Mixer restrictions

[examplens]

That being said, nothing is going to stop regulators if they want to seize and stop some service.

And that started to be bypassed. The most critical point is the clearnet domain and site.
I saw on one forum that mixing is widely offered in direct exchange, as a service. No clearnet link, some don't even have tor page. Greater regulatory pressure can only make such a service more expensive and potentially riskier.

Privacy is mostly long gone now.  It only gets 'better' for us who care as in some intelligent people are making tools that never existed before and in a future Orwellian society they will come in VERY handy for us.  See Bitcoin, Mixers, Tor, Tails et cetera.  I do not know how much longer we will have the Internet for with out having to beg for access using mug shots and finger prints but even when we will get there, people will be happy about it because they will be told this keeps terrorists away.

I completely agree with you, but excessive fear of de-anonymization may lead to paranoia.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Mine is that the majority of people will never start valuing Privacy even when they are already in an Orwellian scenario.

I think most people view privacy a bit differently. Yes, it's true that the majority of people carry surveillance devices everywhere they go, and they often freely broadcast their daily activities on social media, but they very much care about hiding certain things from coworkers, bosses, partners, or friends. So there is some value in privacy.

It's just that most people don't care about Big Corps scrutinizing their lives, because they have come to accept the fact that Big Tech giants are unavoidable at this point, and that laws and politics are simply rigged theater.

The Western world today is not exactly Orwellian. In the novel, the privacy of all people was violated, but those who even remotely entertained the thought of having some private time in their lives became the number one target of the Big Brother State, even if they posed no practical danger to it. Something as simple as abstaining from the media (i.e., "turning off the TV") was considered criminal.

But the world today is far more sophisticated than that Communist State. People do have the freedom to turn off the TV, quit social media, start reading about Bitcoin, the banking system, and so on, and become "anti-systemic". This is not considered illegal. The political pawns are simply placed in an order where hierarchical blackmail results in a helpless situation, where the Money Alchemists can print endless money and fund wars without being questioned.

The current state of affairs is that pretty much everyone knows the system is corrupt. The thing is, everyone is weakened, broke, and has found such comfort in distractions that the people in charge of the world don't have to force you to believe in Big Brother; they just have to keep you in this numb state.

[LoyceV]

I see the future as a combination between Idiocracy and 1984.

I've already seen examples of government telling people not to believe what they see with their own eyes. It literal comes from Orwell's warning handbook:

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

because they will be told this keeps terrorists away.

My country is flying in terrorists for prosecution, after which they're released back into our society. I can't help but think their logic works the wrong way: without the terrorists they couldn't do the mass surveillance they want. Just like they couldn't as easily phase out cash money by removing ATMs without criminals blowing up ATMs at a large-scale.

People have their homes FILLED UP with microphones and cameras and they are excited about it.

I'm pretty sure my Linux laptop doesn't use its microphone to spy on me, but I've always toyed with the idea of physically removing it. The camera is easily disabled with tape. I buy as few "smart" devices as possible. Our new washing machine wants a Wifi connection "for custom programs", but at least it still has physical buttons and can be used without internet connection.
The main devices we have spying all over the house are phones. They're really terrible: the battery drains quickly, so you know it's doing something all day. You can't physically remove the microphone, as that would negate the main function of a phone. I'd be totally fine without a front camera, but tape on the touch screen is ridiculous. The rear camera is too convenient to permanently disable it with tape. And even if I don't bring my phone, someone else still has one that does the same. So that makes phones the perfect device to spy on everyone.

I can't wait to buy a new car that collects data on my sexual activity!
This part from the above link says it all:

Researchers spent 600 hours reading privacy policies, downloading apps, and corresponding with brands

I've recently rejected the privacy policy of a device and returned it, but most people accept just about anything, and reading through it is a massive waste of time.

Also fun for privacy: Owners of Luxury Smart Beds Literally Lost Sleep Due to AWS Outage.
My take: anything that can work without a blockchain, shouldn't use a blockchain. Anything that can work without internet, should be offline.

[SamReomo]

I'm pretty sure my Linux laptop doesn't use its microphone to spy on me, but I've always toyed with the idea of physically removing it. The camera is easily disabled with tape. I buy as few "smart" devices as possible.

If you prefer highest level of privacy then it's better to remove microphone from your laptop as that's not a hard thing to do, yes it's okay to cover camera with a tape that's what I've done myself. Since there's no use of laptop camera for me and that's why disabling was the best choice, by the way it sounds good to remove the microphone from the laptop.

The main devices we have spying all over the house are phones. They're really terrible: the battery drains quickly, so you know it's doing something all day. You can't physically remove the microphone, as that would negate the main function of a phone. I'd be totally fine without a front camera, but tape on the touch screen is ridiculous. The rear camera is too convenient to permanently disable it with tape. And even if I don't bring my phone, someone else still has one that does the same. So that makes phones the perfect device to spy on everyone.

We can't do anything with the phones and that's the bitter truth, although it's possible to physically remove cameras from the phones because most of us don't really use those cameras at all but even doing that is not going to be any helpful because we can't convince other around us to remove the cameras from their phones as they'll consider as mad or someone with overthinking issues. The smartphones are the best devices for the ones who want to spy on us and we can't do anything about that. I still see people who use feature phones to have maximum privacy but still they can't have full privacy because others around them will always have smartphones with good cameras and microphones.

[Cointikka]

Hi theymos,

I kindly ask you to review this thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5589885.0 that I created. I would like to check whether you are aware of such a Signature Campaign, where the CM is promoting a different campaign while hiding behind a wall in disguise and promoting a mixer.

I request that you examine this issue and question the Campaign Manager. If it is possible, give him/her a strict action for what was done. I know you would do the needful, and I feel that there should be some rules of governance and payments for campaign managers. I ask you this because anyone in campaign management service will never overlook the remuneration offered by project promoters.

Edit: Please do look into the Signature Campaign thread https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5584278.0. It seems that the CM was not interested in updating it. I am assuming that he was not interested in focusing his next strategy on promoting a Bitcoin mixer under the disguise of a Bitcoin blockchain explorer.

Please debug [omnisee.io], and you should find more evidence related to [omniseemix.xyz]

[examplens]

Hi theymos,

I kindly ask you to review this thread [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5589885.0] that I created. I would like to check whether you are aware of such a Signature Campaign, where the CM is promoting a different campaign while hiding behind a wall in disguise and promoting a mixer.

I request that you examine this issue and question the Campaign Manager. If it is possible, give him/her a strict action for what was done. I know you would do the needful, and I feel that there should be some rules of governance and payments for campaign managers. I ask you this because anyone in campaign management service will never overlook the remuneration offered by project promoters.

Edit: Please do look into the Signature Campaign thread [https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5584278.0]. It seems that the CM was not interested in updating it. I am assuming that he was not interested in focusing his next strategy on promoting a Bitcoin mixer under the disguise of a Bitcoin blockchain explorer.

Please debug [omnisee.io], and you should find more evidence related to [omniseemix.xyz/]

I don't see a mixer promotion here. Apart from the name in the screenshot, there is nothing promoting or recommending the mixer. These are two different services, with a similar name and probably the same owner, but they are present on this forum only as a blockchain explorer.
The rules aren't that strict, it's not even forbidden to write a mixer's name.

But there seems to be some confusion around promotion. It would be allowed to post even a positive review thread for ExampleMixer, just as long as you don't post the URL and you don't violate the other rules. Promotion is only disallowed in signatures, avatars, and profile-bios; not posts.

[DYING_S0UL]

I don't see a mixer promotion here. Apart from the name in the screenshot, there is nothing promoting or recommending the mixer. These are two different services, with a similar name and probably the same owner, but they are present on this forum only as a blockchain explorer.
The rules aren't that strict, it's not even forbidden to write a mixer's name.

But there seems to be some confusion around promotion. It would be allowed to post even a positive review thread for ExampleMixer, just as long as you don't post the URL and you don't violate the other rules. Promotion is only disallowed in signatures, avatars, and profile-bios; not posts.

examplens, I'll tell you what happened. He did it because he thinks he was removed from the campaign because of me. Yeah, you heard me right, he was one of the campaign participants (from week 1-8), and while being at it he found no fault in the service. Only after getting removed (butthurt), he started attacking me.

As for myself, I had already admitted I shouldn't have posted an image (not any direct link but an image) from a mixer, and deleted that post right away. But he wouldn't just listen, and now venting out his anger to me.

[examplens]

examplens, I'll tell you what happened. He did it because he thinks he was removed from the campaign because of me. Yeah, you heard me right, he was one of the campaign participants (from week 1-8), and while being at it he found no fault in the service. Only after getting removed (butthurt), he started attacking me.

As for myself, I had already admitted I shouldn't have posted an image (not any direct link but an image) from a mixer, and deleted that post right away. But he wouldn't just listen, and now venting out his anger to me.

I do not go into the ultimate intentions of this report, nor do I condemn it. Everyone has the right and should express when they have doubts.
As I understood the mixer ban rules, they were not broken in your case.
This thread has 1380 posts, and through the discussion we came to the point that it is necessary to enable the mention of the name of a mixer, as well as a discussion about them in general. The fact that one member sees a sublimated advertising message on the screenshot is an accident, not practice.

[Cointikka]

I don't see a mixer promotion here. Apart from the name in the screenshot, there is nothing promoting or recommending the mixer. These are two different services, with a similar name and probably the same owner, but they are present on this forum only as a blockchain explorer.
The rules aren't that strict, it's not even forbidden to write a mixer's name.

Yup! You are right, but the @admin never thought that a screenshot pointing towards a mixer could become an issue. Now, you will state why you promote this mixer through the screenshot? Well, it clearly shows how he is pointing to the URL. I do not need to post it, as I think it is evident if anyone has seen it.

If the admin does not want to reply or question them, it is okay for me.

Edit:[/br]
If anyone here wants to see how good that screenshot was in promoting the direct URL, then DM me; I have the screenshot. If you do not agree with me, then do your thingy using your tools, and you will find it out.

Please do not portray me as a culprit. Do some research, then comment on what has happened, but do check the CM and the Signature thread.

This is the original topic: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5589885.msg66994170#msg66994170

[icopress]

[...] He did it because he thinks he was removed from the campaign because of me. Yeah, you heard me right, he was one of the campaign participants (from week 1-8), and while being at it he found no fault in the service. Only after getting removed (butthurt), he started attacking me.

I don't think the user attacked you because they were removed from the campaign.

We're all adults and everyone understands that rotation in any campaign is a routine and integral part of the workflow. The problem was most likely that Cointikka simply overlooked the latest rules update, in which the admin slightly relaxed the ban, that's all.

Please do not portray me as a culprit. [...]

Nobody does this... but you create the impression of a victim by emphasizing it.

If anyone here wants to see how good that screenshot was in promoting the direct URL, then DM me; I have the screenshot. If you do not agree with me, then do your thingy using your tools, and you will find it out.

Publishing links to mixers, and screenshots, is not prohibited as long as you're not receiving money for it.

If someone creates a thread asking "which project would you recommend?" anyone can give a recommendation and a direct link.

DYING_S0UL didn't participate in the mixer campaign and could have published whatever he wanted, not to mention that his screenshot is Case A and the open Mixer tabs are the accompanying Case B. Yes, he's participating in a project whose team also manages a mixing business, but that's fine.

I also have two clients who have a combined business (Mixer A + AML Bot / Mixer B + Mail Service), and as a manager, I'd feel a sense of accomplishment if I saw that the user promoting, say, an AML bot, showed interest in other related projects. But in this particular case, it was just open browser tabs (and not surprising, since it seems he was simply personally researching a project related to the one he's promoting).

[Forsyth Jones]

-

After all this misunderstanding, the bottom line that it would have been better if you had PMed DYING_S0UL before posting the complaint (and in this thread) and you could have resolved this privately, without causing all this discussion here, on the other hand, now that this thread is back at the top of Meta, it helps to clarify this confusion about when someone is exactly breaking the rules regarding mixers (as examplens did very well to refresh our memory below).

I think that if things were resolved internally before things got heated, we would avoid many problems.

I don't see a mixer promotion here. Apart from the name in the screenshot, there is nothing promoting or recommending the mixer. These are two different services, with a similar name and probably the same owner, but they are present on this forum only as a blockchain explorer.
The rules aren't that strict, it's not even forbidden to write a mixer's name.

But there seems to be some confusion around promotion. It would be allowed to post even a positive review thread for ExampleMixer, just as long as you don't post the URL and you don't violate the other rules. Promotion is only disallowed in signatures, avatars, and profile-bios; not posts.

This thread has 1380 posts, and through the discussion we came to the point that it is necessary to enable the mention of the name of a mixer, as well as a discussion about them in general. The fact that one member sees a sublimated advertising message on the screenshot is an accident, not practice.

[icopress]

Unless it becomes a habit from the same person.

[...] The fact that one member sees a sublimated advertising message on the screenshot is an accident, not practice.

[Stalker22]

I don't see a mixer promotion here. Apart from the name in the screenshot, there is nothing promoting or recommending the mixer. These are two different services, with a similar name and probably the same owner, but they are present on this forum only as a blockchain explorer.
The rules aren't that strict, it's not even forbidden to write a mixer's name.

Yup! You are right, but the @admin never thought that a screenshot pointing towards a mixer could become an issue. Now, you will state why you promote this mixer through the screenshot? Well, it clearly shows how he is pointing to the URL. I do not need to post it, as I think it is evident if anyone has seen it.

Since DYING_S0UL chose to delete that post on his own (even though he did not have to), there is no issue anymore, so I do not think we need to keep arguing about it.  But it looks like you misread the rules on banning mixers from the forum.  The admin never explicitly banned screenshots of mixer sites in discussions.  In fact, even mentioning a mixer name is totally fine as long as it is not blatant promotion. DYING_S0UL did not break any rules, but even if he had, you could have just reported the post to the mods and let them handle it without all the extra drama.

[dkbit98]

I don't think there was any mixer promotion in that post, and it looks more like a dispute between two members with one of them trying to nitpick and snitch to theymos