2 ms·
I think David Gerard summarises nicely here [1]: > If the ether is proceeds from a crime, then this is literally just money laundering. > There’s also this we
by d4rti 4y ago
I think David Gerard summarises nicely here [1]:
> If the ether is proceeds from a crime, then this is literally just money laundering.
> There’s also this weird delusion that if you put some dirty money in a box with clean money and shake it, then it all comes out as clean — and not that it all comes out as dirty.
> The bad takes were all variations of the fundamental fallacy of cryptocurrency: that you can code your way around the rules of society.
1: https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/08/09/us-sanctions-tornado-cash-and-crypto-shrieks-in-horror/ https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/08/09/us-sanctions...
- ohgodplsno 4y ago> There’s also this weird delusion that if you put some dirty money in a box with clean money and shake it, then it all comes out as clean — and not that it all comes out as dirty. That's the exact take that brought to closure of tornado.cash. If you start with two distinct piles and at the end you only get one some-of-these-might-be-dirty pile, the solution to this is to destroy the mixer, not to sift through bank notes. The reason why we don't consider everything that has touched dirty money to be tainted is explicitly to protect people who may have been inadvertently brought into it.