then censorship, lack of privacy, cooperation with government agencies is exactly what they should be doing from now on. They just have to mention that on their website and social media so everyone knows that their CoinJoin service stands against everything that Bitcoin stands for.  

Stop. Once again - why did you decide that YOU set what and how developers should do? Who gave you such a right - explain, please?
It seems to me that you "slightly" do not understand the position of the authors and the consumer, I emphasize once again, a free-to-use wallet. Why did you decide that developers should listen only to your opinion? Is it the only correct one?
When you look at pictures, or read a book, or drive a car, do you demand from someone that their author or developer rewrite it as it seems right to you? This is exactly the same product, and the authors themselves decide how it should be!

And you have every right to inform people about such changes in the product! What do you use, and the authors of Wassabi, by the way, do not force you to be silent about this, although according to your logic they can also - "it's your business to silently use your wallet, in the way they decided" ... Or is it "completely different"?

[o_e_l_e_o]

1. already described examples - makes it safer. If you are afraid of getting blacklisted - you know what their triggers are, just don't have relationships with questionable personalities.

Just repeating that blacklists make things safer without explaining in any way how that is the case does not make it true, nor is it a compelling argument. And we also don't know what the triggers are - we don't even know which blockchain analysis company is spying on Wasabi users, let alone their triggers.

2. Exactly - I am ready to exchange some, and for me, a dubious risk of deanonymization, for higher security! But you also do not have the right to restrict my security rights! Or just you can not be limited? Moreover, there are a lot of alternatives - choose, or is this wallet the most comfortable for you?

Once again, no one is infringing your security, because blacklists do not make you more secure. If you think otherwise, then again, please explain why you think that is the case.

3. I agree! This is freedom - you warned those for whom mega-anonymity is extremely important - you are done!

Nope. As long as Wasabi continue to spread lies I'll keep going, thanks.

4. Unfortunately, very bad people often use confidentiality. And I am a supporter of the fact that safety is above very dubious benefits (of course - in my opinion).

Ahh, so if you want privacy you are a criminal. I must say, you are a perfect representative for Wasabi - anti-privacy to the core.

[BlackHatCoiner]

what can they track that is so secret?

Transactions. Preventing mixing for some outputs means preventing the right of privacy to everyone. But, privacy is a civil right, and so do the heads of zkSNACKs ironically believe:

We believe that privacy is both a fundamental human right and business need that should be preserved at all times.

Preserving at all times means preserving criminals' privacy just as mine and yours, regardless of the inputs. Is that clear?

Stop doing them and you will have nothing to hide!

Ever heard of mass surveillance? Google DuckDuckGo it.

[dkbit98]

You have a very wild imagination. I just said what to check, according to the database - do you have bad deeds or not, but you already fantasized about nudism and exhibitionism Once again - security control is not the same as using a toilet with open doors ... If this is for you identical entities - live with it, I can't forbid you, but I have my own and different opinion

It's funny that you are telling me that I have a wild imagination after you wrote that sci-fi post about burning everything and wearing rubber gloves  
I didn't fantasized about anything, I simply asked if you are doing such things since you are totally open and don't have anything to hide...
I have my own opinion as well and I not trying to impose it on anyone, unlike you.

Do you communicate here? And someone collects information about you - your email, your wallet address, for example, published somewhere, etc. and the police. How did you live with all this for so many years?

Well I can slowly start blacklisting you everywhere, and then you can tell me later how do you live and how do you like it.
It's nice commenting about this things saying they are nothing, like a true internet warrior, but when someone starts blacklisting people anywhere it starts to grow like a cancer.

[DireWolfM14]

why did you decide that YOU set what and how developers should do?

I'm not going to speak for Pmalek, but the fact is we all get to decide.  If a developer wants to create a "privacy wallet" that only works for people who "have nothing to hide" they're entitled to do so.  But, if nobody uses the wallet then haven't we as a community expressed our opinion about "what and how developers should do?"  Wasabi's downloads rates should make it quite clear what the community thinks about their 2.0 wallet since the news broke about Wasabigate.

Wasabi 2.0 is like trying to sell snow in Alaska.  The trouble is they need Joe Sixpack to use their service to make it more private for the institutional investors they're pursuing.  But, if they have nothing to offer Joe Sixpack, then odds are he's not going to use their service.

Personally, I don't have anything to hide, but I still don't want the government in my house looking for evidence of a crime.  Even though I'm of the opinion that I have nothing to hide, they might find something that I should have kept hidden.

[n0nce]

1. already described examples - makes it safer. If you are afraid of getting blacklisted - you know what their triggers are, just don't have relationships with questionable personalities.

How does a blacklist make anything safer? I already asked, but you ignored my last post; do you believe someone can get their coins back if they're on a blacklist, similar to freezing a credit card?
And another big issue: Nobody knows 'what their triggers are'. Nobody! They can also change anytime, they could vary from user to user, and besides that the question about what's 'questionable' is entirely up to Wasabi and / or the Chainalysis company. If you ask your politicians, lots of things they do (like extraditing an investigative journalist to the United States for saying the truth) are totally legit and not at all questionable, while most people who value freedom disagree. You see, we don't even know whether the decision on 'what is questionable' is given by a government, which government, or whoever the fuck else. Maybe it's the highest bidder! I don't know..

2. Exactly - I am ready to exchange some, and for me, a dubious risk of deanonymization, for higher security! But you also do not have the right to restrict my security rights! Or just you can not be limited? Moreover, there are a lot of alternatives - choose, or is this wallet the most comfortable for you?

Honestly the risk of deanonymization is not at all dubious but very real and the marketed increased security is nonexistent. In fact, Wasabi never even claim themselves that they give you higher security. That's your own crazy thought you spun up in your own head. They just claim to be a privacy wallet.

3. I agree! This is freedom - you warned those for whom mega-anonymity is extremely important - you are done!

There's not 'mega anonymity' and 'medium anonymity' -- besides the fact that Wasabi promotes itself as 'mega anonymity wallet', they are provably against anonymity by the very fact of working with blockchain analysis companies (whose job it is to deanonymize, if you're not aware).

4. Unfortunately, very bad people often use confidentiality. And I am a supporter of the fact that safety is above very dubious benefits (of course - in my opinion).

You must have a very twisted view of reality. You actually believe that confidentiality is not of utmost importance, if it can give you higher (perceived) safety? Do you know that billions of people's safety is greatly dependent on technology that allows them to confidentially exchange information? And you're implying that they actually all just like to do 'very dubious' stuff? This goes back to your point 1: who defines 'dubiousness'? You and I both have very different views on what's dubious and what's not; and we both don't know who at Wasabi (or chain analysis company) decides what's dubious or what's not. Maybe they even agree more with me than you? There's no way to tell and that should be pretty unnerving for any Wasabi user.

Well, and most importantly - what can they track that is so secret? Do you often conduct transactions that they describe as illegal? And there is a list of really very specific operations. Stop doing them and you will have nothing to hide!

It's not that we have something to hide - we've got nothing to show. You've totally taken the Blue pill, mate.
In case you like watching movies, there are some that touch on this subject, that I recommend.
1984
The Matrix
V for Vendetta

Now please don't reply to all of my questions with 'This is my opinion *cry* *cry*' again. This is not about opinions; it's about discussing facts. If your 'opinion' (I would call it 'conviction' maybe), is so strong, you can surely answer the questions like an adult person.

[...]

But we are talking about a black list, when in some online store, for example, you are trying to buy some product you really need, and this store is a scammer. This is where the blacklist, for example, of your bank, will not allow you to easily make a transaction, he will say - this online store is bad, there are already 100,500 complaints about illegal debiting of money, and not shipping goods.

Ooooohh this is your understanding of blacklist? Because that's totally not how it works, my dude! Sorry to break it to you; Wasabi won't prevent you from sending to a scammer's Bitcoin address. Like, at all. Never claimed that. This goes back to what I said about their claims; they claim to be a privacy wallet (which we're questioning). Not about some security guarantees and preventing you to get ripped off. That's not what Wasabi is claiming or trying to do.

They're trying to establish a notion of 'untainted coins' and preventing you from spending your coins, because your coins are called dirty. No matter if you try to send them to your grandma, theymos or an online scammer; they are not blacklisting 'recipients', but 'senders'. This is not going to make your funds more secure and not preventing you from making mistakes. It just allows institutional investors to make sure if they mix their coins with yours, that your coins don't come from criminal origin. Again, we don't know who or what defines 'criminal' or 'taint' - all my questions regarding that I posted above.

If you want - then check the box "I am notified of the negative rating of the store, and I am ready to lose my money." This is an objective example.

Does this box exist? As far as I know, if you're blacklisted from Wasabi CoinJoin, there's no checkbox to click which allows you to still mix your UTXO. Honestly, if it would exist, their whole blacklist wouldn't work and wouldn't make sense.
Again, this statement seems to be based on a totally wrong picture of what Wasabi actually does and what the blacklist actually entails. It's not here to prevent you sending funds to a 'blacklisted store'; it's the other way round. They could blacklist you, which blocks you from sending anywhere.

This is not speculation or secret information; it's what they claim and always claimed on their website and everywhere else. Focus on privacy. Not about scam protection.

[pooya87]

why did you decide that YOU set what and how developers should do?
Why did you decide that developers should listen only to your opinion?

It's the opposite way around, it seems like everyone here except you are unanimously agreeing on the bad behavior of Wasabi developers. And only you are getting paid to advertise their service...

[witcher_sense]

It's the opposite way around, it seems like everyone here except you are unanimously agreeing on the bad behavior of Wasabi developers. And only you are getting paid to advertise their service...

As saying goes, "it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." This is why I am not participating in this meaningless discussion.

Wasabi still meet all those points though, since wasabi create HD wallet, use BIP 158 (also called Neutrino[2]) and use Tor by default. It's more appropriate to say those privacy feature not useful since Wasabi (the company) collaborate with blockchain surveillance companies for CoinJoin feature.

If a wallet collaborating with a blockchain surveillance company still falls within the definition of a "privacy-oriented wallet", then there must be something wrong with the definition itself. But I get your point.

It might be because nobody complained so far on bitcoin.org repository[1].

Perhaps, it is because more experienced users and those who follow the news rarely visit this section. Or just nobody cares.

[NotATether]

Wasabi 2.0 is like trying to sell snow in Alaska.  The trouble is they need Joe Sixpack to use their service to make it more private for the institutional investors they're pursuing.  But, if they have nothing to offer Joe Sixpack, then odds are he's not going to use their service.

And the reason that didn't work is because Joe Sixpack is not even interested in crypto in this bearish market - they're all using Cash App.

(BTW - Wasabigate returns virtually no hits on Google Search. Maybe people aren't interested enough in this scandal.)

[Pmalek]

Stop. Once again - why did you decide that YOU set what and how developers should do? Who gave you such a right - explain, please?

Have you looked at your signature and what it says on it? It says "Your private Bitcoin wallet". They are the ones who decided voluntarily to do what they do, but they are lying about the nature of their service. The CoinJoin service is not private, it's not anonymous. It restricts, limits, freezes, and prevents people from using it for reasons that are unknown and questionable. Remember my analogy with the DNA on the paper bill? That's how stupid the whole taint nonsense is.

[DrBeer]

1. already described examples - makes it safer. If you are afraid of getting blacklisted - you know what their triggers are, just don't have relationships with questionable personalities.

Just repeating that blacklists make things safer without explaining in any way how that is the case does not make it true, nor is it a compelling argument. And we also don't know what the triggers are - we don't even know which blockchain analysis company is spying on Wasabi users, let alone their triggers.

2. Exactly - I am ready to exchange some, and for me, a dubious risk of deanonymization, for higher security! But you also do not have the right to restrict my security rights! Or just you can not be limited? Moreover, there are a lot of alternatives - choose, or is this wallet the most comfortable for you?

Once again, no one is infringing your security, because blacklists do not make you more secure. If you think otherwise, then again, please explain why you think that is the case.

3. I agree! This is freedom - you warned those for whom mega-anonymity is extremely important - you are done!

Nope. As long as Wasabi continue to spread lies I'll keep going, thanks.

4. Unfortunately, very bad people often use confidentiality. And I am a supporter of the fact that safety is above very dubious benefits (of course - in my opinion).

Ahh, so if you want privacy you are a criminal. I must say, you are a perfect representative for Wasabi - anti-privacy to the core.

1. Look how interesting - I show examples of how blacklists can work, and according to your statements, I did not give arguments. You yourself say that you don’t know how a blockchain analyzing company works, but you unequivocally state that it is watching you?! Don't you think that you put your opinion above others in a very one-sided way, and really without arguments and evidence? And you also think that you are some kind of target for this company! Are you a government official? A carrier of meaningful information? Owner of super technology ? No ? Then I'll upset you - you are unlikely to arouse such interest among the "intelligence" No offense - 1% of the population can really be of interest to any services or company. 99% of analytics on the movement of funds - only extras for analytics, for advertising and other companies. Do you still consider yourself that 1%?

2. I repeat once again - blacklists make our life safer! There are tons of examples, you just don't want to see them. From spam lists and blacklists of Internet resources, to lists of unwanted business partners or bank lists of "bad" creditors

3. Hmm... At first you were talking about the infringement of some of your rights, now you are talking about lies? Ok - give an example?

4. You again confuse the concepts of confidentiality and privacy. The first relates to security, most likely data, the second - to privacy. I recommend comparing the lexical meanings of these words, it will expand understanding
I will even conduct an acquaintance, for free and without requiring you to show your passport
PRIVACY is a sphere of vital interests, life activity, emotions, affections of an individual, a private person, an individual, isolated from other public spheres. In this sphere, a person is autonomous, but not isolated, his relations with others are concentrated in it.

PRIVACY - does not oblige you to process personal data only for the purposes that you initially stated. It does not oblige you to limit the data storage period. It does not require you to introduce yourself, tell the name of your company. Confidentiality means that you encrypted the data, closed access to it, and you, for example, have special means of restricting access to data inside your laptop.


PS "I must say, you are a perfect representative for Wasabi - anti-privacy to the core." - and labeling those who have a different opinion is a "good" indicator

[o_e_l_e_o]

1. Look how interesting - I show examples of how blacklists can work, and according to your statements, I did not give arguments.

No, you didn't. Wasabi's blacklist does not work how you think it does. It does nothing to prevent scammers from targeting users. You are simply wrong here.

You yourself say that you don’t know how a blockchain analyzing company works, but you unequivocally state that it is watching you?!

That's absolutely not what I said. Try reading my reply again.

Don't you think that you put your opinion above others in a very one-sided way, and really without arguments and evidence?

If you claim that blacklists make you safer, then the onus is on you to explain how that is the case. You have repeatedly failed to do that.

And you also think that you are some kind of target for this company!

At least you admit that Wasabi are targeting their users.

Then I'll upset you - you are unlikely to arouse such interest among the "intelligence"

This is just the same old utterly stupid "Nothing to hide" argument which has been thoroughly debunked on many occasions.

2. I repeat once again - blacklists make our life safer! There are tons of examples, you just don't want to see them.

Then give me one single example of how Wasabi deciding to blacklist some inputs makes my coins safer. Just one example. You've been asked repeatedly.

3. Hmm... At first you were talking about the infringement of some of your rights, now you are talking about lies? Ok - give an example?

I've previously outlined Wasabi's lying here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5286821.msg60337199#msg60337199

4. You again confuse the concepts of confidentiality and privacy.

You can argue semantics all you like - none of that changes the fact that Wasabi are spying on their users.

[Poker Player]

...I have my own and different opinion

Your opinion seems to be greatly affected by the signature you are wearing because that opinion wasn't voiced before the campaign started.

I also get paid from it although I actually took a paycut, so now I get half of what I used to get per post, although if I complete 50 posts, I get the same weekly.

The reasons to change were others: no posting requirements in the gambling section, no minimum posting requirements, possibility to have a personalized avatar and cool guy managing the campaign.

I have much less technical knowledge than most of you who write here, and I'm not going to go into that.

I must say that I don't see much sense in the idea of tainted coins if we make the analogy with cash: that they won't accept a bill because a criminal has previously used it.

But I see all this in a more global way.

The ease of making undeclared transactions without the tax authorities knowing about it is going to be greatly reduced in the next few years.

That's the crux of the matter.

You can argue about the right to privacy as much as you want. Blacklists, tainted coins, kyc requirements, are all steps in that direction. There are also ATMs that didn't ask for kyc below certain amounts and have switched to asking for kyc for any amount, so less privacy there.

All of that is a far cry from the original idea of P2P, just like when Satoshi wrote the whitepaper he sure wasn't thinking about lots of people paying capital gains tax.

I would guess that all of you who are very concerned about this issue, and so called privacy, have a significant part of your net worth in "private" bitcoins so to speak, probably mixed, no wonder the vast majority of you work for Chip Mixer. And of course, it is normal that you are worried about these issues because they could blacklist your coins.

I have to say that I am concerned about privacy, but to a certain extent. That's why I often pay in cash, or I don't post my life on Facebook or Instagram, for example.

Room for privacy in the use of Bitcoin is going to be there in the future, but it will be reduced. Better get used to the idea.

[dkbit98]

I repeat once again - blacklists make our life safer! There are tons of examples, you just don't want to see them. From spam lists and blacklists of Internet resources, to lists of unwanted business partners or bank lists of "bad" creditors

Spam list and blacklist for internet resources are optional and they should stay like this.
I can use my browser with uBlocker origin extension that has many filter lists, but I can always turn it off and use it without uBlocker, so I am in control, there is no such option in Wasabi wallet.
In this case we are talking about blacklisting regular people and individuals, that is totally different thing, same like blacklisting and arresting journalists for telling the truth...
I guess you approve that as well.  

[DrBeer]

stop. Once again - why did you decide that YOU set what and how developers should do? Who gave you such a right - explain, please?

Have you looked at your signature and what it says on it? It says "Your private Bitcoin wallet". They are the ones who decided voluntarily to do what they do, but they are lying about the nature of their service. The CoinJoin service is not private, it's not anonymous. It restricts, limits, freezes, and prevents people from using it for reasons that are unknown and questionable. Remember my analogy with the DNA on the paper bill? That's how stupid the whole taint nonsense is.

All right! Your wallet is your PERSONAL, private key is known only to you. And no one has the right, except you, to dispose of the funds in this wallet. No one has the right to take and transfer them somewhere without your knowledge.

CoinJoin is a specific technology, more precisely one that can be used both for privacy and for offenses. And people who are dishonest in their thoughts can use it for illegal actions, or to conceal such actions. And a certain control, I personally think, can and even should be. Moreover, this control is quite clearly described by items that are really illegal and immoral. If you don't do that, what are you afraid of?!

[n0nce]

[...]

Why are you ghosting me?

I just want to know, how Wasabi's blacklist concretely improves my security. dkbit98 showed above that blacklists can be used for good; heck, my latest thread is a blacklist.

It just makes no sense that users are supposed to be secured by Wasabi's blacklist; especially as they never claimed to do that themselves.

1. already described examples - makes it safer. If you are afraid of getting blacklisted - you know what their triggers are, just don't have relationships with questionable personalities.

How does a blacklist Wasabi's blacklist make anything safer? I already asked, but you ignored my last post; do you believe someone can get their coins back if they're on a blacklist, similar to freezing a credit card?
And another big issue: Nobody knows 'what their triggers are'. Nobody! They can also change anytime, they could vary from user to user, and besides that the question about what's 'questionable' is entirely up to Wasabi and / or the Chainalysis company. If you ask your politicians, lots of things they do (like extraditing an investigative journalist to the United States for saying the truth) are totally legit and not at all questionable, while most people who value freedom disagree. You see, we don't even know whether the decision on 'what is questionable' is given by a government, which government, or whoever the fuck else. Maybe it's the highest bidder! I don't know..
[...]

[Pmalek]

Moreover, this control is quite clearly described by items that are really illegal and immoral. If you don't do that, what are you afraid of?!

Show us that list that explains in great detail the algorithm at work when the centralized and privacy-infringing coordinator decides if I can partake in a coinjoin or not. I am not aware of one, maybe I haven't looked closely enough. Show it to us. Give me a list with the types of inputs that aren't welcome. Show us what type of coin history is illegal and dirty according to the privacy-infringing coordinator and their blockchain analysis buddies.