klee's hacked 1170 btc, Part II

[The Avenger]

Real name? What happened to the right to be anonymous, as one of the core principles of bitcoin?

Difference here is "user" and "service provider".

Bitcoin users have the right to be anonymous, if they so desire.

But people providing "legitimate" bitcoin services are businesses and need to act like businesses.

bitmixer.io took $4000+ for their "service" to the thief/hacker.

If bitmixer is a legitimate business, providing a legitimate service, then there is no reason not to be transparent. I think them hiding behind a cloak of anonymity reveals the true intention and intended clientele of their "service".

Nobody is supporting criminals, but calling the government(s) to protect us from those individuals is playing right into the politicians hands.

Where did I ask the government to get involved??!!? I said people should look at what they are doing and see how it would stand up in the real world.

I asked bitmixer to prove they are a legitimate business is what I asked.

The problem and solution to this can be handled within the bitcoin community. But it doesn't help if you are putting words in people's mouth and supporting blatant criminality.

[itod]

But people providing "legitimate" bitcoin services are businesses and need to act like businesses.

What you are really saying here is "People providing "legitimate" bitcoin services are businesses and need to act like fiat businesses." This simply is not true. Bitcoin businesses aim not to hoard themselves into national borders. They aim not to have "default" currency in align to the owners nationality. They aim to be truly global and not submit themselves to any government authority. If you insist that Bitmixer owners submit themselves to the state authority they live in, they will get the court order to collect their users data in no time. Have you noticed that best BTC gambling site, Just-Dice, had to close themselves last month because Canada ordered them to collect all users data before their users can place a bet? Do you want the same to happen to Bitmixer?

[The Avenger]

If you insist that Bitmixer owners submit themselves to the state authority they live in

I did not say that.

They aim to be truly global and not submit themselves to any government authority.

You are saying they want to be above the law. I've got no problem with global currency, just not global theft/money laundering being seen as a-okay in the bitcoin community.

Have you noticed that best BTC gambling site, Just-Dice, had to close themselves last month because Canada ordered them to collect all users data before they can place a bet? Do you want the same to happen to Bitmixer?

I don't know whether Just-Dice were involved in a $750,000 theft and money laundering "service"?

But bitmixer were.

Do you think Shavers should have been able to defraud everyone and get away with it, because he was providing a "bitcoin ponzi service" He was only providing a service, right?

[itod]

If you insist that Bitmixer owners submit themselves to the state authority they live in

I did not say that.

Maybe you haven't noticed, but in fact you did say that. By reveling the Bimixer's owners identity and place they run their business from, they immediately submits themselves to the possible court order to collect their users data. Maybe there even should not be any court order at all, they may be obliged to that by the laws of that country, depends where they live in.

They aim to be truly global and not submit themselves to any government authority.

You are saying they want to be above the law.

I'm saying exactly that, "above the law" of the country they live in until the legislative in countries Bitcioin business operate from catch up with the idea of global cryptocurrency nobody has any authority of. It will happen in a few years (or decades?) but will eventually happen. Until then, I support the idea that the community should not force the business to lose their anonymity if they chose to be anonymous. Some businesses, like the exchanges, will choose not to be anonymous so they could convert fiat currencies to BTC, but some will chose to stay anonymous. We should support that.

[The Avenger]

We should support that.

I don't support
- theft
- blackmailing the victim into giving up claims on his own money
- money laundering the stolen funds
- defence of any of the above

[BurtW]

Privacy and mixing of BTC are both necessary for the proper functioning of the Bitcoin system.  If you are against both then Bitcoin is not for you.  So why are you wasting your time here?  We all want a properly functioning Bitcoin system, you want to change fundamental underpinnings of the system and in this way destroy it.  What is up with that?

[The Avenger]

Privacy and mixing of BTC are both necessary for the proper functioning of the Bitcoin system.

Mixing is NOT built into the bitcoin protocol. The day it is, I will agree with your statement. Until then...

And your statement is what I said earlier

Because you know that while some may argue on an intellectual, idealogical level that money laundering is good for bitcoin - in practice, the only people who use this service on a significant scale are those laundering stolen bitcoin.

i.e. criminals

[itod]

We should support that.

I don't support
- theft
- blackmailing the victim into giving up claims on his own money
- money laundering the stolen funds
- defence of any of the above

It's easy to judge the Bitmixer from the tower of moral high-castle, but you are member of this community and we have to put the pressure on Bitmixer for what it is doing - or not. We have a choice: accept, or not accept, the money laundering of the stolen funds. There's no middle ground, either Bitmixer has to collect the user's data and help the government agencies catch a thief, or let them do what they are doing because it is all part of the life of anonymous, global, unregulated cryptocurrency. If we choose to cry for governments to help us than we don't deserve that anonymity in the first place.

[BurtW]

Privacy and mixing of BTC are both necessary for the proper functioning of the Bitcoin system.

Mixing is NOT built into the bitcoin protocol. The day it is, I will agree with your statement. Until then...

Either mixing will become everyday OR coin listing will become everyday.  If mixing then Bitcoin will survive as money, if coin listing then Bitcoin will fail as money and become a collectible.  Hence my statement that mixing is necessary for Bitcoin to survive as money.

[The Avenger]

It's easy to judge the Bitmixer from the tower of moral high-castle, but you are member of this community and we have to put the pressure on Bitmixer for what it is doing - or not. We have a choice: accept, or not accept, the money laundering of the stolen funds. There's no middle ground, either Bitmixer has to collect the user's data and help the government agencies catch a thief, or let them do what they are doing because it is all part of the life of anonymous, global, unregulated, cryptocurrency. If we choose to cry for governments to help us than we don't deserve that anonymity in the first place.

You are not reading or listening at all. I have never said get the government involved.

The problem and solution to this can be handled within the bitcoin community.

Hence this discussion. And yes, it's total about putting pressure on bitmixer for what they are doing.

If the bitcoin community decide that what they have done is wrong and unconscionable, then the bitcoin community can instruct bitmixer to make amends that will satisfy the bitcoin community.

Either they claw back the mixed funds from the hacker. Or pay the outstanding bitcoin back to klee from their own pocket.

Otherwise, bitmixer are out of the bitcoin commmunity, as their criminality is not something accepted here. Although it feels like I'm the only person who thinks this way.

[BurtW]

It's easy to judge the Bitmixer from the tower of moral high-castle, but you are member of this community and we have to put the pressure on Bitmixer for what it is doing - or not. We have a choice: accept, or not accept, the money laundering of the stolen funds. There's no middle ground, either Bitmixer has to collect the user's data and help the government agencies catch a thief, or let them do what they are doing because it is all part of the life of anonymous, global, unregulated, cryptocurrency. If we choose to cry for governments to help us than we don't deserve that anonymity in the first place.

You are not reading or listening at all. I have never said get the government involved.

He is spot on.  It is you that is not listening to us.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Privacy is a double edged sword. We, as Bitcoiners, need to either accept that or watch Bitcoin destroyed.

[The Avenger]

Privacy is a double edged sword. We, as Bitcoiners, need to either accept that or watch Bitcoin destroyed.

But millions of dollars being stolen, blackmail, money laundering and that being condoned by the bitcoin community won't? Right.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Privacy is a double edged sword. We, as Bitcoiners, need to either accept that or watch Bitcoin destroyed.

But millions of dollars being stolen, blackmail, money laundering and that being condoned by the bitcoin community won't? Right.

That's exactly what makes privacy a double edged sword. I suggest considering the deep implications of what you are pushing.

[The Avenger]

Privacy is a double edged sword. We, as Bitcoiners, need to either accept that or watch Bitcoin destroyed.

But millions of dollars being stolen, blackmail, money laundering and that being condoned by the bitcoin community won't? Right.

That's exactly what makes privacy a double edged sword. I suggest considering the deep implications of what you are pushing.

Says the guy with trust of -463

Stole 4100 BTC from everyone in a large scam known as "Inputs.io"

[BurtW]

Hence this discussion. And yes, it's total about putting pressure on bitmixer for what they are doing.

If the bitcoin community decide that what they have done is wrong and unconscionable, then the bitcoin community can instruct bitmixer to make amends that will satisfy the bitcoin community.

Either they claw back the mixed funds from the hacker. Or pay the outstanding bitcoin back to klee from their own pocket.

Otherwise, bitmixer are out of the bitcoin commmunity, as their criminality is not something accepted here. Although it feels like I'm the only person who thinks this way.

You may not be alone but what you and all the other anti-privacy advocates need to realize is just how important and critical privacy is to the rest of us.  You might as well go into an NRA convention and preach that they should all turn over their guns to the local sherrif.  What you are not getting is that you are talking to the Bitcoin community and we are saying no, we are not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  What you are saying in this post above will never be accepted by the community because that would destroy Bitcoin.

Or is the destruction of Bitcoin your actual goal?

The fact you use the term claw back is very telling of your state.  You fear freedom and privacy - you want money that can be clawed back, again Bitcoin is not for you.  Go back to the safety of USD and be happy and fear free.

[The Avenger]

Hence this discussion. And yes, it's total about putting pressure on bitmixer for what they are doing.

If the bitcoin community decide that what they have done is wrong and unconscionable, then the bitcoin community can instruct bitmixer to make amends that will satisfy the bitcoin community.

Either they claw back the mixed funds from the hacker. Or pay the outstanding bitcoin back to klee from their own pocket.

Otherwise, bitmixer are out of the bitcoin commmunity, as their criminality is not something accepted here. Although it feels like I'm the only person who thinks this way.

You may not be alone but what you and all the other anti-privacy advocates need to realize is just how important and critical privacy is to the rest of us.  You might as well go into an NRA convention and preach that they should all turn over their guns to the local sherrif.  What you are not getting is that you are talking to the Bitcoin community and we are saying no, we are not willing to throw the baby out with the bathwater.  What you are saying in this post above will never be accepted by the community because that would destroy Bitcoin.

Or is the destruction of Bitcoin your actual goal?

The fact you use the term claw back is very telling of your state.  You fear freedom and privacy - you want money that can be clawed back, again Bitcoin is not for you.  Go back to the safety of USD and be happy and fear free.

You are thick and can't/don't read.  I am not anti-privacy. Also, you do not speak for the entire bitcoin community. Read what I wrote and comment appropriately. Or else go away if you can't comprehend what is being said and discuss it without putting words into my mouth.

[baby222]

my god good luck guy , wish catch  the thief ASAP

[alfabitcoin]

Well, bitmixer did not know that coins were stolen, they provide mixing service to anyone. Just because they confirmed afterwards of hacker using their service does not make them involved in the thieft.

I hope klee get his funds back but we all need to take security very seriusly.

[valerian253]

For f#ck's sake, PLEASE get up on multi-sig for personal security as outlined by Bitcoin Core dev Manuel Aráoz in this video:

http://www.bitcoinmediaproject.com/blog/manuel-araoz-multisig/

#NOMOREHACKS