Mixers to be banned

[joker_josue]

I can understand the sig campaigns ban - that was coming since CM went down. But even discussing mixers?

I mean, that. Advertising illegal sites, or linking to darknet sites is reasonably forbidden, because the feds could use it as an excuse to shut it down. But, we are generally forbidden from even talking about it?

What's next? Banning me for saying "Pirate Bay", "Breached", "1337x"?

I've seen sites/forums being closed and their owners being fined/arrested, for just having links to these sites.

This is an excellent example. Nowadays, torrents continue to exist, but everyone knows that this should not be encouraged by third parties, as it could cause legal problems. Torrents in general are not at stake, but rather those that violate laws.

This forum may be one of the most liberal there is, but it is still a public place that must follow the laws in order to avoid legal problems. Not advertising or having content related to mixers does not mean that they cease to exist or that people stop using them. It just prevents the forum from being affected by activities that have nothing to do with them.

Yes, we can question whether this is against freedom of expression or something else. But one thing does not imply the other. Because we can continue talking about mixers, as long as we don't promote them - that is, we don't teach readers how to get there.

Returning to the example of torrents. He also asks: "Where can I download the latest Mission: Impossible?" And I can answer: "There are torrent sites that you can do, it's a matter of searching on those sites." With these words, I am not giving any link or specific indication of how to get there. It is up to those interested in carrying out this research.

So, sharing affiliate links is currently not allowed - publicly. It is no longer allowed to share links to mixes or direct directions to them. If you want to continue doing this via PM, you can continue to do so. The point here is that the information is public, and when it is on the forum, it can be held responsible.

[1714226676]

1714226676

[1714226676]

1714226676

[1714226676]

1714226676

[1714226676]

1714226676

[1714226676]

1714226676

[alani123]

He can't, but I never understood one thing: why is this forum hosted in the draconian USA? It surprises me that mixers were allowed for so long already.

The U.S. isn't Draconian, it's actually very permissive.
We all know that in Europe people have gotten sued over online posts and even lost their cases and had to pay damages, even for saying the truth.
Apparently hurt feelings in many jurisdictions are fair game to go after someone.
Bitcointalk enjoys freedom in that it's a forum where you can say anything about anyone, and just lay it out to the court of public opinion without fear of it being taken down.
There exist VERY few public forums that allow completely free and uninterrupted discussion of people and ideas.

And besides, it's not just the website location that matters. The whole value that bitcointalk can provide is based on the fact that there's active staff maintaining it.
And it's their jurisdiction that matters most. Like, we can't expect anyone to migrate to Russia for simply running a forum. That's not realistic. And it's also unlikely that this would allow more freedom of speech.

So if governments today consider that mixers are helping facilitate illegal and harmful transactions, why should our moderators be caught in the crossfire?
We did notice from a past mixer thread that was shut down for instance, that user assets were frozen on Binance for simply having been paid through a signature campaign... And this is just a small example. There's no need for forum members to come under such serious regulatory scrutiny with sanctions. Because it was obvious that large part of this forum's userbase was actually receiving payments from mixers. And even if users are willing to take that risk, I'm pretty sure nobody in the west can risk hosting a forum where large parts of its userbase are under sanctions.

In the long term I'm pretty sure keeping the forum alive, its administrators and staff out of jail is more important than going to ridiculous lengths over any ideal. We don't have the strength in numbers or means to fight governments as of right now. Buuuut... One must also consider that governments are actually one step behind, not ahead. What we do have, is the technological advantage.

Mixers could only be shut down because they're fully centralized and trust based. But there already exist trustless and decentralized ways to mix coins. The use of which will likely increase a lot, and with use, also comes increased interest to fund and improve these technologies.

[Danydee]

Ok, why did you all have not banned all those f** Shit/Scams newCoins, ICOs, tokens etc... when we see that bitcointalk was the first vector of promoting all that early shitcoins !

[BlackHatCoiner]

And I can answer: "There are torrent sites that you can do, it's a matter of searching on those sites."

With the exception that you should never suggest anyone to search a mixer on the Internet, unless you want them to get scammed.

Like, we can't expect anyone to migrate to Russia for simply running a forum.

I meant to host the forum elsewhere, not migrate elsewhere. I'm not a lawyer though. It's possible that as a US resident, hosting a legally operating site in Africa could lead to legal consequences in the US.

But there already exist trustless and decentralized ways to mix coins.

Sure, but this in-forum censorship makes me wonder. If I don't have the right to even talk about anti-government activities like this instance, how valuable decentralized alternatives are?

I know what you'll say, theymos wasn't blackmailed to enact this type of censorship, and that it has been done as precaution. It's just that, from my perspective, privacy-protecting tools become less and less available as time goes by. This year, a bill was proposed to discriminate against any coin which isn't controlled inside a KYC-ed exchange. Mixers fall apart, one after the other. Open-source, privacy-proclaimed services like Wasabi partner with anti-privacy organizations. Where are we heading to?

[philipma1957]

And I can answer: "There are torrent sites that you can do, it's a matter of searching on those sites."

With the exception that you should never suggest anyone to search a mixer on the Internet, unless you want them to get scammed.

Like, we can't expect anyone to migrate to Russia for simply running a forum.

I meant to host the forum elsewhere, not migrate elsewhere. I'm not a lawyer though. It's possible that as a US resident, hosting a legally operating site in Africa could lead to legal consequences in the US.

But there already exist trustless and decentralized ways to mix coins.

Sure, but this in-forum censorship makes me wonder. If I don't have the right to even talk about anti-government activities like this instance, how valuable decentralized alternatives are?

I know what you'll say, theymos wasn't blackmailed to enact this type of censorship, and that it has been done as precaution. It's just that, from my perspective, privacy-protecting tools become less and less available as time goes by. This year, a bill was proposed to discriminate against any coin which isn't controlled inside a KYC-ed exchange. Mixers fall apart, one after the other. Open-source, privacy-proclaimed services like Wasabi partner with anti-privacy organizations. Where are we heading to?

very likely a George Orwell 1984 style world.

[KingsDen]

BTW, why aren't these authorities harassing banks for money laundering too if their claim of seizing mixers is to prevent money laundering? I know what theymos is trying to do here is taking a preventive measure to save the forum but I also know that this isn't likely going to be the last of government wanting more grounds to be shifted.

This is, indeed, sad.

Well, I really do not think that theymos care about money laundering through banks and neither does he care when it happens through bitcoin.
Honestly, theymos also may not care much if the forum is taken down or not. But according to his statement, it seems he really cares much about me and you, which is the reason for the proposed mixer ban.
Imagine that Abcmixer did a fraudulent transaction with an address, launches a campaign on bitcointalk, uses same address to pay upto 50 participants of the campaign. FBI uncovers them, link more than 30 addresses belonging to the bitcointalk members to Abcmixer. The 30 participants are automatic culprits or accomplice. It will take more than 10 tons of efforts to convince FBI that you are a mere promoter of the mixer.

[Kruw]

And I can answer: "There are torrent sites that you can do, it's a matter of searching on those sites."

With the exception that you should never suggest anyone to search a mixer on the Internet, unless you want them to get scammed.

You should never suggest anyone to use a mixer on Bitcointalk either, unless you want them to get scammed.

[DooMAD]

very likely a George Orwell 1984 style world.

That's what some governments appear to be pushing for, sure.  But there are enough determined people within this community who won't stand for that sort of thing.  They harder they push, the harder we push back. 

Again, people are talking here as though we've lost something.  Everyone can continue to use these services if they choose to.  We simply have to maintain the thin veneer of discretion about it.  And one day we'll likely find ways to build protocols to replace these services so that the whole thing becomes impossible to shut down.  Then we win.  It's not as bleak as it looks.

[digaran]

So we can't tell people to go to xxx.org forum, since it might contain mixer names? How are you going to moderate that? But I like this idea, after all we need to start fixing from within before trying to fix the world, cool.
But this "within" is run by dictator gangs, there is no place to talk freely without fearing personal attacks and fallacies on reputations.

NPC mode activated, going back to play my role as DT doormat(landmine). Lol.

[yenerbatmaz]

He can't, but I never understood one thing: why is this forum hosted in the draconian USA? It surprises me that mixers were allowed for so long already.

The U.S. isn't Draconian, it's actually very permissive.
 

Such a sentence can only be formulated by someone who hasn't spent any significant time outside of USA, the world's self appointed "policeman" and the most totalitarian state in the modern world (maybe in a tie with North Korea), even China can't rival the aggression and ruthlessness of American operations against freedom.

In fact, if you decide to escape the tyranny of United States in favor of a more libertarian place which respects human dignity more, the number 1 threat to your future liberties will once again be American law enforcement or intelligence agencies conducting covert ops against you or requesting extradition, etc.

Look at the biggest exchanges that "failed" or are facing tremendous amounts of fines / heaps of lawsuits. The common denominator in all of them is they or their founders personally made the fatal mistake of basing themselves in the USA or in a weak country where USA can get hyperactive with their projection of power...

The only reason @theymos is still hosting this forum in the USA and caving into all kinds of whimsical pressure by his overlords is

1) He is an ineffectual coward, and cowards can't afford to have any strong principles and / or

2) The account, and forum administration is no longer owned by @theymos and actually the whole Bitcointalk forum is a softly controlled honey pot gradually closing in on its genuine members, or both.

[theymos]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

[yenerbatmaz]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

Only if you pay people for all the future ad revenue lost owing to your bizarre decision to host and manage this forum in the worst place in the world you could have possibly picked to run a crypto operation...

Can you do that, make something happen man, it's been what 10+ years since you took over from Satoshi, finally stand up for something in your life and make a name for yourself, I genuinely mean it.

[alani123]

But there already exist trustless and decentralized ways to mix coins.

Sure, but this in-forum censorship makes me wonder. If I don't have the right to even talk about anti-government activities like this instance, how valuable decentralized alternatives are?

We have to think, why did satoshi exhaust his genius to build a trustless system for cash payments?
1. Money moves the world.
2. With financial incentives, it's easier to balance incentives.

When parties in a network have a financial interest to do their job right, this also acts as a disincentive to make mistakes, so the network is less likely to collapse.

Ok, so incentives are important. What would the incentive in a decentralized social network or forum be then?
Tough questions to answer.  
Many smart minds after satoshi have contributed towards creating decentralized social platforms, but all have so far failed to achieve widespread use AND censorship resistance at the same time.

from my perspective, privacy-protecting tools become less and less available as time goes by. This year, a bill was proposed to discriminate against any coin which isn't controlled inside a KYC-ed exchange. Mixers fall apart, one after the other. Open-source, privacy-proclaimed services like Wasabi partner with anti-privacy organizations. Where are we heading to?

Let's not kid ourselves. There is plenty of progress alright.

I understand that slow progress might be hard to notice in a fast moving space, but the progress on privacy and decentralization is still constant.
Think about it, going to Turkey for instance (along with many other countries), you'll see a booth to exchange FIAT for crypto in every other corner.
Adoption is making tremendous progress.
Under this setting, it's easy to transact in whatever way you like with crypto and never be noticed if you're careful.

10 years ago this would have been unheard of.
10 years ago also some individual got life in prison for running a free (as in freedom) peer to peer marketplace with bitcoin payments.
This hurt bitcoin's reputation tremendously.
These days, even though the "notorious" side of the economy has grown, it's peanuts compared to the whole crypto scene. That's because of how much the "legitimate" side has grown. And maybe things need to stay that way if we want growth.

It's not like we can't use btc and crypto platforms to transact in any way we want and do whatever we want. But maybe it doesn't currently help our cause to discuss such use cases in bitcointalk.org on the clearnet.
Give it a few years, with progress people will start seeing through the tyranny of the current financial system and governance structures at increasing rates.

Once the majority of the population realizes that buying prescription medicine from abroad to be able to afford to live (as many people use crypto for) is not a crime as it's characterized to be, compared governments freely getting to finance murderous wars abroad, maybe then we will not even need mixers.

Till then, we can work within the system's tolerances, grow, and if we don't trip and fall on the way, think about how we'll do big moves once time has matured.
Alas, changing entire systems isn't something that happens magically and we'll need more than just bitcoin. But bitcoin is surely a good tool. We need to use it wisely.
I think we can be confident that a revolution will happen within our lifetimes.

[mikeywith]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:


Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

Loosening up a bit is nice, but I would personally prefer a very clear set of rules regarding mixers because reading these two lines alone

- You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

It could be understood that I could still wear mixers' signatures as long as they don't contain a URL and my username isn't mixerABCD.

[alani123]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

This makes little sense.
Astroturfing is a thing.
I can PRETEND not to be affiliated with a service, and still promote it.
Especially with mixers, there'd be a high incentive to do it since they're very starved of visibility.

Do we want bitcointalk to be a hub for mixer promotion while they come under increasing regulatory scrutiny?
Probably no.
If your assessment is that bitcointalk should not be associated with mixers and you want to stick with it, the OP proposal makes more sense.
Not saying that it's ideal, but priorities have to be set straight.

Leaving the window open for abuse always means that there will be abuse at some point.

[joker_josue]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

I think this approach makes more sense. The way the "rules" were written generated a lot of doubts, as it seemed that all it took was for someone to say "mixer" to be penalized. This way, it is a little more enlightening. There is talk but without having links (this is what causes problems - I know), and without anyone receiving money (based on the forum).

It could be understood that I could still wear mixers' signatures as long as they don't contain a URL and my username isn't mixerABCD.

Yes you can. As long as it doesn't have any links. And in turn, whoever is paying him to do so contacted him outside the forum.

Only if you pay people for all the future ad revenue lost owing to your bizarre decision to host and manage this forum in the worst place in the world you could have possibly picked to run a crypto operation...

You clearly don't know what you're talking about and have zero knowledge of website hosting services.

If for you the USA is bad when it comes to hosting, how good is Europe? Interestingly, SB was closed in Europe. And if you analyze carefully, you will discover that the biggest illegal content sites were closed in Europe.

Apart from the USA and Europe, where do you choose?
Russia, to be sanctioned for doing business in Russia, or for the Russian government to confiscate the website?
China, to be giving all the data to the government?
Latin America, to suffer from political instability and poor facilities conditions?

Don't talk about what you don't know. Investigate a little about website hosting, and you will discover that the best servers in the world are in the USA or Europe. If now, you complain about there being times when the forum is down, imagine if the forum was hosted outside the USA or Europe, it would always be down.

[yenerbatmaz]

If for you the USA is bad when it comes to hosting, how good is Europe? Interestingly, SB was closed in Europe. And if you analyze carefully, you will discover that the biggest illegal content sites were closed in Europe.

Apart from the USA and Europe, where do you choose?

What about multi hosting, deploying a website in multiple locations, and not picking as your residence one of the few places on Earth where the government is on a psychotic mission to eradicate individual liberty.

If you can't find a way to make a stand against central authority and oppression and would rather immediately bend over at the face of the slightest perceived threats, then crypto is not the place for you amigo...

[cryptosize]

I think we as a community failed big time.

14 years have passed, and we have not built anything truly decentralized

- No decentralized forum/community platform
- No truly decentralized exchange
- No truly decentralized mining pool
- No truly decentralized mixer

Too much power/responsibility is put in the hands of a few, creating terrible single points of failure. It's only a matter of time before they start banning everything that contributes to users' privacy/anonymity on the blockchain. We need to start looking for alternatives to everything we use today, something truly decentralized by ownership.

Best post I've read so far.

There's a reason Satoshi designed Bitcoin in such a way that it would become truly decentralized eventually (initially it started centralized on a single PC -> Satoshi's computer).

What would happen to bitcointalk.org if theymos died? The forum would most likely die too.

Someone should design a decentralized forum protocol... maybe something like Nostr.

ps: TBH, I don't think most people here care about "freedom" or "decentralization", they mostly care about losing their precious signature campaign income. Let's be honest, shall we?

I've never visited this forum to make money, I'm merely here for discussions. That's the purpose of forums.

And I can answer: "There are torrent sites that you can do, it's a matter of searching on those sites."

With the exception that you should never suggest anyone to search a mixer on the Internet, unless you want them to get scammed.

Like, we can't expect anyone to migrate to Russia for simply running a forum.

I meant to host the forum elsewhere, not migrate elsewhere. I'm not a lawyer though. It's possible that as a US resident, hosting a legally operating site in Africa could lead to legal consequences in the US.

But there already exist trustless and decentralized ways to mix coins.

Sure, but this in-forum censorship makes me wonder. If I don't have the right to even talk about anti-government activities like this instance, how valuable decentralized alternatives are?

I know what you'll say, theymos wasn't blackmailed to enact this type of censorship, and that it has been done as precaution. It's just that, from my perspective, privacy-protecting tools become less and less available as time goes by. This year, a bill was proposed to discriminate against any coin which isn't controlled inside a KYC-ed exchange. Mixers fall apart, one after the other. Open-source, privacy-proclaimed services like Wasabi partner with anti-privacy organizations. Where are we heading to?

very likely a George Orwell 1984 style world.

This will definitely happen if people don't take a stand against Digital ID.

I've tried to warn them, but to no avail...

Governments are NOT your friend.-

very likely a George Orwell 1984 style world.

That's what some governments appear to be pushing for, sure.  But there are enough determined people within this community who won't stand for that sort of thing.  They harder they push, the harder we push back.  

Again, people are talking here as though we've lost something.  Everyone can continue to use these services if they choose to.  We simply have to maintain the thin veneer of discretion about it.  And one day we'll likely find ways to build protocols to replace these services so that the whole thing becomes impossible to shut down.  Then we win.  It's not as bleak as it looks.

It's pretty "bleak" if you lose $1200/month.

For some people in poorer countries this is higher than the minimum wage...

[OgNasty]

This has long been coming and there really was no other possible outcome. Surely this will cause a bunch of people to become angry over the loss of income, but as I said, it was only a matter of time. I’m sure theymos held out as long as was reasonable to do so before making this difficult decision, but in the end there really wasn’t any other way to go.

Hopefully those who retaliated against me using the trust network for stating these uncomfortable facts before they became facts will rethink their actions.

[shahzadafzal]

Several people seem to be concerned that the current policy will be too disruptive/constraining. How about I make this modification to loosen it a bit: you can direct people to mixers by name (even in something like a "top 10 mixers" topic), as long as:
 - You don't directly post their URLs.
 - It's not a paid ad, and you're not representing a mixer.

Would this be sufficient to address the concerns?

Seriously? I mean the proposed modification might seem like a step towards addressing concerns, it still leaves room for potential issues. By allowing users to mention mixers by name, even in a 'top 10 mixers' topic, you might inadvertently create a gray area.

People could find ways to indirectly promote specific mixers without violating the stated rules. The distinction between a casual mention and intentional promotion might become blurred. Considering the sensitive nature of the topic, a more robust and clear-cut policy might be necessary to prevent any inadvertent promotion or misuse.

Even a while ago a post (which is still in my draft) and I stopped my self from posting it when I read your this comments.

don't tell people to "Google ASDFmixer"

But based on your above new comments, I think i can post it? or no? I'm confused now.