5 ms·

Seems impractical to expect end users to monitor the history of where money sent to them comes from. Would expect enforcement to be at the currency exchange poi

Seems impractical to expect end users to monitor the history of where money sent to them comes from. Would expect enforcement to be at the currency exchange point.

PKop 4y ago
>Seems impractical Of course. Making it impractical through enforcement of laws will benefit governments efforts to crush crypto, no? >Would expect Only if you believed government wanted crypto to succeed, yes?
yieldcrv 4y ago
users should just get used to recreating their own transaction obfuscation, mostly to avoid getting flagged at exchanges what someone on twitter wrote is pretty apt: deposit the Ether in AAVE to borrow USDC, move the USDC to another address and send that to Coinbase to cash out pretty much just walk away from the deposited Ether, let that get collateral called eventually. The protocol can enjoy its sanctioned money.
- rnk 4y ago
  If you purchase eth now, how can you be sure you don't have eth that came from tornado or some other prescribed system? If I buy through a reputable seller, say coinbase, will they be able to certify my crypto is valid?
  - cypress66 4y ago
    Most eth will be connected in some shape or form to TC. It's just whatever arbitrary number of degrees of separation you consider related to TC.
kube-system 4y ago
Isn't the whole point of cryptocurrency to remove any third parties from the transaction? You can't have your cake and eat it too.
IshKebab 4y ago
It's not impractical at all. Laws around money laundering and handling stolen goods generally say that you're at fault if you had a reasonable suspicion that the item was the proceeds of crime.
- mrtranscendence 4y ago
  Surely the post you're replying to has in mind cases where there is no reasonable suspicion?
  - bee_rider 4y ago
    At this point that would include any ETH that you can't fully trace the provenance of, right?
- naillo 4y ago
  Guess it would have been nicer of the donator to send it in small increments instead so plausible deniability (or actual non detection) was more possible.
pavlov 4y ago
Remember the crypto rallying call “Be your own bank”? Well, this is what it actually means: you’re on the hook for enforcing sanctions and all kinds of shit that banks do.
- scottiebarnes 4y ago
  Are you on the hook for when you sell your couch on craigslist for dollars? If not, why not?
  - rtkwe 4y ago
    What do you mean on the hook for what? You're supposed to include that in your EOY taxes and AFAIK you're also not allowed to sell to sanctioned entities. No one will care in all likelihood but you're still not supposed to.
    - scottiebarnes 4y ago
      So you need to do a background check on anyone you sell to, so you don't give money to sanctioned entities?

Seems impractical to expect end users to monitor the history of where money sent to them comes from. Would expect enforcement to be at the currency exchange point.

PKop 4y ago

>Seems impractical Of course. Making it impractical through enforcement of laws will benefit governments efforts to crush crypto, no? >Would expect Only if you believed government wanted crypto to succeed, yes?

yieldcrv 4y ago

users should just get used to recreating their own transaction obfuscation, mostly to avoid getting flagged at exchanges what someone on twitter wrote is pretty apt: deposit the Ether in AAVE to borrow USDC, move the USDC to another address and send that to Coinbase to cash out pretty much just walk away from the deposited Ether, let that get collateral called eventually. The protocol can enjoy its sanctioned money.

rnk 4y ago
If you purchase eth now, how can you be sure you don't have eth that came from tornado or some other prescribed system? If I buy through a reputable seller, say coinbase, will they be able to certify my crypto is valid?
- cypress66 4y ago
  Most eth will be connected in some shape or form to TC. It's just whatever arbitrary number of degrees of separation you consider related to TC.

kube-system 4y ago

Isn't the whole point of cryptocurrency to remove any third parties from the transaction? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

IshKebab 4y ago

It's not impractical at all. Laws around money laundering and handling stolen goods generally say that you're at fault if you had a reasonable suspicion that the item was the proceeds of crime.

mrtranscendence 4y ago
Surely the post you're replying to has in mind cases where there is no reasonable suspicion?
- bee_rider 4y ago
  At this point that would include any ETH that you can't fully trace the provenance of, right?
naillo 4y ago
Guess it would have been nicer of the donator to send it in small increments instead so plausible deniability (or actual non detection) was more possible.

pavlov 4y ago

Remember the crypto rallying call “Be your own bank”? Well, this is what it actually means: you’re on the hook for enforcing sanctions and all kinds of shit that banks do.

scottiebarnes 4y ago
Are you on the hook for when you sell your couch on craigslist for dollars? If not, why not?
- rtkwe 4y ago
  What do you mean on the hook for what? You're supposed to include that in your EOY taxes and AFAIK you're also not allowed to sell to sanctioned entities. No one will care in all likelihood but you're still not supposed to.
  - scottiebarnes 4y ago
    So you need to do a background check on anyone you sell to, so you don't give money to sanctioned entities?