4 ms·

From the analysis being shared around, ~10% of transactions via TC were from hacks, the rest the vast majority are individuals protecting their privacy. as in

From the analysis being shared around, ~10% of transactions via TC were from hacks, the rest the vast majority are individuals protecting their privacy. as in their human right to do. its a block of code that uses cryptography to hide information. like tor or https. there are many many valid reasons to do this. i know hackernews doesn't like crypto, but come on maybe question why we are fine with this government overreach? maybe question is this a trend we want to support as "hackers"? could we consider the fact that all governments in the world have a history of abusing surveillance to harm their citizens? you know not long ago i could be locked up for being gay, maybe standing up for cryptography is a good thing to do? but oh no bitcoin is icky good job government protec me from the bad ideas.

colinsane 4y ago
> the vast majority are individuals protecting their privacy. i get your point but i don't know if it's true. on various occasions, i've wanted to (1) anonymize my funds before sending them to a discreet cause and (2) generate return on the funds i hold long term. for (1) i specifically avoid TC because going through a tumbler points a huge target of "this is suspicious activity", thereby drawing more attention to me specifically (attention isn't good for privacy). for (2) TC became an appealing place to park ETH particularly after ETH-denominated yields plummeted during this last DeFi crash (TC pays fees to the mixing pool). do we know how much of that "90% of non-hacked funds" involved in TC were provided by privacy advocates v.s. good ol' capitalists seeking returns from laundering?
fleddr 4y ago
Thank you for your comment to restore my sanity. It's absolutely mind blowing how seemingly progressive people cheer when authority is rapidly expanded at the cost of privacy and personal freedom.
- jokethrowaway 4y ago
  Progressivism is all about authority, if you hadn't noticed in the last 3 years I agree it's weird to remember the past when the opposite was true
phatfish 4y ago
Is there an impartial source on this "analysis"? That would exclude cryptobros on Twitter.

colinsane 4y ago

> the vast majority are individuals protecting their privacy. i get your point but i don't know if it's true. on various occasions, i've wanted to (1) anonymize my funds before sending them to a discreet cause and (2) generate return on the funds i hold long term. for (1) i specifically avoid TC because going through a tumbler points a huge target of "this is suspicious activity", thereby drawing more attention to me specifically (attention isn't good for privacy). for (2) TC became an appealing place to park ETH particularly after ETH-denominated yields plummeted during this last DeFi crash (TC pays fees to the mixing pool). do we know how much of that "90% of non-hacked funds" involved in TC were provided by privacy advocates v.s. good ol' capitalists seeking returns from laundering?

fleddr 4y ago

Thank you for your comment to restore my sanity. It's absolutely mind blowing how seemingly progressive people cheer when authority is rapidly expanded at the cost of privacy and personal freedom.

jokethrowaway 4y ago
Progressivism is all about authority, if you hadn't noticed in the last 3 years I agree it's weird to remember the past when the opposite was true

phatfish 4y ago

Is there an impartial source on this "analysis"? That would exclude cryptobros on Twitter.