Mixers that mix bitcoin without letting it be obvious that it came from a mixer?

[LoyceV]

What "watch list"? Using ANY mixer definitely WILL put your PUBLIC ADDRESS in a watch list in a database somewhere. Using a centralized exchange could possibly do that too.

I'm pretty sure I have a list of all Bitcoin addresses on a watch list, and I'm pretty sure there are also unused addresses on watch lists somewhere.

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources.

Wasabi uses a questionable source to blacklist addresses, while attacking the basics (fungibility) of Bitcoin as electronic cash.

They merely want to protect their users from taint.

They merely want to maximize their profit, and convincing people their Bitcoins are only fungible if they use Wasabi Wallet is part of that.

[1714908509]

1714908509

[1714908509]

1714908509

[1714908509]

1714908509

[1714908509]

1714908509

[o_e_l_e_o]

What "watch list"? Using ANY mixer definitely WILL put your PUBLIC ADDRESS in a watch list in a database somewhere. Using a centralized exchange could possibly do that too.

According to the document I quoted extensively above, so much as withdrawing your coins to your own wallet which has not been linked to your KYC data is enough to put you on a watchlist. It is quite clear the future the governments and authorities around the world want for bitcoin: Only to be used on centralized exchanges under extensively KYCed accounts. No decentralization, no peer to peer trades or exchanges, and no use as a currency. Buy it on a CEX, store it on a CEX, sell it on a CEX, and anything else is prohibited, which would obviously be the death of bitcoin as we know it. This is the future that franky1 is supporting.

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.

And who defines what are "questionable sources"? I discussed this before here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5286821.msg60373127#msg60373127. The most hilarious example is this: Under Wasabi's terms, they will censor people from paying for hosting the bitcoin whitepaper, since in some stupid jurisdictions known scammer CSW owns the copyright.

[Wind_FURY]

What "watch list"? Using ANY mixer definitely WILL put your PUBLIC ADDRESS in a watch list in a database somewhere. Using a centralized exchange could possibly do that too.

The Bitcoin blockchain itself is a massive database of all transactions that have ever taken place and all the addresses associated with these transactions. By spinning up your own full node that maintains a full copy of this database, you are essentially deploying your personal watchlist, which you also can use to surveil brazenly the transactions and addresses of others.

Your post is out of context, and it doesn't address the question that WasabiWallet users is in a "watch list"? What actual "watch list"? An FBI Watch List? Because if WasabiWallet users is in a watch list, then ALL public addresses that uses/has used any mixer is in the same watch list.

Wasabi developers have actually taken the trade off of blocking UTXOs with "taint" to keep their pool" clean".

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.

Apparently, the taint of bitcoin addresses is a flawed and misleading concept, and it largely depends on who you ask. For example, according to my standpoint regarding this concept, each UTXO that comes from Wasabi CoinJoin is to be considered "tainted" because, before entering the CoinJoin process as input, it had been touched or filtered by the dirty hands of chain surveillance companies. Therefore, not only did Wasabi not protect the user's from taint, it made all their bitcoins even more tainted and disgusting.

Plus you make newbies believe as if those users in your post are "scammers", but in fact you are the one who spreads disinformation in the forum and gaslight people. But if people trust you, then they will learn the HARD WAY.

I can also deem your post about taint disinformation, but, in fact, it is just a difference of opinion. If someone considers someone's opinion to be a guide to action, they should learn the hard way.

Disinformation? Ser, read my posts about "taint", in fact, I have already said it before that "taint" doesn't exist in the blockchain. I'm merely talking about "taint" as something that centralized exchanges and services use to lock you out of your accounts if they find "taint" in the UTXOs you send.

What "watch list"? Using ANY mixer definitely WILL put your PUBLIC ADDRESS in a watch list in a database somewhere. Using a centralized exchange could possibly do that too.

According to the document I quoted extensively above, so much as withdrawing your coins to your own wallet which has not been linked to your KYC data is enough to put you on a watchlist. It is quite clear the future the governments and authorities around the world want for bitcoin: Only to be used on centralized exchanges under extensively KYCed accounts. No decentralization, no peer to peer trades or exchanges, and no use as a currency. Buy it on a CEX, store it on a CEX, sell it on a CEX, and anything else is prohibited, which would obviously be the death of bitcoin as we know it. This is the future that franky1 is supporting.

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.

And who defines what are "questionable sources"? I discussed this before here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5286821.msg60373127#msg60373127. The most hilarious example is this: Under Wasabi's terms, they will censor people from paying for hosting the bitcoin whitepaper, since in some stupid jurisdictions known scammer CSW owns the copyright.

I don't know. The government? The cartel of centralized exchanges? "Them"?

[franky1]

This is the future that franky1 is supporting.

researching. learning and understanding does not mean supporting it

being ignorant and not willing to learn is a way of you defeating yourself
EG if a boxer does not know his opponents moves a boxer cannot learn how to defend himself

so learn things . research things. then you wont get defeated so easily

.. but yet again.. your point was not to try and prove i support something or pigeon hole me into some silly natative you made up.. (not an orgininal tactic by your group).. you again are just pointing aimless fingers of distraction just to not accept the reality that.. your buddy group idolise the DCG.. where its the DCG that are actually involved in lobbying for regulations so that they can operate legitimately
its funny how you completely wish to avoid any negative speak about them..

so take your cries and finger pointing to them. your kiss ass love and adoration should have atleast earned you a few minutes talk time with them to vent your frustrations about their actions in regards to lobbying for regulations and accepting payments from regulators

and please. stop being a pedantic idiot and actually take the time to learn things

Receiving funds from or sending funds to VASPs whose CDD or know-your-customer (KYC) processes are demonstrably weak or non-existent.

Pretty sure that covers all the examples I gave above.

you want to pretend this means all coins are suspect(facepalm)
no its not about saying all utxos are suspect.
its a guidance for vasps.. where a vasp reading it and sees that it is receiving funds from a vasp...
its a guidance for vasps.. where a vasp reading it and sees that it is sending funds to a vasp...
where that vasps CDD or KYC processes are demonstrably weak or non-existent.

it means when funds are moved between vasps if one vasp is not following its CDD/KYC processes or doesnt comply at all even when it should. then treat funds coming from them as suspicious.


however.. by you and your buddies trying to do silly adverts of scare stories and fear to try and get everyone to use a mixer(known red flag) YOU and your buddies are trying to cause all coins to get flagged.

yep your malicious greedy immature and naive games are that your small swamp of 0.25% flags that your utxo's sit in. you fear you might be caught oneday because your in a small swamp of people that use mixers.

so instead of trying to think of a real solution such as stop swimming in swamps. you instead want the whole community to jump into your swamp in the hopes you can hide better by having everyones utxo put on a watch list. while then play more distracting games to pretend/scare/lie to everyone by saying they already are in a swamp because [insert your misunderstand/misrepresenting dumb games].
hard facts shows not everyone is in your swamp.
(1700tx a  block ~10k an hour ~89,250,000 a year yet.. there are not 89m SAR reports generated a year from crypto)

 but you just care about fooling people to jump into your swamp of flagged utxo(caused by you using a mixer) under your false pretence that they already are..
which again makes you a very vile person

[n0nce]

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.

Except that there is no central list of 'what is tainted' and what's not, so even a 'clean' output by Wasabi's standards might be rejected from an exchange.
Heck, some exchanges could flag a UTXO, exactly because it comes from a (Wasabi or otherwise) CoinJoin and thus is not trivially linkable to a real-world identity.

According to the document I quoted extensively above, so much as withdrawing your coins to your own wallet which has not been linked to your KYC data is enough to put you on a watchlist. It is quite clear the future the governments and authorities around the world want for bitcoin: Only to be used on centralized exchanges under extensively KYCed accounts. No decentralization, no peer to peer trades or exchanges, and no use as a currency. Buy it on a CEX, store it on a CEX, sell it on a CEX, and anything else is prohibited, which would obviously be the death of bitcoin as we know it. This is the future that franky1 is supporting.

He's such a visionary. This would also solve the scaling problem without the evil, evil, 'fake Bitcoin' IOUs that we are moving on the Lightning Network.

[franky1]

According to the document I quoted extensively above, so much as withdrawing your coins to your own wallet which has not been linked to your KYC data is enough to put you on a watchlist.

He's such a visionary. This would also solve the scaling problem without the evil, evil, 'fake Bitcoin' IOUs that we are moving on the Lightning Network.

m0nce nice try to poke a derailment to avoid the nonsense oeleo keeps spewing out
ill just say this
bitcoin never leaves the bitcoin network. (fact, thats the beauty of the security)
whether its balance on an exchange mysql database.
whether its another unit of measure pegged at 1:1000 rate or 1:1 rate on another network.. those are not bitcoin thus someone somewhere owes you real bitcoin on the bitcoin network at a later date when they broadcast a real bitcoin transaction to the bitcoin network

..
as for what oeleo said. the bit he was quoting is gudelines for a vasp.. lets call it vaspA where the quoted bit from FAFT is saying if vasp A is sending or receiving from another VASP where that VASP is not conducting KYC then treat the funds coming from the VASP as suspect
(this has nothing to do with random coins from users own wallets. its about funds coming from another exchange)
so oeleo is trying to pretend it means its about all coins from all sources of all wallets/users. but its not.
he is trying to exaggerate/make up and fake and pretend and lie about many things to falsely suggest that all coins are red flagged by default. but they are not

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.

Except that there is no central list of 'what is tainted' and what's not,

while you lot are trying to stir the social drama about taint.
what you lot are ignoring(still) is it doesnt matter of source of funds before a mixer.. its the use of the mixer itself that puts a red flag on a utxo, which gets put on a watchlist(wher they can then look back at movements before he mix)
and those receiving funds from a mixer are red flagged. where that utxo is put on a watch list and they can follow the movements after the mixer

so no matter the source pre mix.. your on a watchlist. thus people are watching you.

and yes there is a established list of what causes a red flag

[franky1]

@franky1: Describing o_e_l_e_o as "vile beyond belief" is a little uncalled for, no? I'm not financially incentivized to endorse mixers but I still agree with every point I've read that o_e_l_e_o and LoyceV have made on this issue (in this thread and others).

certain few people (theres about a dozen main instigators) pretend they are the whole community. and they only listen to their own like minded mindsets that confirmation bias each other to pat each other on the back, and kiss each others ass when they repeat the same mantra their buddies have said.

these certain individuals have for hundreds of posts in many topics been trying to tell thousands of other people that bitcoin is broke or not fit for purpose. trying to then advertise a service or subnet as the solution that everyone should  use. even though these services/subnets cause more issues for people.
locking value up with middlemen to then play around with and then give back value at a later time. where by these services/subnets actually red flag users value.

the vile part is in 2 motives
1: they dont like/want regular people just using bitcoin. and they shout out many stupid reasons why they think bitcoin is unfit. yet they are happy to bloat up bitcoin with nonsense data and mixer data thats not actually buying a product or good or paying a proper recipient.. but instead just more wasted tx for their silly shuffling of utxo in and out of their promoted middlemen service or subnet that they love and admire and advertise so much

yep they would rather have 2x 1500byte(3kb) of confidential nonsense data added to a block(their next promotion is to add the monero confidential bloat). so that 1 guy can hide his malicious activity, rather than have 12x 250byte(3kb) of 12 people just buying their daily life stuff

2: mainly they have an incessant effort of lying and exaggerating to say how they think bitcoin is broke, not fit. and/or already 100% dirty. just to try to scare normal clean people into getting dirty and enter the swamps of dirt(their promoted services/subnets) with them just so they can have a better chance of escaping their swamps with other peoples clean coin and leave/hand off to other people the muck they want to leave behind

they know less than 1% use subnetworks like LN and mixers. they know that this small swamp pool of users are just stirring value amongst themselves, shuffling the same value between each other..  and they know that it not helping them look clean if only dirty people are jumping into the swamp. so they are desperate to lie, deceive and exaggerate some weird fantasy utopian dream about their service/subnet. and then they also try endlessly to call out bitcoin as the nightmare, just so they can scare people into jumping into their swamp

[Wind_FURY]

About WasabiWallet, OP's concern is "taint". Wasabi's developers make sure that all UTXOs that enter their pool don't come from questionable sources. They merely want to protect their users from taint.

Except that there is no central list of 'what is tainted' and what's not, so even a 'clean' output by Wasabi's standards might be rejected from an exchange.

That's what I was asking franky1, "what watch list"? He's always there and invents something to disinform, and gaslight people, especially newbies.

It could be true that clean outputs from WasabiWallet might be rejected, but its blocking of outputs that were used in "illegal transactions" could protect its CoinJoin pool from sanctions.

Heck, some exchanges could flag a UTXO, exactly because it comes from a (Wasabi or otherwise) CoinJoin and thus is not trivially linkable to a real-world identity.

Exchanges can do anything they need to do to protect themselves from sanctions, but my debate is merely either you accept the trade off and mix through Wasabi, or you don't. I'm not debating whether nopara37 did the right decision or not.

[NotATether]

what you lot are ignoring(still) is it doesnt matter of source of funds before a mixer.. its the use of the mixer itself that puts a red flag on a utxo, which gets put on a watchlist(wher they can then look back at movements before he mix)
and those receiving funds from a mixer are red flagged. where that utxo is put on a watch list and they can follow the movements after the mixer

We're trying to fight back by abrogating the bold part. Because the use of a mixer in itself does not constitute a crime even in Federal law (and we have to make sure that crooks do not attempt to make it so).

Currently the only entities that read the "watch list" are feds, like NSA and such. The only thing they can do about it is give you legal trouble. That's it.

They're not forcing anyone to seize your funds or block your use of payment processors/exchanges, because the corps that are actually doing that are largely acting on their own (with their own goofed up criterea about what is suspicious - there was a report that a casino tried to make a guy do KYC by standing in front of a street sign holding a newspaper and ID).

[o_e_l_e_o]

Except that there is no central list of 'what is tainted' and what's not, so even a 'clean' output by Wasabi's standards might be rejected from an exchange.

I did a small experiment in this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5395035.msg59905002#msg59905002
One particular blockchain analysis entity found that approximately 25% of coins in Binance's hot wallet were part of an OFAC blacklist. Bittrex's hot wallet contained coins from known scams and hacks. Why are these exchanges accepting these coins which are tainted? The only logical conclusion is that different entities have different definitions of taint, which goes to show how arbitrary the whole thing is, but also means that coins from one CEX could be refused by another CEX.

We're trying to fight back by abrogating the bold part. Because the use of a mixer in itself does not constitute a crime even in Federal law (and we have to make sure that crooks do not attempt to make it so).

I've put franky1 back on ignore, but it is hilarious that he is still just repeating the same trash after I definitively proved him wrong earlier I this thread. By the very document he is using to support his red flag nonsense, even so much as buying bitcoin with a credit card or withdrawing your bitcoin to your own wallet is enough to earn you the exact same red flag.

It is clear that the problem here is not mixers, or coinjoins, or anonymous altcoins like Monero, or any other privacy tools such as Tor, or the users who are interested in maintaining a bit of privacy in the face of the ever increasing global surveillance we are all subjected to. The problem here is governments and centralized exchanges which want to turn bitcoin in to a surrogate CBDC, where you can only interact with bitcoin on approved, KYC enforced platforms, under the watchful eye of your overlords.

[franky1]

Except that there is no central list of 'what is tainted' and what's not, so even a 'clean' output by Wasabi's standards might be rejected from an exchange.

I did a small experiment in this post: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5395035.msg59905002#msg59905002
One particular blockchain analysis entity found that approximately 25% of coins in Binance's hot wallet were part of an OFAC blacklist. Bittrex's hot wallet contained coins from known scams and hacks. Why are these exchanges accepting these coins which are tainted? The only logical conclusion is that different entities have different definitions of taint, which goes to show how arbitrary the whole thing is, but also means that coins from one CEX could be refused by another CEX.

1. oeleo's decision to look into binance, is because he knows binance doesnt serve US citizens because its not licenced and thus not regulated by us regulations. so binance does not follow the US regulation policy..

so yea. when oeleo says and plays ignorant about:
 "Why are these exchanges accepting these coins which are tainted? The only logical conclusion is that different entities have different definitions of taint, which goes to show how arbitrary the whole thing is, but also means that coins from one CEX could be refused by another CEX."

the answer which i think he does know, unless he really is dumb, instead of playing dumb.. is that yes exactly that different exchanges follow different regulatory policies. its called jurisdictions.. different countries have different rules
so by learning what the policies are. you then learn which services to use and what ones to avoid.
so it requires learning the rules... instead of his game of pretending rules dont apply because there are so many.

..different businesses have different policies due to different jurisdiction so learn the rules that apply to your area and the services you use.

dont play oeleo's game of:
'then it must ignorantly mean the rules are fake and dont apply because there are so many different rules'.

We're trying to fight back by abrogating the bold part. Because the use of a mixer in itself does not constitute a crime even in Federal law (and we have to make sure that crooks do not attempt to make it so).

I've put franky1 back on ignore, but it is hilarious that he is still just repeating the same trash after I definitively proved him wrong earlier I this thread. By the very document he is using to support his red flag nonsense, even so much as buying bitcoin with a credit card or withdrawing your bitcoin to your own wallet is enough to earn you the exact same red flag.

oh and as oeleo quoted earlier about the sending receiving coin that lack KYC.. that definitively was about CEX to CEX. not wallet to cex..(OELEO. try reading it again, and try reading without the fantasy hat on.)
  so yes one exchange might deem funds coming from binance as suspicious if binance does not show good KYC linkage. again he keeps mentioning the same "proof" to play games about user funds from private wallets even though the "proof" is about CEX to CEX.. where one cex isnt doing good KYC meaning that a regulated CEX might deem a unregulated cex as suspicious

It is clear that the problem here is not mixers, or coinjoins, or anonymous altcoins like Monero, or any other privacy tools such as Tor, or the users who are interested in maintaining a bit of privacy in the face of the ever increasing global surveillance we are all subjected to. The problem here is governments and centralized exchanges which want to turn bitcoin in to a surrogate CBDC, where you can only interact with bitcoin on approved, KYC enforced platforms, under the watchful eye of your overlords.

governments dont want to take over bitcoin. they love their fiat and they are making their own CBDC. what they dont want is people escaping their fiat to avoid paying taxes or buying stuff that can hurt their citizens. (logic/reality)

if people are angry about the rules.. think about complaining to those that lobby for the regulation to then run legitimate businesses that can work in the valley edges between crypto and fiat. whereby to offer fiat they have to follow the rules of said fiat.
the main big players are those found at DCG.io

different jurisdictions have different rules. and yep those rules are real. so instead of playing ignorant to ignore the rules. you have to learn the rules and then decide on what services to ignore.(avoid using)

pretending you can pretend that for instance coinbase rules dont apply and then continue to use coinbase shouting 'its ok guys break the rules because they are fake and so they cant do anything'. is actually just going to get people into trouble.
the smart play is to learn the rules and then decide if you want to use or avoid coinbase

EG if you know that coinbase suspects mixers and binance received funds.. but you want to use a mixer then you avoid coinbase...and you find out binance doesnt care much about mixers.then you use binance.

EG if you are american thus cant use binance, but coinbase doesnt like mixers. then you avoid using mixed funds with coinbase

however, seems oeleo wants to play the fantasy role of a wild west outlaw cowboy.thinking he can just walk into a western saloon not introduce himself ask for a drink and a wench, walk out without paying.and for just fun sake shoot someone in the foot because he thinks he is untraceable.and then walk out thinking he had a fun day.. not realising the stuff he caused and the trouble that can follow him
and then pretend he is invincible so should recruit other cowboys to join him so he can shift the trouble onto them and use them as his shield/fall guy to defend him while he walks off with all their loot into the sunset..

[PowerGlove]

@franky1: Look, you've made a lot of posts about this and I see what you're saying and I even empathize with your position and agree with some of your analysis, but if you truly believe that there is some kind of Bitcointalk conspiracy to trick innocent users into adding their clean UTXO's to the "swamp" then I don't think there is much profit in discussing this with you.

In your mind, how is it that I agree so strongly with your opposition? Am I part of the conspiracy, too? Do you think that I'm just parroting other users and not applying my own mind to the problem?

My position is very simple and can be stated from two points of view:

The user point of view: It may be better for individual users to steer clear of anything that obfuscates their transaction history because that (and a million other things) will probably add them to some bullshit "list" and may affect their future dealings.

The system point of view: We all have a responsibility to recognize where "taint" and "watchlist" fearmongering will eventually lead us if we don't fight back against it. That means being opposed to anything that undermines fungibility and being for anything that enhances it.

I expect most people to act in (what they perceive to be) their own best interests (like you are) by trying to avoid being "marked". But I hope that a significant fraction of users will see the bigger picture and realize what's at stake here.

Ideas like being able to "freeze" someone's assets are not a part of Bitcoin. We shouldn't let fear allow us to become complicit in the construction of systems that would eventually be used for things like this.

[PrivacyG]

certain few people (theres about a dozen main instigators) pretend they are the whole community. and they only listen to their own like minded mindsets that confirmation bias each other to pat each other on the back, and kiss each others ass when they repeat the same mantra their buddies have said.

You pretend the whole community of privacy advocates are all criminals and malicious people, so there is that.  Although you have been told a gazillion times that there are people like me who just do not want their personal information collected, stolen or analyzed and do not want their expenses to be traced for privacy reasons, you keep repeating the same B S.

they know less than 1% use subnetworks like LN and mixers. they know that this small swamp pool of users are just stirring value amongst themselves, shuffling the same value between each other..  and they know that it not helping them look clean if only dirty people are jumping into the swamp. so they are desperate to lie, deceive and exaggerate some weird fantasy utopian dream about their service/subnet. and then they also try endlessly to call out bitcoin as the nightmare, just so they can scare people into jumping into their swamp

You will have a point when you will prove for real that Lightning Network and Mixers are mainly used for malicious activity.  Until then, your words are pure thoughts and speculation.  I know for a fact that my use of such services and networks are for clean activity and I am convinced that way less Mixer users are as malicious as you think.  But hey, to you it is completely normal for you to force no privacy on me and it is completely nonsense if I try to just exist as a privacy advocate.  How does that sound to you?  Fair?

Tell me how many of your Fiat bills are 'clean'.  Then tell me why you are still using them if they might in fact be bills that have been used for crime before.  Why are you not abandoning the bills if my 'dirty' bill could end up an year from now in your pocket and your 'clean' bill might end up in mine, which is exactly what you say about 'stirring value amongst themselves'.  Then talk about how bad Mixers are again?

governments dont want to take over bitcoin. they love their fiat and they are making their own CBDC. what they dont want is people escaping their fiat to avoid paying taxes or buying stuff that can hurt their citizens. (logic/reality)

Because our Government loves us and cares so much about us.  And they definitely want the best for us, this is why laws are mostly for us and not for them, this is why corporations and the wealthy have so many advantages over us, this is why rules change when the wealthy put pressure on the change.  This is why there is so much insider trading and they are getting rich at our expense.  Because the Government cares about me and definitely does not want me to get hurt by o_e_l_e_o's acquirement of an Amazon Gift Card or honey with Bitcoin.  Because at every corner of the street there is someone who is selling drugs for Monero and Chip Mixer chips and everywhere you look on the internet you can find rockets, bombs and weapons for Bitcoin.  And because it must be so much easier for me to purchase a weapon with Monero through the Internet without getting tracked down and found than it is for me to purchase a weapon with cash from a physical black market dealer.

But yes, the problem is me, o_e_l_e_o and all the other privacy supporters here because we are hurting citizens.  Hey, o_e_l_e_o, do not forget to send me that address to stir up some more Bitcoin in the pot of dirt!  Need to buy some alcohol for my 10 year old son's birthday party and thanks to Monero and Chip Mixer I can finally buy it for him without anyone knowing.  Only if I could walk to the store pretending to purchase it for myself and then hand it out to him, that would make things so much easier..

Franky, you are exactly the reason the government's tactic works.  You took their bait and are already drooling over the next one.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[franky1]

certain few people (theres about a dozen main instigators) pretend they are the whole community. and they only listen to their own like minded mindsets that confirmation bias each other to pat each other on the back, and kiss each others ass when they repeat the same mantra their buddies have said.

You pretend the whole community of privacy advocates are all criminals and malicious people,
PrivacyG

nope
being watched and red flagged is not about being a criminal first to earn an investigation and a level where someone is watching you..
thats your first failure especially when later in your post you pretend that it requires LN,liquid/mixer/monero to be proven as doing criminal things to be suspected
sorry thats not how the real world works

You will have a point when you will prove for real that Lightning Network and Mixers are mainly used for malicious activity.  Until then, your words are pure thoughts and speculation.

have a read.. you will learn that the entities you want to hide from have a list of what they are particularly watching for.. i actually tried to help you lot by showing you what they watch for and what they red flag so you can learn what to stay away from to not be on their watch list(no matter if your clean or dirty)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5409206.msg60729993#msg60729993

my point has been repeated many times

those wanting to remain under the radar and not appear on a watch list. should avoid things that put them on watchlists.  SIMPLE!!!
it does not matter what they bought.. its about by the USE OF A MIXER they are on a watch list(something they want to avoid)
SIMPLE!!
so simple solution dont use a mixer,ytumbler LN, liquid, monero or other AEC or (other things in list) = dont get on a watch list
SIMPLE!

it doesnt matter if you bought office chair legitimately from a good retailer..and with the 'change' then using a mixer. the very fact of using a mixer puts you on a watch list.

its not about just being on some blockchain taint on the ledger that SEC investigators dont have time or labour to watch every uxto every second.. .. its about you actually having your deposit into mixer highlighted to a point that human eyes are physically then investigating the movements from the mixer backward to the payment service that dealt with the office chair

and the mixer withdrawal(from the mixer to your current unspent output).. another investigation with physical eyes looking at the movement from the mixer to current unspent output

thus you are now on the radar. where as if you didnt use a mixer. you would have not been red listed. its simple

so you are actually not being private/hidden. but actually watched to a higher scale due to using a mixer.
..
again to note every hour there are ~10k tx.. but only 25 are mixer related. human eye investigators at MSB do not watch with physical eyes 10k tx an hour. instead they are only interested in the suspicious ones(the 25 per hour)
as its a time saving to only watch the suspicious transactions (which regulators deem as suspicious by having a list of what they declare as suspicious activity to watch)

however the social drama of particular people
(separate debate)
those certain people who are ignorantly trying to convince normal/everyone to use mixers. have nefarious intent in why they are exaggerating the foolish need that everyone should join their swamp pool of coins those certain people are just spinning between each other
EG if you only have tomatos being put into a saucepan.. you are only going to get tomato sauce out of the saucepan.

sticking with the saucepan analogy
they want other ingredients added to their small saucepan of tomatoes so they can spoon out the other ingredients for themselves and leave the tomatoes for whomever put other ingredients into their saucepan
leaving them with the red sauce to have to deal with


mixers DO NOT REMOVE blockchain taint. all coins are always linked all the way back to the coin reward they were generated from.
a mixer does not cut that.
it just swaps one persons source with another person

meaning nefarious people want to swap their coin with someone else that has no nefarious activity..
and that nefarious activity ends up with the person how handed off their non nefarious activity


certain nefarious peoples next agenda is to totally dismantle bitcoins audit system where they want to break bitcoin to have it where users cannot prove their coin was generated from mining coin reward. which sounds good to nefarious people because it removes tracking.. but to normal people that want to see clearly that no one just randomly invented coin,thus want to know that bitcoin complies to the 21m coin rule of mining. those people that want a good money system that cant be counterfeited, double spent dont want bitcoin broke for the dreams of nefarious intent people that dont care about bitcoin but only care about their own personal greed and selfish desires.

[o_e_l_e_o]

You will have a point when you will prove for real that Lightning Network and Mixers are mainly used for malicious activity.  Until then, your words are pure thoughts and speculation.

The best data that we do have (from Chainalysis of all places) shows that only 8% of coins passing through mixers were linked to illegal activities, with the largest proportion by far (around 50%) coming directly from exchanges. So the majority of mixer use is indeed simply average users trying to regain some privacy after buying coins on privacy invading centralized exchanges.

Franky, you are exactly the reason the government's tactic works.  You took their bait and are already drooling over the next one.

His antics remind me of this quote:

Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked.

Don't use mixers, or the government won't like it.
In fact, don't pay attention to your privacy at all, lest you anger the government.
In fact, why bother even holding your own coins? Leave them in a CEX so the government know exactly what you are doing with them at all times. That way, they will leave you alone.
In fact, better just let them monitor everything you do. You've got nothing to hide, right?

[franky1]

You will have a point when you will prove for real that Lightning Network and Mixers are mainly used for malicious activity.  Until then, your words are pure thoughts and speculation.

The best data that we do have (from Chainalysis of all places) shows that only 8% of coins passing through mixers were linked to illegal activities,

again for probably the 20th time
its not about the activity before or after the mixer being good or criminal (silly peoples latest misdirect)

its about the use of a mixer puts you on a watchlist no matter the activity before or after it.

people that want to remain private dont want to be on a watch list on some SAR that goes to a government agency
so the smart thing is to learn what do the agencies list as things they consider red flags that generate SAR reports to them..  

..
and remember, the main lobby group that helped write the rules along side legislators, to then run legit businesses that comply, follow and use the rules and pass on SAR to agencies can be found here:
https://dcg.co/portfolio/

so go complain to them
oh and i have been calling the DCG out on their shit for 7 years plus, ever since they got their grubby paws on the edges and core of bitcoin

knowing how they operate helps me avoid them

[so98nn]

Interesting. So they are fighting because they want 100% Privacy. Here is simple solution, why not use different mixing services one after another. For example, get your original coins, put them into chipmixer and then again go for another mixer Service put the freshly minted coin in it and get whole new mint condition coins. That should ring a bell. If I am missing any technological point of view then please feel free to correct me.
But as far as mixers are considered this would keep adding extra layer of security I believe.

[franky1]

Interesting. So they are fighting because they want 100% Privacy. Here is simple solution, why not use different mixing services one after another.

better solution
1. ignorance is not bliss
2, know that using mixers does put you on a watch list
3. pushing everyone onto a watchlist helps no one
4.think of a different service NOT described as a mixer but instead a loop hole term not in their list

(emphasis on 4)
like uber never called itself a taxicab company so that it can avoid taxicab regulations. (even though its feature and function resembled the service a taxicab service operated)
think of a new term like "private property protection tool" that does a similar function but not described in the way that is listed as a red flag

where swaps happen privately. and protected by private property laws that have existed since the romans

yep "privacy" laws are nuanced and modern and not as protective as people think.
economics/money has no privacy protections. thus trying to defend your value under "privacy" is a weak legal defense to protect what is yours.

think smarter

[FanEagle]

Most of this discussion could be removed and considered to be futile if you could basically realize half of what you guys are saying against each other could co-exist together. Like one side is saying "it’s all about the money they are making and nothing more" and the other side is saying "it’s about doing a good job of mixing for customers", how about we just say "they are doing a good job of mixing because they only care about money" and be done with it?

I am not fond of mixing at all, it should be illegal but doesn't mean that I can't see people who will keep doing it for bad purposes, and yet decentralized world will bring in bad with the good so I am fine with it.

[LoyceV]

I am not fond of mixing at all, it should be illegal

So asking change for the meter would become illegal too? It still amazes me how many people always ask for more government regulation and less freedom.

people who will keep doing it for bad purposes

Let me guess: next you'll tell me you have nothing to hide?