3 ms·

You have to remember that access to the US financial system is a privilege not a right. To be granted that privilege, a financial institution has a number of ob

by jmyeet 4y ago

You have to remember that access to the US financial system is a privilege not a right. To be granted that privilege, a financial institution has a number of obligations. Thesee include various KYC/AML obligations. So this isn't Tornado Cash "might be used for illegal purposes" so much as it's clear evidence they're failing to meet their legal obligations. There's a larger point here too: as much as proponents tour crypto's extragovernmental status, it would take very little effort by governments to completely cripple any crypto assset in practical terms.

bruiseralmighty 4y ago
So proposing a hypothetical. If the only issue here is obligation to the U.S. financial system what if the only on-off ramps to e-coins were cash only? So as an individual, I convert my cash to e-coins through some e-coin dedicated ATM-like machine. And I can redeem my e-coins for cash at another e-coin-ATM somewhere else (maybe anywhere in the world). Would coin pools like Tornado Cash then be acceptable? It would not be tied in any way to the credit or banking systems, it takes cash only, and then just a basic utility internet connection. Maintenance for the machines and paying the internet utility would just be a fraction of a percentage fee on each transaction. Now all e-coins would simply exist as a privacy themed alternative ecosystem to cash. Since we are not joining the U.S. financial system, these e-coins should not be expected to have any obligations to that system correct?