4 ms·

Bitcoin is not private. Wallets are ephemeral, however the coins themselves can be tracked. Monero, on the other hand...

• asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
  Here's one possible recipe for fixing this issue: - Ban anonymous cryptocurrencies. - In pseudonymous cryptos, mark any address that has been the destination of a ransomware payment or demand as tainted. Any net positive transaction from a tainted source wallet marks the destination wallet as tainted. (I.e. you are obligated to return tainted monies to tainted wallets if they send money to you.) - Exchanges are forbidden to deal with tainted wallets, or with any exchange that deals with tainted wallets. While you're at it, I guess you could mark any wallet funded at an exchange that doesn't KYC as tainted as well, to limit the use of crypto for money laundering. I'm guessing we're going to figure a lot of this stuff out in the next 10-20 years, if the crypto craze doesn't die off naturally during that timeframe.
  • tnzm 5y ago
    How would you ban an anonymous cryptocurrency?
    • asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
      Basically, in order for a wallet to be "green" it needs to be associated with a real world identity and, if it serves as an exchange, it also needs to follow the policy not to exchange anonymous into pseudonymous. Any wallet that doesn't follow this policy is tainted. At fiat offramps, seize monies sourced from tainted wallets as it's presumptively illegal.
      • tnzm 5y ago
        How do you intend on preventing people from just exchanging crypto for goods instead of having to go through offramps?
        • asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
          The threat of being charged with money laundering? The enormous friction that such a transaction would encounter compared to the status quo?
          • tnzm 5y ago
            Ah yes, threats and bureaucracy, the go-to tools of the statist. Reminds me, more than anything else, of all the joy sparked worldwide for the better part of the 20th century by the War on Drugs. In your ideal world, is any cash transaction also "presumed guilty" (hah!) of money laundering? The real fault lies with institutions rushing to half-assedly digitize so now they're wide open to script kiddies, and with enterprise IT providers doing a piss-poor job at doing correct software engineering. And now you're suggesting more savagery like it's some sort of solution to anything at all?
            • asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
              Yeah I mean we have these requirements for banks. They seem to work pretty well for preventing bank system usage in ransomware. So, at least at a glance, I think something in this direction would work. The war on drugs is bad because it doesn't work, and because drugs cause less harm than fighting them does. It's not an apt comparison to the situation we're talking about.
              • tnzm 5y ago
                As far as comparisons go, let's try this on for size. Which of the following causes more harm in total: (a) a ransomware gang attacking the computers of a hospital, thus endangering the lives of its patients; or (b) law-abiding citizens adhering to a historically contingent economic system which leaves millions of people without access to healthcare?
                • asdfasgasdgasdg 5y ago
                  I think it's best to talk about specific things rather than broadening every conversation to encompass the entire economic system and the problems with it. Probably someone wants to have that conversation with you, but that someone isn't me.