How do we prevent money laundering and assasinations?

[TiagoTiago]

But most people still let the client go with the default, which is relying on IRC unless it's down, right?

[1714106045]

1714106045

[1714106045]

1714106045

[1714106045]

1714106045

[1714106045]

1714106045

[1714106045]

1714106045

[1714106045]

1714106045

[MoonShadow]

But most people still let the client go with the default, which is relying on IRC unless it's down, right?

Down or not, the client will attempt to connect to it's internal list to fill out it's connections.  It doesn't depend on any one source for data, so such an attempt to prevent new clients from bootstrapping the blockchain would be short lived.  Clients that have already bootstrapped remember their past connections anyway.

[error]

You prevent both money laundering and assassinations by not having a totalitarian police state. Bitcoin is irrelevant.

[TiagoTiago]

I can think of several circunstances where both activities could still exist without the presence of totalitarian states...

[FreeMoney]

I can think of several circunstances where both activities could still exist without the presence of totalitarian states...

Need some kind of state though. Doesn't assassination mean killing public official? And isn't money laundering just transfer designed to get around laws?

[sortedmush]

I recommend to read the original Jim Bell's essay: http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/jimbellap.htm

As he shows, assassination market will make wars impossible (because any government official, who wants to wage a war, will get a bounty for his head). And it will probably make impossible to exist for government, that extort taxes from it's subjects by force (because they will get a bounty for their heads too). Only governments, that provide their services on voluntary contracts will be able to evade such system.

This was a fascinating read. Thanks for the link.

[BitterTea]

I recommend to read the original Jim Bell's essay: http://www.outpost-of-freedom.com/jimbellap.htm

As he shows, assassination market will make wars impossible (because any government official, who wants to wage a war, will get a bounty for his head). And it will probably make impossible to exist for government, that extort taxes from it's subjects by force (because they will get a bounty for their heads too). Only governments, that provide their services on voluntary contracts will be able to evade such system.

This was a fascinating read. Thanks for the link.

This one is good as well.

I like his ideas on how such a service might establish trust with its userbase. I'm thinking about working on a service similar to this.

To establish itself as an authentic operation, AP [assassination politics] might be introduced not as a full fledged death machine but instead as a low key betting pool system whereby users could put money on sporting events or guess the day certain celebrities will get divorced, and other trivial wagers. The selling point is the hardcore anonyminity feature for users in harsher nanny states. In this relatively low risk phase, winners could have the option of being publicly announced for ego’s sake, and this would prove the system operated as intended. Then gradually more and more sinister bets would be allowed until it becomes completely un-moderated and AP is born.

[Triast]

as a non hacker investor in BTC, i am tired of hearing laughing and joking about how drug dealers and gangs will most definitely use BTC to move money around the world to facilitate their illegal activities.  Hive 45 had 2 jokers laughing and joking about using BTC for assasinations.  i'm sorry, civilized ppl just don't talk like that.  if this becomes the case, BTC may be doomed in the long run to function as a new currency to replace the USD which is what i presume most of the ppl on this forum want.  i know i sure do and now i have an invested interest in making this so.  i would like to use this thread to develop ideas about how this activity might be prevented.  i don't want to hear comments about how it is inevitable, can't stop it, its gonna happen no matter what type comments that are often accompanied by a veneer of glee.  this is serious business and i have BTC to protect; so i'd like to hear productive ideas about how this can be accomplished.  if everyone believes its impossible then fine, i get an empty thread.

Whoa, I know it was a while back but I thought I should say something. I am one of the jokers off Hive 45, when we started talking about it we wanted to explore all the possible futures of bitcoin not to promote any illigal activity. Bitcoin is a fantastic system and I know it is going to go places, but we still need to acknowledge and discuss all possible outcomes of this going mainstream. Even if it does lead to such things as assassination networks.

I am actually kind of glad that even in my very small way I helped get the discussion about this out there. This thread had been a gold mine. Some of the ideas that have been brought up have blown my mind.

The Assassination Politics essay is definitely raising a few hairs on the back of my neck though...

[gigabytecoin]

 If I saw an assassination market using Bitcoin, I think I'd contribute to that effort myself, though I know saying that won't win me any points here.

EDIT:  Just to be clear, I mean I'd contribute to the DOS effort against such a thing, not to the assassination market!

You get points from me.  There are a lot of extreme ideologies thrown around on the internet without regard to their practical application.  I'd sink a good ship to prevent it from being used for evil any day, and I think anyone who supports the freedom for assassination markets to exist "on principle" should be made to be present during the event--after spending an hour talking with the person before and then having to sit alone with them in a room after.  Then they have to explain their principles to the person's family.  And raise their kids.

What if the CIA put hit out on Ghaddafi in bitcoins?

Where would that leave all you holier than thous?

How did they pay to have Saddsam Hussein offed anyway, your taxes, in USD to hired guns most likely. FFS how sanctimonious are you going to get on us.

What are you smoking?

Saddam Hussein was hung in front of the world to see. They had an in court trial and everything. He was convicted of war crimes and hung.

[TiagoTiago]

I can think of several circunstances where both activities could still exist without the presence of totalitarian states...

Need some kind of state though. Doesn't assassination mean killing public official? And isn't money laundering just transfer designed to get around laws?

Assasins are only assasins if they target public officials? I thought they were simply executioners for hire...


Regarding money laundry, it doesn't need to be just for dealing with state laws, a subordinate to a crimelord could be doing some protection service on the side and not reporting the earnings to the boss, in order to be able to enjoy his money, he would have to for example buy a bunch of lottery tickets and only mention the winning ones and say he's on a lucky streak, since this doesn't cut into the crime org's busyness he might be able to keep what he wins on the lotto; or a store cashier could invest a little bit in his brother's bakery and each month go there as a customer and slip the acumulated change he swiped from the registrer and slip to his brother, who later would give him a similar amount back pretending it's his share of the monthly earnings.

[FreeMoney]

I can think of several circunstances where both activities could still exist without the presence of totalitarian states...

Need some kind of state though. Doesn't assassination mean killing public official? And isn't money laundering just transfer designed to get around laws?

Assasins are only assasins if they target public officials? I thought they were simply executioners for hire...


Regarding money laundry, it doesn't need to be just for dealing with state laws, a subordinate to a crimelord could be doing some protection service on the side and not reporting the earnings to the boss, in order to be able to enjoy his money, he would have to for example buy a bunch of lottery tickets and only mention the winning ones and say he's on a lucky streak, since this doesn't cut into the crime org's busyness he might be able to keep what he wins on the lotto; or a store cashier could invest a little bit in his brother's bakery and each month go there as a customer and slip the acumulated change he swiped from the registrer and slip to his brother, who later would give him a similar amount back pretending it's his share of the monthly earnings.

Uh, it's not important I just thought the word implied killing a certain sort of person and I didn't think it had to be for money. Like JFK was assassinated whether the killer was paid or not, but my wife's lover was just murdered, again regardless of whether I do it or pay for it.

[em3rgentOrdr]

since bitcoin enables money laundering and asaasination markets and tax evasion and promotes anarchism, then why do you support it? Im curious.  You have great tools with democratic-state-regulated currencies already that dont have these issues as much, right?

The available data leads me to believe that BitCoin enables more good than bad.  Neither BitCoin nor cash "promote anarchism"--at best any implications for a political ideology like anarchism are peripheral to their broader significance.

Try to step back for a moment.  BitCoin is technologically superior to and more efficient than any existing currency or payment provider.  Particularly exciting are its applications in the developing world, in enabling microtransactions, in creating the possibility for digital contracts, and in facilitating the emergence of a tipping economy.  It seems very narrowminded to me to think that BitCoin's primary relevance is political.  I'm sure there were people who thought the same of the internet, and while they were right that the internet has political consequences, it's had kind of a lot of other ones as well.

And most importantly, I'm not naive.  BitCoin is ultimately mathematics--there are plenty of drug lords and covert organisations that have the finances to run their own BitCoin-like network regardless of whether BitCoin itself succeeds or fails.  I cannot control what they do--but I canA help to make BitCoin an effective counterpart to that possibility.  So that's what I try and do--think ahead, and act appropriately.

Thanks.  And yes I tend to agree with you here.  And bitcoin is first and foremost a currency to help people.prosper, not a political tool.

But I am still curious about pracfical ways to deal with assasination markets, given the existence of bitcoin.  They are inevitable now.  So I think preventing money laundering and trying to prevent assasination markets is foolish now, unless one wants to eliminate bitcoin.  What we can do is study block chains and internet patterns to identify these things and then possibly take action against them, not prevent.

[BitterTea]

I'm curious if you guys that are "against" an assassination market have read the article.

If not, the gist is that basically, the site is nothing but a death pool. It's just that, if you take matters into your own hands, you're most likely going to win the pool.

[eMansipater]

But I am still curious about pracfical ways to deal with assasination markets, given the existence of bitcoin.  They are inevitable now.  So I think preventing money laundering and trying to prevent assasination markets is foolish now, unless one wants to eliminate bitcoin.  What we can do is study block chains and internet patterns to identify these things and then possibly take action against them, not prevent.

Definitely something worth thinking about, because I agree that anonymous cryptocurrency will not be undone.  For money laundering I think the key will be to use the plain old-fashioned approach of "if some guy buys a yacht but claims to be unemployed...." as well as honeypots.  The trust overlay problem for anonymous finances has yet to be solved, and I think this is also a key vulnerability of criminal enterprises because no matter how organised they are it's still hard for a criminal to trust a criminal.  But re-positioning our laws and mentalities as early as possible is important.  I think we have to start focussing on the last remaining constraint that exists for human beings--that we are not yet locationless.  I suspect that someone's being in a known physical location will emerge as one of the highest forms of trust.  As long as we can make it so that violence still has to be committed physically there will be a constraint on assassinations, and we may have to accept that that is the only one that can be any longer leveraged.

@BitterTea I've read the article.  That "incidental feature" was important enough to name the concept after, so I hardly see the difference.

[tlhonmey]

The simple counter to the "Bitcoins are being used for illegal activities and should be banned" argument is that, since bitcoins have a transaction record easily available on the public net, without even needing a search warrant or anything, bitcoins are actually *more* traceable than cash.  You don't need to set someone up with marked bills.  *Every* bill is marked.  When the politicians finally get around to trumpeting about how it's a haven for criminals, be sure to point that out.  It's no worse than bank transfers between numbered accounts, and it's considerably easier for law enforcement to follow any trail that gets left behind.

[MoonShadow]

The simple counter to the "Bitcoins are being used for illegal activities and should be banned" argument is that, since bitcoins have a transaction record easily available on the public net, without even needing a search warrant or anything, bitcoins are actually *more* traceable than cash.  You don't need to set someone up with marked bills.  *Every* bill is marked.  When the politicians finally get around to trumpeting about how it's a haven for criminals, be sure to point that out.  It's no worse than bank transfers between numbered accounts, and it's considerably easier for law enforcement to follow any trail that gets left behind.

If they can show a direct association between an address and the suspect, then yes.

[BitterTea]

@BitterTea I've read the article.  That "incidental feature" was important enough to name the concept after, so I hardly see the difference.

Yeah, on the one hand I'm not sure why I made that remark. On the other hand, an assassination pool could form out of a death pool without the operator even knowing or intending, the only thing required is an anonymous payout method.

[cypherdoc]

The simple counter to the "Bitcoins are being used for illegal activities and should be banned" argument is that, since bitcoins have a transaction record easily available on the public net, without even needing a search warrant or anything, bitcoins are actually *more* traceable than cash.  You don't need to set someone up with marked bills.  *Every* bill is marked.  When the politicians finally get around to trumpeting about how it's a haven for criminals, be sure to point that out.  It's no worse than bank transfers between numbered accounts, and it's considerably easier for law enforcement to follow any trail that gets left behind.

If they can show a direct association between an address and the suspect, then yes.

clarify something for me Creighto;  is it anonymous or not?  just how easy would it be to trace tx's?

[MoonShadow]

The simple counter to the "Bitcoins are being used for illegal activities and should be banned" argument is that, since bitcoins have a transaction record easily available on the public net, without even needing a search warrant or anything, bitcoins are actually *more* traceable than cash.  You don't need to set someone up with marked bills.  *Every* bill is marked.  When the politicians finally get around to trumpeting about how it's a haven for criminals, be sure to point that out.  It's no worse than bank transfers between numbered accounts, and it's considerably easier for law enforcement to follow any trail that gets left behind.

If they can show a direct association between an address and the suspect, then yes.

clarify something for me Creighto;  is it anonymous or not?  just how easy would it be to trace tx's?

Bitcoin's system is anonymous, in the sense that identifying information is not available from the system itself, and that such information is not neccessary for it's function; unlike credit cards and the like.  However, bitcoin does nothing to prevent the user from breaking his own cover.  Whoever desires to remain anonymous must take some rather drastic steps to maintain it, such as never allowing coins to mix from a published address to any that are intended to be used for anonymous business.  So basicly, to remain truly anonymous, care must be taken that two distinct wallet.dat files (presumedly with two clients) never intermingle.  This is so that a user can have a public business personna with Bitcoin, while maintaining an additional set of funds for cladestine business transactions. 

However, transactions can easily be traced as they flow from one address to another, which is why it is difficult to maintain an anonymous personna with only one Bitcoin wallet.dat file.  The client mixes account funds by default, and the current client makes no attempt to maintain any kind of seperation of funds.

So the short answer to the question is that Bitcoin can be anonymous, but it's the actual people who are not.

[cypherdoc]

Bitcoin's system is anonymous, in the sense that identifying information is not available from the system itself, and that such information is not neccessary for it's function; unlike credit cards and the like.  However, bitcoin does nothing to prevent the user from breaking his own cover.

To say it more generally, anonymity requires that you not transfer or spend bitcoins in any way that attaches your identity to them; it is thus far better a tracking tool than cash but less effective a tracking tool than credit cards, ACH, SWIFT, and so on.

If you earn bitcoins anonymously, you can maintain anonymity as long as you properly hold the money (in the way Creighto was describing) and as long as, when you eventually transfer it to others, you either (1) avoid attaching your (non-pseudonymous) identity to that transaction or (2) deal with an intermediary (or set of intermediaries) to whom you disclose your identity but whom you trust not to disclose it to others.  As an example of (1), you might simply purchase a subscription to a website using a pseudonym and access it through Tor.  As an example of (2), you might convert bitcoin-denominated funds to USD using a bank that you believe will not choose (and cannot be coerced by those you wish to maintain anonymity from) to disclose your identity, or you might attempt to use a series of intermediate exchangers that mix and "launder" coins, hoping that the chain will not be compromised (and that its components haven't maintained logs if they are).

Whether it will in practice be feasible for a criminal to transfer large amounts of money in bitcoins anonymously in the ways they desire remains to be seen (and I would personally hope not and would support regulation to make it less likely), but it is already possible for criminals to transfer large amounts of cash.  Except to the extent that the physical limitations of cash provide opportunities for the detection of criminal activity (e.g., it has to be in a truck or on a plane for some amount of time), it ought to be strictly less likely for a wrongdoer to avoid detection using bitcoins.

how do u earn btc anonymously?  by mining? what about when i buy btc from mtgox and then transfer them to my wallet?  as i recall, i never had to give my name or other id info when i signed up for an acct did i?