Mixers to be banned

[joker_josue]

I'm not sure why both of you believe the impostor (mentioned account) is a real government agency without any type of verification. There was no way of knowing if the fool behind the account was a genuine FIOD agent.

I can think of a reason: timing:
The account was created 2.5 hours before fiod.nl published this article, and posted about it 6 minutes after publication.

And why would FIOD create an account just to announce something that was already on blogs and news outlets?

Ask them? Their number is on their website

Of course, they cannot prove 100% that this account is true. However, due to the proximity of the events, it became difficult to separate the two events.

Another point that should serve as reflection is that, if he was a hater, the probability of him having made more posts on this subject and even on this OP would be high. Or don't you think so?

The account continues to be accessed.

[1714735981]

1714735981

[1714735981]

1714735981

[1714735981]

1714735981

[1714735981]

1714735981

[Igebotz]

It could be an insider (typist, editor, photocopier) who gained access to the information, but does that make it an official account? I'm talking about how this account might be used to deceive individuals.

I was hoping they confirm being real. That would be interesting. I can't see how they'll "deveive" people here.

I was also hoping they would do it after those tags but no they disappeared.

I bet there are already 1-2 idiots in their DM asking "how to recover stolen funds," and this is how victims are further duped. Lol

Having impersonated CIA, FBI, and FIOD officers on this forum would cause more harm than benefit.

theymos are these usernames allowed?

Add +31 (0) 6 ~. If it's government, they're not working in the weekend

Switzerland Why would an anti-crime organisation not function on weekends, considering weekends are when the majority of frauds occur??

Another point that should serve as reflection is that, if he was a hater, the probability of him having made more posts on this subject and even on this OP would be high. Or don't you think so?

The account continues to be accessed.

I would say those early warning tags sent the bastard to exile.

[arabspaceship123]

Doesn't he mean we're allowed to post links to ANN threads which aren't open without facing bans. If pll start linking posts to closed topics we won't be getting banned. It's a new rule so when users make a mistake I'll be surprised if they get banned immediately. Mods will probably give a warning telling users they shouldn't do it.

theymos, what about this?

Also I should point out, it should not be ban-worthy to link to a closed mixer's ANN thread. Or actually to any post in the ANN thread that is not advertising to use the mixer.

[Medusah]

For clarity, if a non-kyc exchanger accepts XMR (and can therefore exchange XMR for BTC), it is not forbidden to promote, because mixing is "an incidental use of the service".  Correct? 

[arabspaceship123]

It's in the OP he's explained XMR isn't banned but theymos said c d so exchanging from your crypto to XMR isn't going to get you banned. I've read c d I'm certain I know what it means but it's better for XMR swappers & savers if theymos makes a statement about it.

Something is considered a mixer if it meets all of these requirements:
     c. If the site takes coins, gives you a possibly-transferrable IOU, and will convert this IOU back into mixed coins much later, then the temporary conversion into a different type of property does not prevent it from being considered a mixer.
     d. If the site internally converts your deposit into other things as part of its mixing, but ultimately the point of the product is to get your original type of property back, then that's a mixer, not an exchanger.

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

For clarity, if a non-kyc exchanger accepts XMR (and can therefore exchange XMR for BTC), it is not forbidden to promote, because mixing is "an incidental use of the service".  Correct? 

[GxSTxV]

I decided to share my opinion as a user here after reading everything here and many different opinions, my opinion might be useless in this situation but it's important for me to share it; this decision to ban mixers with everything that's happening I think it's a very smart move from Theymos and also important to avoid many issues against the US regulations, the government or specifically FBI and others are hunting down mixers, many of them that been promoting their services here were shutdown and they arrested owners and people involved in illegal activities. Logically speaking a place where these unwanted websites are promoting their services it should be also locked down, and for the government that's not a  hard thing from them to do.
I believe that Theymos did a good move to ban mixers, without talking about freedom or decentralization.

[BITMIXER.IO]

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

[philipma1957]

It could be an insider (typist, editor, photocopier) who gained access to the information, but does that make it an official account? I'm talking about how this account might be used to deceive individuals.

I was hoping they confirm being real. That would be interesting. I can't see how they'll "deveive" people here.

I was also hoping they would do it after those tags but no they disappeared.

I bet there are already 1-2 idiots in their DM asking "how to recover stolen funds," and this is how victims are further duped. Lol

Having impersonated CIA, FBI, and FIOD officers on this forum would cause more harm than benefit.

theymos are these usernames allowed?

Add +31 (0) 6 ~. If it's government, they're not working in the weekend

Switzerland Why would an anti-crime organisation not function on weekends, considering weekends are when the majority of frauds occur??

Another point that should serve as reflection is that, if he was a hater, the probability of him having made more posts on this subject and even on this OP would be high. Or don't you think so?

The account continues to be accessed.

I would say those early warning tags sent the bastard to exile.

And cost me 90 minutes to about 2 hours time before I pulled my signature.  Which means If the government goes after me.

I will need to get a lawyer to defend myself. Which in turn means I have to go after those that posted the negative trusts. Any of us attacked be the government because we were too slow will need.

All info from the forum about the 'warning' poster  and the taggers of it.  In order to defend ourselves for being too slow to remove the signatures.

Did you bother to look up people with the signatures still intact and let them know you had no real evidence to tag no you did not.

So you no favors to anyone that had an active signature.

  Your first duty would be to them just in case it was real. You put your self in line for legal action by a quite a few people that were slow to remove the signature. Even though I am the only one talking about it now. I know of at least five others that were close to a day to pull the signatures.

Hopefully it is all over nothing and the government is done with us.

[alani123]

If a big company like Coinbase created a KYC mixer, I could imagine myself using it in a few limited cases. True, a KYC mixer would only have value because of the evil of state-imposed KYC requirements, but it'd still potentially be useful. (In cases where I don't want anyone to be able to link my transactions, I wouldn't consider a centralized mixer in any case, KYC or no.)

I am sure this is well established already, but exchanges already act in the same exact fashion as mixers.

When a user wants to deposit, they are given a unique address, with the possibility also to receive a new one each time they deposit for most exchanges. Then when they want to withdraw, the withdrawal is processed from a hot wallet that serves a big chunk of all the withdrawals in the exchange. So it's not obvious who requested the withdrawal to outsiders.

In fact, by looking at publicized documents such as what prosecutors wrote on Binance's indictment, many parties with unknown or even malicious intent were using the exchange for these purposes, and the exchanges even through their KYC checks, didn't push for further checks or restrictions.

So when we consider what makes a mixer good, the volume it carries is a basic factor. Given that exchanges carry a big portion of all the volume in crypto transactions, they're perfect for mixing purposes as they make it super easy for anyone's transactions to get lost among the rest. And it is a fact that big exchanges have played this role in the past. KYC is easy to bypass by rich criminals actually and they do it very often when they want to utilize premium services, just using fake data and limiting their transfers each time.

So really the issue once again here is centralization.

[virasog]

1) Some mixers already have a Know Your Transaction (KYT) policy, will they get banned? Is it enough to add the phrase “The mixer can collect KYC data” in the terms of use?

First of all the term "Mixer" needs to be eliminated from the brand name and the domain name. As long as you have the word mixer, it won't be allowed on the forum. KYC or KYT won't matter.
For example, develop an instant exchange and have a feature /link of Mixer. For the mixers, they need to add instant exchanges on their site and focus on the exchange while promoting 

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

Think out of the box 

[Kryptowerk]

Okay, I've been reading the OP and then a few follow up pages.

Please can someone clarify if I get this right - since a mixer is also an integral part of certain wallets with a strong focus on privacy (Samurai, Wasabi etc), will it also be prohibited to talk about these?

In consequence, will it be prohibited to talk about https://walletscrutiny.com/ or any other forum, website, service focused on privacy in Bitcoin?
What about Monero, can we talk about that?

Edit: My bad, the final sentence gives a clear answer to my question:

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

Even though it seems a little strange to me because it contradicts

    1 b. If a site is not primarily a mixer but has a mixer function, such as a mixer function on a gambling website, then the whole site is considered a mixer.

[Hueristic]

@theymos
Okay, I've been reading the OP and then a few follow up pages.

Please can someone clarify if I get this right - since a mixer is also an integral part of certain wallets with a strong focus on privacy (Samurai, Wasabi etc), will it also be prohibited to talk about these?

In consequence, will it be prohibited to talk about https://walletscrutiny.com/ or any other forum, website, service focused on privacy in Bitcoin?
What about Monero, can we talk about that?

...

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

[Kryptowerk]

Okay, I've been reading the OP and then a few follow up pages.

Please can someone clarify if I get this right - since a mixer is also an integral part of certain wallets with a strong focus on privacy (Samurai, Wasabi etc), will it also be prohibited to talk about these?

In consequence, will it be prohibited to talk about https://walletscrutiny.com/ or any other forum, website, service focused on privacy in Bitcoin?
What about Monero, can we talk about that?

...

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

Thanks and my bad. I really read the whole post but somehow not the last sentence.

Glad to hear it but I feel it contradicts this:

    1 b. If a site is not primarily a mixer but has a mixer function, such as a mixer function on a gambling website, then the whole site is considered a mixer.

[NotATether]

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

In hindsight, you were actually quite lucky to shut down your mixer before law enforcement started closing in on the industry.

I almost finished making a bitcoin mixer list website, so when it's ready, tell your friends about it

[hugeblack]

First of all the term "Mixer" needs to be eliminated from the brand name and the domain name. As long as you have the word mixer, it won't be allowed on the forum. KYC or KYT won't matter.

They do not need to do that. According to the definition, all of the following conditions must be met for a mixer to be called a mixer.

Definition of a mixer

Something is considered a mixer if it meets all of these requirements:
 3. The service does not collect KYC-type info from all users. (This is not an endorsement of KYC generally, or a condemnation of non-KYC services generally. Non-KYC services of other types are still allowed, and in many cases they are a good idea.)

Examples of things that are not banned mixers include exchangers (unless they have a mixing function), CoinJoin-supporting non-custodial wallets, and Monero.

If a mixer collects KYC-type info from all users, it is not a mixer.
According to @theymos, some models are not considered a mixer, but one of the non-custodial mixers has been seized.

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

What you said in 2017 actually happened several years later.

[LoyceV]

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

Your account doesn't show you woke up recently, which means you've been around for longer. How's life?

And cost me 90 minutes to about 2 hours time before I pulled my signature.  Which means If the government goes after me.

I will need to get a lawyer to defend myself. Which in turn means I have to go after those that posted the negative trusts. Any of us attacked be the government because we were too slow will need.

All info from the forum about the 'warning' poster  and the taggers of it.  In order to defend ourselves for being too slow to remove the signatures.

Did you bother to look up people with the signatures still intact and let them know you had no real evidence to tag no you did not.

So you no favors to anyone that had an active signature.

  Your first duty would be to them just in case it was real. You put your self in line for legal action by a quite a few people that were slow to remove the signature. Even though I am the only one talking about it now. I know of at least five others that were close to a day to pull the signatures.

Hopefully it is all over nothing and the government is done with us.

So you worry about a 90 minute delay before you removed your previous signature, but you don't worry about your current signature? That doesn't make sense.

[joker_josue]

And cost me 90 minutes to about 2 hours time before I pulled my signature.  Which means If the government goes after me.

I will need to get a lawyer to defend myself. Which in turn means I have to go after those that posted the negative trusts. Any of us attacked be the government because we were too slow will need.

All info from the forum about the 'warning' poster  and the taggers of it.  In order to defend ourselves for being too slow to remove the signatures.

Did you bother to look up people with the signatures still intact and let them know you had no real evidence to tag no you did not.

So you no favors to anyone that had an active signature.

  Your first duty would be to them just in case it was real. You put your self in line for legal action by a quite a few people that were slow to remove the signature. Even though I am the only one talking about it now. I know of at least five others that were close to a day to pull the signatures.

Hopefully it is all over nothing and the government is done with us.

I got curious.
Were you contacted by the authorities because you had a SB signature? Has this happened to other users? 

Or are you just putting on the table the possibility of this scenario happening?
If you were contacted, even via PM on this forum, this whole matter takes on a completely different perspective, and the reason for this decision becomes clearer.

[EarnOnVictor]

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

Hahaha, this is good and factual. I can't but totally agree with you, the disappearance is for the common good of mankind indeed. This is a clear conscience talking if I must say, but the sincere question is, are you for real?

Oh, I guess you are one of a kind. I just checked your last posts and I believe you have a rethought. I can't be happier that you sustained the advice in your last thread which is similar to this one for the common good of all. But unfortunately, others will never do like you. You have seen reason(s) and evil in it which might have made you decide to shut down your service. But I tell you, in this evil is where most dwells, so your advice will always enter a deaf ear, they don't just care.

[SamReomo]

There's a big change that needs to happen, sometimes it's better to disappear for everyone's good. 🙂

Very true indeed! You have made a pretty bold statement and surely if disappearing is good for everyone then a platform should do that rather then doing something that may not be good for others who unintentionally get affected because of it.

I got curious.
Were you contacted by the authorities because you had a SB signature? Has this happened to other users? 
Or are you just putting on the table the possibility of this scenario happening?

I believe that Phil was just predicting the scenario that could happen because no one expected that SB will get seized but it got seized and that's why such questions come in mind of those who were promoting that signature on their profiles.  Binance's notification to users who have received deposits from the campaign also caused much fear in participants mind because that was something unexpected.

I think anyone who's sensitive enough will think a lot about the things that can happen with them. Although, campaign participants had no direct relationship with SB but still the matter is somewhat concerning. I hope that there won't be any issues to the participants or the manager as they were not sure about something like that and I'm pretty sure that authorities know better that who's wrong and who isn't.

[Bureau]

snip~~Hopefully it is all over nothing and the government is done with us.

I got curious.
Were you contacted by the authorities because you had a SB signature? Has this happened to other users?  

Or are you just putting on the table the possibility of this scenario happening?
If you were contacted, even via PM on this forum, this whole matter takes on a completely different perspective, and the reason for this decision becomes clearer.

Why will the government or even the authorities come after someone who was only part of the signature campaign? Even the BM should not come under their investigation as we are not a community of criminals, who are active on the darknet. I do not think you or anyone here promoting a questionable mixer campaign now, should have any issues. Lazarus Group as my understanding goes is a darknet group of NK and they would not dare to promote a signature campaign of a mixer on a forum that is accessible to everyone.