WHY PEOPLE ARE NOT TAKING THEIR PRIVACY SERIOUSLY.

[Bananington]

To think of it, no government actually wants complete anonymity for their citizens, mostly when it regards outside communication or business deals. No one wants a repeat of the 911 bombings that no one saw serious, until it was seriousness they had to be.
The terror scare is even why I feel governments try as much as possible to regulate the decentralized network and centralized network too. Besides money laundering claims too, I think that some people are too engrossed in a day to day job that involves physical cash, than even bother to secure  or upgrade the privacy of their Crypto investment.

With more persons showing interest on the subject after observing if the idea of cryptocurrencies would survive this long,  they only have to have had a personal experience that involved their wallets being hacked, being ripped off from P2p transactions, to clearly consider giving more attention to the privacy of all financial holdings, both on decentralized network, centralized network too.

[WhyFhy]

Why do people think that coordinators, mixers, coinjoin software, etc.  have something to hide?

Probably because they do, it's services literally designed to cover your trail and obscure data. " For privacy"
If these services where used for fiat it would probably get chalked up to money laundering or racketeering.
After the last few days I'm pretty sure mixers are mainly used for bitcointalk users to hide funds of their purchased alt accounts  signature campaign earnings before they hit main wallets.
This is probably the real reason for the ban of mixer stuff here. JK but it's a noteworthy explanation but the truth is calling for multi layer anonymity when layer 1 does the job is considered excessive and suspicious. It's the equivalent of melting down gold for resell in a stolen market. You can't shake the outside looking in on 1st thoughts. You got blood diamonds.You got blood Bitcoin too.

[Z-tight]

After the last few days I'm pretty sure mixers are mainly used for bitcointalk users to hide funds of their purchased alt accounts  signature campaign earnings before they hit main wallets.
This is probably the real reason for the ban of mixer stuff here.

I don't know where you got this theory from, but this is not why Theymos is banning mixers on the forum, he is doing that to protect the forum from LE. The government is attacking BTC privacy solutions because they want to deanonymize most BTC users and attack BTC fungibility with bullshit about tainted and clean coins. Theymos does not want the forum to run into trouble with the authorities, that is the reason for the ban on mixers, and not what you are saying here.

but the truth is calling for multi layer anonymity when layer 1 does the job is considered excessive and suspicious. It's the equivalent of melting down gold for resell in a stolen market.

The BTC blockchain is transparent because it is a public ledger, it does not give you anonymity, you use privacy solutions to achieve anonymity and better privacy.

[BenCodie]

Ugh ... "What do you have to hide"...someone needs to ask this guy, why do we all wear clothes! Is it because we have something to hide? No, it is our choice and right to keep our bodies private and to feel comfortable! Yes, some can argue that no clothes is the natural way but that's a minority opinion based on irrelevant beliefs in the modern age.

Investigating someone's receiving and spending is as bad as asking them to take their clothes of and check their genitals for cleanliness. It's disgusting, but both have the same thing in common - it's invasion of privacy.

[Bureau]

This is going no where as they as miners have their choice. You cannot project them as culprits as they are the ones who are not mining Ordinals. If they are doing something that we don't agree doesn't mean that we should put a negative mouth with what they are trying to achieve.

After two mixers taken down it is clear that mixers are unable to filter out bad money when they are processing transactions. North Korea is not a country it is a land owned by a dictator which is slowly now facing issues with its population. To fund itself they are stealing money globally and using mixers to make it untraceable.

As per my understanding this is how you make use of privacy to the benefit of a dictator. It is an alarming issue and I don't think a topic should have been created to make privacy a top notch priority.

[Apocollapse]

After two mixers taken down it is clear that mixers are unable to filter out bad money when they are processing transactions. North Korea is not a country it is a land owned by a dictator which is slowly now facing issues with its population. To fund itself they are stealing money globally and using mixers to make it untraceable.

Having a censorship means it's no longer decentralized, if Bitcoin get censored due to their own rule, they're threat to Bitcoin's decentralization.

The funny thing is Jack and Luke Dash Jr who're known Bitcoin developers are censoring Bitcoin transactions, so it's a big problem.

Not a mixer, but one of known wallet that has a privacy tool was start to censor certain Coinjoin transaction, maybe you're looking for this one.

[NotATether]

To think of it, no government actually wants complete anonymity for their citizens, mostly when it regards outside communication or business deals. No one wants a repeat of the 911 bombings that no one saw serious, until it was seriousness they had to be.
The terror scare is even why I feel governments try as much as possible to regulate the decentralized network and centralized network too. Besides money laundering claims too, I think that some people are too engrossed in a day to day job that involves physical cash, than even bother to secure  or upgrade the privacy of their Crypto investment.

This is understandable, but it does not explain why some people go out of their way to advocate to people not to use any sort of privacy technology for your coins. You can even see this with ad-blockers, which is completely different from crypto: The FBI posted a recommendation for people to use one to avoid malware, then Youtube blocks you from watching videos until you turn it off.

[348Judah]

Why do people think that coordinators, mixers, coinjoin software, etc.  have something to hide?

Because they believed they are the only moet assured means whereby scammers uses them a s a rescue to their financial theft committed, just as thesame way the government are now fighting against these mixers because of same reasons

Would you sow anyone your bank account transactions just because they want to see? Is it any of their business?

It's non of their business, just as I cant have access to anyone else financial income or account, they shouldn't have access to mine, this is all about trust, security and privacy which the government refuse to render on every one of use but we got to have them through digital decentralization in bitcoin network, only for the dake of little ones who don't know how they can have this same privacy with blockchain.

People are not taking their blockchain privacy seriously enough. It wasn't too long ago that FTX users' financials were exposed in a hack!

Maybe we could say here that experience is the perfect teacher, those that have once been a victim would always wanted to avoid centralized exchanges.

[kryptqnick]

I wouldn't show by bank account history because it's linked directly to my name and I don't want people investigating where I shop, how much and when I spend, etc. But I'm okay with Bitcoin transactions being public because, while people can see the movement of funds, they don't know whose funds are moving and it would be quite hard to investigate every transaction to see where it went.
We live in a world of little privacy, considering how the big companies that own social media platforms operate, the abundance of cameras, as well as various surveillance scandals. It's not great, but it becomes normal and acceptable for most people, to a point where privacy isn't that important.

[SamReomo]

This is understandable, but it does not explain why some people go out of their way to advocate to people not to use any sort of privacy technology for your coins.

Because they want Bitcoin transactions to be public and that's the main reason they are going against the mixers and all those services which are present to add privacy element into the transactions. We all know that it's impossible for anyone to control Bitcoin as the network as grown to huge levels and if the privacy remains the way it is then there won't be any taxes on the investors who have a lot of Bitcoin holdings I guess. There are other reasons which I don't know but I think tax is one of the those reasons and because of that they don't want the users to use tools that would make it difficult for them to see what a user owns.

You can even see this with ad-blockers, which is completely different from crypto: The FBI posted a recommendation for people to use one to avoid malware, then Youtube blocks you from watching videos until you turn it off.

The YouTube is blocking users who are having ad-blockers because it wants to have as much revenue as possible from the advertisements and now they have started their subscription model and with that model they want users to pay them on monthly basis in order to have ad-free experience. It's all about money and same is the case with Twitter now X. I believe Elon Musk has shown them the way when he introduced fee of $1 on Twitter accounts.

[ImThour]

People want transparency however, they completely forget that someone's Private Transactions that are related to Money shouldn't be public. Bitcoin works well in this case, you can have as many public addresses as you want to keep your Digital Identity private however if you look at other services like Ethereum name Service (ENS), people are buying domain names for their addresses which was meant to hide their original identity. Isn't that funny? Paying money to make their profiles public and easy to identify.

[Lucius]

What do you say? As of today, only El Salvador and the Central African Republic have bitcoin as legal tender. In the rest of the countries it has been regulated as a financial asset.I don't see how you can conclude anything about privacy from that, which is false.

Actually only El Salvador has Bitcoin declared as legal tender, CAR supposedly had it for a while and then they gave up on it, because who the hell cares about BTC when 90% of people in that country don't have access to the internet.


As for privacy when it comes to Bitcoin, I believe that most people are not even aware that there are services like mixer, and besides, I don't think most people really need it, because they invest in BTC exclusively for profit and have nothing to hide. Also, some still think that Bitcoin is actually a private online payment method and we can see that by the fact that many so-called hackers sooner or later end up behind bars.

Privacy is almost impossible to achieve these days anyway, especially in the online world - from the devices we use to the pages we visit and the software we use, everyone is spying on us in some way. Those with powerful surveillance tools can very likely find out anything they want about any individual anywhere in the world.

[m2017]

Notice what a typical post Bob has in the picture with the correspondence in the tweet.  According to him, everyone who hides or tries to hide their transactions are criminals and do it only for criminal purposes. It never occurs to him that some people value their privacy and confidentiality. Of course, there is nothing criminal or criminal in this (in a desire to maintain privacy), although all sorts of Bobs are trying to convince us of the opposite with their cheap rhetoric.

I like Ali’s answer in their conversation and I think that with his post he put an end to that discussion. Sorry, Bob, but shouldn't you go in that very famous direction with your phrase "What do you have to hide". The point is not that people have or need to hide something, but that everyone has the right to privacy by default. If Bob wants to publish information about his bank accounts and transactions, then let him do it, but there is no need to force it on everyone else, as if this is how it should be and this is normal.

[franky1]

This is understandable, but it does not explain why some people go out of their way to advocate to people not to use any sort of privacy technology for your coins. You can even see this with ad-blockers, which is completely different from crypto: The FBI posted a recommendation for people to use one to avoid malware, then Youtube blocks you from watching videos until you turn it off.

i wouldnt say people are advocating for people to not use any sort of privacy tools... just the ones that can get users in more trouble for using stupid obvious ones

decades ago i knew satoshi dice was just a mixer for silkroad users. everyone knew it but no one talked about it in those words so publicly. no one had issues with the "mixing" but only the dust spam it generated

but now regulators are specifically targeting services termed "mixers" we have idiots promoting "mixers" and even have userguides into how the funds are split into known quantity amounts and how they function making it easy for any analyst to then make patter recognition tools to then tag mixer users.. thus playing into regulators eye-line

people need to get smarter

[Zaguru12]

Certainly, I understand the importance of addressing privacy concerns in the crypto community. It's crucial for individuals to realize that financial privacy is a fundamental right. Just as you wouldn't share your bank account transactions indiscriminately, it's wise to prioritize the confidentiality of your blockchain activities. Recent incidents, like the FTX hack, highlight the need for heightened privacy measures. Stay informed, use reliable privacy tools, and make conscious choices to protect your financial data.

I just have to agree it’s quite worrying when people actual ask this questions of what someone has to hide. To me privacy is more of a security measure to protect one from potential attacks. look at bitcoin it’s transactions are public but yet the advice to use different addresses every-time for new transactions is always given, not because you’re are criminal but with proper anonymity hackers won’t trace you, kidnappers won’t come for you. We have read tweets of people getting kidnapped or either their family just because the flaunt there wealth on social media. An anonymous person doesn’t face this challenges and asking them not to take this measures his like asking them to expose themselves to this threats.

[tjtonmoy]

Your privacy is yours to keep. If you can't keep it safe, others will always take advantage of it. Once you are under the radar, it is hard to get out because the internet is a vast place. Every single step you take here will always get recorded in some place and if that is compromised, your privacy should be compromised too.

We just ignore the fact that privacy is something when we are browsing the internet. Yeah, most of the time you don't face the consequences instantly. But trust me, when the time comes it will haunt you for the rest of your life. If those platform has something to hide, maybe they have some reason behind it. Maybe it's for their own safety. If not, they won't hide it in the first place. When it to understand it from their point of view too.

[icalical]

an average Joe who lives paycheck to paycheck doesn't take it seriously because even if someone finds their identity they have nothing to lose from there.

This one is I think the most plausible reason, people who doesn't have anything to lose wouldn't even care if their identity or bank account were exposed, that's the least they need to worry. And I think we all can agree that most of the population is an average Joe who has more think to be worried about than just their privacy. I am telling the truth when I say that I know some people who even sell their ID to get our one week salary, and some people verifying exchange account with their ID to just get small bonus. What I meant to say is that They aren't taking their privacy seriously, because there are more serious problem than just their privacy

[goldkingcoiner]

I think that you may be confusing privacy for anonymity. Bitcoin is as private as you want it to be. But Bitcoin is meant to be a public ledger. An anonymization service like a mixer never was meant to be part of Bitcoin, and Bitcoin transactions were never meant to be anonymous. So it makes absolutely no difference other than to those who enjoyed a Bitcoin-based service that is no longer possible.

Anyone who wants to keep their anonymity has many options to do so.... TOR, VPN, Monero...

[digaran]

Well, luke jr is already compromised, so there is that. He should not remain a part of development team, I said this before, we are seeing the signs of collapse. this is just a start though, we don't even know what happened with Luke, and the rest of them, well they I don't care much.

[franky1]

Well, luke jr is already compromised, so there is that. He should not remain a part of development team, I said this before, we are seeing the signs of collapse. this is just a start though, we don't even know what happened with Luke, and the rest of them, well they I don't care much.

when re-branding eligius to ocean(mummolin). they filed with the SEC. and SEC regulations now apply to that service
https://disclosurequest.com/form/mummolin-inc./0002002263-23-000001

before this year
eligius was not registered with the SEC it was just a business name registered with just state business registry. where only state business policy applied

but now they are operating as a financial business(financial security(asset) offering/facilitator) so the rules they need to follow has changed