4 ms·

Pretty dumb but not surprising. Private transactions should not be something that is criminalized, but it is taking a trajectory like reefer madness and the dru

Pretty dumb but not surprising. Private transactions should not be something that is criminalized, but it is taking a trajectory like reefer madness and the drug war. User seeking financial privacy is now put in the same group as terrorists. Reminds me of arguments being made by governments around tightening the use of end-to-end encrypted chat apps. Since this is a decentralized application running as an Ethereum smart contract with IPFS[1] interface, the move will not actually deter any state actors from using this, but will criminalize and stigmatize regular users who want to anonymize their Ethereum transactions. The end result may be as the government wants: force users back to fiat so they can maintain maximum control of funds, and anyone left in the mixer is default a criminal. [1] ipfs://QmU3j1B1UagFbfqgwWBu3yk1La657y8hoGoA24fG3QpPjf

tantalor 4y ago
If crypto mixers are outlawed, only outlaws will use crypto mixers. This doesn't actually sound so bad. If you seek transactional privacy, then maybe don't use global systems. Try back alley instead.
- whatisweb3 4y ago
  Users will be forced into other systems that are less tested and less regulated, forced to tie their wallet to the public ledger, or forced to pay high fees to centralized exchanges to achieve similar privacy. One compromise would be a US-based smart contract mixer that provides strong privacy but allows the US government to request transaction history in extreme cases. These addresses can then be sanctioned, frozen by USDC and barred by all regulated CEX.
  - uncomputation 4y ago
    That’s not a compromise at all to me. That’s total capitulation. Once any party has the right to sanction or ban and CEX comply with government orders, what is the point?
    - whatisweb3 4y ago
      The US government already has the right to sanction crypto addresses, they just did today with Tornado Cash. USDC also has the right to freeze funds, they have done it already. I would rather see the US support privacy, but if they refuse to allow their citizens the right to financial privacy, then at least they could provide better systems for regular users to keep their crypto transactions private from the entire world.
- null0pointer 4y ago
  > If crypto mixers are outlawed, only outlaws will use crypto mixers. This is only true in the tautological sense. Crypto mixers are outlawed > All users of crypto mixers are therefore deemed outlaws > Only outlaws use crypto mixers. An otherwise innocent person who has never heard about the sanctions may continue to "launder" their crypto unawares because they don't want everyone they transact with to know their total balance. I would not consider them an outlaw but they may be in for a nasty surprise now.
  - tantalor 4y ago
    In case you are unfamiliar, that was a reference to an old cliche about gun bans: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/201803/only-outlaws-will-have-guns https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/2018...

tantalor 4y ago

If crypto mixers are outlawed, only outlaws will use crypto mixers. This doesn't actually sound so bad. If you seek transactional privacy, then maybe don't use global systems. Try back alley instead.

whatisweb3 4y ago
Users will be forced into other systems that are less tested and less regulated, forced to tie their wallet to the public ledger, or forced to pay high fees to centralized exchanges to achieve similar privacy. One compromise would be a US-based smart contract mixer that provides strong privacy but allows the US government to request transaction history in extreme cases. These addresses can then be sanctioned, frozen by USDC and barred by all regulated CEX.
- uncomputation 4y ago
  That’s not a compromise at all to me. That’s total capitulation. Once any party has the right to sanction or ban and CEX comply with government orders, what is the point?
  - whatisweb3 4y ago
    The US government already has the right to sanction crypto addresses, they just did today with Tornado Cash. USDC also has the right to freeze funds, they have done it already. I would rather see the US support privacy, but if they refuse to allow their citizens the right to financial privacy, then at least they could provide better systems for regular users to keep their crypto transactions private from the entire world.
null0pointer 4y ago
> If crypto mixers are outlawed, only outlaws will use crypto mixers. This is only true in the tautological sense. Crypto mixers are outlawed > All users of crypto mixers are therefore deemed outlaws > Only outlaws use crypto mixers. An otherwise innocent person who has never heard about the sanctions may continue to "launder" their crypto unawares because they don't want everyone they transact with to know their total balance. I would not consider them an outlaw but they may be in for a nasty surprise now.
- tantalor 4y ago
  In case you are unfamiliar, that was a reference to an old cliche about gun bans: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/201803/only-outlaws-will-have-guns https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/ethics-everyone/2018...