The hell are you talking about? Decentralized? Are you supporting people who facilitated so many criminals to laundering their billions of money? There are thousands of people's life savings there. It's kinda stupid to talk about decentralization when it's harmed many people. [...] They deserved it. It was not even attacking. Tornado cash deserved it. It shall be 100 years rather than only 5 years.
Tornado cash was a tool which could be misused by criminals, but had also legitimate privacy usage.
With the same logic, you could say: "There are so many deaths due to car accidents! And cars were even used for terrorist attacks! Car manufacturers should all go jailed!"
Think again.
I don't know the absolute details from the case, but from what media reported, evidence of actual collaboration between the Tornado Cash developers and criminal groups is very thin. There were some mentions in internal communication that could be interpreted as to tolerate criminal use. But yeah ... you can "criminally use" a lot of things. For example, you can use computers and the Internet to distribute child abuse imagery. Should computer manufacturers and Internet providers also go jailed?
The only misbehaviour that could be attributed to the Tornado cash devs is that they ran the mixer as a service taking fees, and depending on the jurisdiction they were operating, they could have had to register a license for their business. But first that would never justify such a long sentence, and second Pertsev was actually not in control anymore of the service when they arrested him, as it was run by a DAO.
More on that topic is here:
https://cointelegraph.com/news/tornado-cash-verdict-crypto-industryOnly hope I have is that the court where he was sentenced seemed to have been a minor provincial court, and Pertsev is appealing the sentence. A better informed judge could perhaps rule in a different way, as basic human rights are touched here.
Very expected considering we are talking about the United Stated
No, it's in the Netherlands. There is another case about other developers in the US though, so you probably confused both cases. FWIW, the US protects software development as a basic right (freedom of speech). US authorities also have clarified that at least their case isn't about developing open source tools.