4 ms·

Just because someone uses a mixer/coinjoin/atomic swaps etc it isn’t money laundering. If the US really know that money is being laundered, they can send an ema

Just because someone uses a mixer/coinjoin/atomic swaps etc it isn’t money laundering. If the US really know that money is being laundered, they can send an email to the developer and tell him to not accept funds from those addresses. I doubt that this happened.

superchroma 4y ago
Only criminals need this technology, and usage from non-criminals helps hide real laundering. I see people are downvoting this post. Name a legitimate usage. I sure as hell can't think of one.
- colechristensen 4y ago
  The basis for crypto transactions on most blockchains is a public ledger whereby if you don't launder your money, anyone can see every transaction you make, anyone you transact with can see your whole history. "need" is a value judgement, but people in general would certainly dislike the premise of using money where everything you did was public knowledge.
  - salawat 4y ago
    Welcome to why cryptocurrency was a bad idea touted as the biggest thing since sliced bread, and why authorities may actually push things in that direction once they have the tooling right Y'all played yourselves tbqh.
  - superchroma 4y ago
    Ok, so there's no need. There's want, but no need.
saalweachter 4y ago
> Just because someone [does something mechanically identical to money laundering] it isn’t money laundering. I'm not actually sure this is the case under the law. Removing the technology from the mix, one of the better-known AML laws is that you can't structure your transactions for the purpose of avoiding the $10,000 transaction threshold (at which point the banks report the transaction to the feds for them to keep track of it). Note that -- as it is commonly stated, anyway, I haven't read the statute in question -- it doesn't matter why you are structuring your transactions to avoid the threshold, just doing it gets you in trouble.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Ferrotin 4y ago
  What the law is depends on the country, and I’m not familiar with Netherlands law, but this isn’t about structuring, because there isn’t bank reporting of Ethereum transactions. The parent is correct in some jurisdictions (like the U.S.) that merely hiding transactions isn’t money laundering.
colechristensen 4y ago
One of the issues that resulted in US sanctions is explicitly what you said they could do… they refused to enact any controls for just this kind of thing.

superchroma 4y ago

Only criminals need this technology, and usage from non-criminals helps hide real laundering. I see people are downvoting this post. Name a legitimate usage. I sure as hell can't think of one.

colechristensen 4y ago
The basis for crypto transactions on most blockchains is a public ledger whereby if you don't launder your money, anyone can see every transaction you make, anyone you transact with can see your whole history. "need" is a value judgement, but people in general would certainly dislike the premise of using money where everything you did was public knowledge.
- salawat 4y ago
  Welcome to why cryptocurrency was a bad idea touted as the biggest thing since sliced bread, and why authorities may actually push things in that direction once they have the tooling right Y'all played yourselves tbqh.
- superchroma 4y ago
  Ok, so there's no need. There's want, but no need.

saalweachter 4y ago

> Just because someone [does something mechanically identical to money laundering] it isn’t money laundering. I'm not actually sure this is the case under the law. Removing the technology from the mix, one of the better-known AML laws is that you can't structure your transactions for the purpose of avoiding the $10,000 transaction threshold (at which point the banks report the transaction to the feds for them to keep track of it). Note that -- as it is commonly stated, anyway, I haven't read the statute in question -- it doesn't matter why you are structuring your transactions to avoid the threshold, just doing it gets you in trouble.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Ferrotin 4y ago
What the law is depends on the country, and I’m not familiar with Netherlands law, but this isn’t about structuring, because there isn’t bank reporting of Ethereum transactions. The parent is correct in some jurisdictions (like the U.S.) that merely hiding transactions isn’t money laundering.

colechristensen 4y ago

One of the issues that resulted in US sanctions is explicitly what you said they could do… they refused to enact any controls for just this kind of thing.