4 ms·

Absolutely tragic that the US government's war on anonymous transactions is getting in the way of FOSS receiving donations here. I presume the donations itself

Absolutely tragic that the US government's war on anonymous transactions is getting in the way of FOSS receiving donations here. I presume the donations itself is an attempt to make a statement, and I applaud it. Make people feel the impact of this attempt of absolute financial control without hurting them. I hope the developer can get access to the funds in the end!

ram4jesus 4y ago
If someone donated me a brand new mid-engine Corvette, it would be a huge headache because I couldn't afford the taxes & maintenance. I think in this case, FOSS would stand to gain more by not receiving money-laundered transactions which, as someone else pointed out in this discussion, would create a compliance nightmare. To put it this way: would you accept 1,000 dollars from me if it would take you 100 hours of your life to receive?
- mrtranscendence 4y ago
  I suppose that in this case the project received enough money to hire two lawyers to deal with it full time for a year, so as long as there's a chance it could still be worth it. I'd put the odds pretty low, though.
- Dylan16807 4y ago
  If someone gives you a brand new car, and you really don't want to be bothered with it, I think you could arrange a sale for 2/3 its value in a couple hours. > To put it this way: would you accept 1,000 dollars from me if it would take you 100 hours of your life to receive? Does that really apply here? If this money can't be touched, then it's a minor time sink with zero benefit. If there is a way to dump in 100 hours and extract the money, it's worth it because it's so much. That analogy is more fitting to a 1 ETH donation.
- Ajedi32 4y ago
  Right, and that's the point. If an open source project can't receive an anonymous donation without a "compliance nightmare", then what does that say about the laws and regulations which created that nightmare in the first place? Keep in mind that there is, as of right now, no evidence that this cash was "laundered" or in any way associated with any nefarious activity. It's merely anonymous.
  - acdha 4y ago
    > If an open source project can't receive an anonymous donation without a "compliance nightmare", then what does that say about the laws and regulations which created that nightmare in the first place? This makes it sound like this happened in a vacuum, but those laws and regulations are in response to real world events and you have to consider that when talking about whether laws are unreasonable. For example, many people would have ethical objections to accepting a donation from an unknown source (what if the money was generated from some activity I object to?), don't want to deal with potential hassle if the source does something to trigger legal attention, or the risk of a non-zero chance of some unsavory sorts showing up and “suggesting” that you give them some fraction of it as clean cash, etc. Allowing anonymous transactions means that the latter two kinds of events will happen on an somewhat regular basis, which is why most people accept laws requiring financial institutions to know their customers' identities as a necessary cost. If you say magic internet money is exempted from those requirements, well, there are going to be a whole bunch of surprisingly well-funded open source projects in Mexico paying salaries which make FAANG employees weep with envy.
  - pavlov 4y ago
    Who can receive $400k today from an unknown source without any questions asked? Nobody — not an ordinary person, not a small business, not a foundation. What exactly makes an open source project so special that it should be exempt from the regulations that apply to everyone else? And if that were the case, what would prevent an open source project from being just a smokescreen for something else? Obscure API implementations paying pseudonymous developers for PRs with anonymous donation money seems like a fine kind of laundering operation.
    - Ajedi32 4y ago
      > Obscure API implementations paying pseudonymous developers for PRs with anonymous donation money seems like a fine kind of laundering operation. If that happens then you investigate, find out if it is a money laundering scheme, and bring a criminal prosecution if it is. You don't just assume they're guilty because the transaction was anonymous, or ban privacy tools and conduct mass surveillance on every transaction to make sure none of them are suspicious. It's kinda wild how many people on HN suddenly become anti decentralization and pro mass surveillance whenever the topic of cryptocurrency comes up.
- bergenty 4y ago
  What are you talking about? You just sell the thing immediately.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- ascar 4y ago
  > To put it this way: would you accept [350,000] dollars from me if it would take you 100 hours of your life to receive? Fixed the amount for you. Yes, absolutely. I would spend 100 hours to receive the 350,000. That's 3500 per hour.
  - ram4jesus 4y ago
    Thank you for the correction. Assuming the money would be ethical and cleared by the government (two separate things), I too would absolutely take it. :P
colesantiago 4y ago
Or just send this most likely sanctioned laundered cryptocurrency to a dead wallet and not deal with a incoming legal headaches
TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago
Thanks for this comment even though it's being downvoted. This is a huge overstep to sanction a set of open source protocols. Funny enough, even VB himself has 'Tainted' Eth in his wallet. He's used tornado cash on three different occassions.
belltaco 4y ago
>Absolutely tragic that the US government's war on anonymous transactions is getting in the way of FOSS receiving donations here No, the intent of the donation is to cause trouble to FOSS projects and waste their time. Not sure why you're appreciating this. It's like donating stolen property to the local orphanage.
- anvic 4y ago
  Is the money known to be stolen?
  - loeg 4y ago
    Dirty money in, dirty money out.
  - solveit 4y ago
    If the donor is making a statement, it would be strategically best if the money could be proven at the donor's convenience not to be stolen.
kube-system 4y ago
The sanctions caused the donation. Criminals with big bucks in their account are blowing it on donations because they can't convert it to Lamborghinis, hookers, and mansions anymore. Tornado Cash wasn't some haven for big money philanthropy pre-sanctions.
- solveit 4y ago
  You seem to be going so far out of your way to be uncharitable that you've stopped caring about whether your statement makes the slightest bit of sense. Surely there's still some form of mindless consumption available that would provide more entertainment than donations to FOSS projects? It's not a very high bar to clear?
  - kube-system 4y ago
    The folks running ransomware rings make a lot of money. Sending $400k to a project they like might be their mindless entertainment. There's only so many ways to spend money that doesn't involve meatspace transactions... which you'd probably want to avoid if you know your wallet is being scrutinized by the best-funded investigators on the planet.
- xur17 4y ago
  Do you have evidence to back this assertion? > Tornado Cash wasn't some haven for big money philanthropy pre-sanctions. Vitalik used it to donate to Ukraine [0], and there are several other examples here [1] as well. [0] https://forkast.news/vitalik-buterin-says-used-tornado-cash-donate-ukraine/ https://forkast.news/vitalik-buterin-says-used-tornado-cash-... [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-08/coinbase-backs-lawsuit-against-us-treasury-for-tornado-sanctions https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-08/coinbase-...
  - kube-system 4y ago
    I'll go further than your examples: I am sure hundreds of Ethereum enthusiasts have sent pocket change to Ukraine with it. Nobody was sending a half-million dollars to FOSS projects with it pre-sanctions.
mmastrac 4y ago
Are you sure this money isn't stolen? We just don't know. If I was a charity and got a suitcase full of dirty cash, I wouldn't necessarily be upset if I had to jump through hoops to make use of it.
- drdrey 4y ago
  If someone pays you in cash, how do you know the money was not stolen?
  - mrgoldenbrown 4y ago
    You don't know. That's why there are rules about when to report large cash transactions. For example: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understand-how-to-report-large-cash-transactions https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understand-how-to-report-large-...
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
mrgoldenbrown 4y ago
If the donor tried to make a statement by getting a FOSS developer in trouble with the IRS, that is not something to applaud! The people being who would be punished here are not the people attempting absolute financial control. I would not very publicly send a "donation" of valuable but illegal drugs to my favorite charity, even though I support ending the war on drugs.

ram4jesus 4y ago

If someone donated me a brand new mid-engine Corvette, it would be a huge headache because I couldn't afford the taxes & maintenance. I think in this case, FOSS would stand to gain more by not receiving money-laundered transactions which, as someone else pointed out in this discussion, would create a compliance nightmare. To put it this way: would you accept 1,000 dollars from me if it would take you 100 hours of your life to receive?

mrtranscendence 4y ago
I suppose that in this case the project received enough money to hire two lawyers to deal with it full time for a year, so as long as there's a chance it could still be worth it. I'd put the odds pretty low, though.
Dylan16807 4y ago
If someone gives you a brand new car, and you really don't want to be bothered with it, I think you could arrange a sale for 2/3 its value in a couple hours. > To put it this way: would you accept 1,000 dollars from me if it would take you 100 hours of your life to receive? Does that really apply here? If this money can't be touched, then it's a minor time sink with zero benefit. If there is a way to dump in 100 hours and extract the money, it's worth it because it's so much. That analogy is more fitting to a 1 ETH donation.
Ajedi32 4y ago
Right, and that's the point. If an open source project can't receive an anonymous donation without a "compliance nightmare", then what does that say about the laws and regulations which created that nightmare in the first place? Keep in mind that there is, as of right now, no evidence that this cash was "laundered" or in any way associated with any nefarious activity. It's merely anonymous.
- acdha 4y ago
  > If an open source project can't receive an anonymous donation without a "compliance nightmare", then what does that say about the laws and regulations which created that nightmare in the first place? This makes it sound like this happened in a vacuum, but those laws and regulations are in response to real world events and you have to consider that when talking about whether laws are unreasonable. For example, many people would have ethical objections to accepting a donation from an unknown source (what if the money was generated from some activity I object to?), don't want to deal with potential hassle if the source does something to trigger legal attention, or the risk of a non-zero chance of some unsavory sorts showing up and “suggesting” that you give them some fraction of it as clean cash, etc. Allowing anonymous transactions means that the latter two kinds of events will happen on an somewhat regular basis, which is why most people accept laws requiring financial institutions to know their customers' identities as a necessary cost. If you say magic internet money is exempted from those requirements, well, there are going to be a whole bunch of surprisingly well-funded open source projects in Mexico paying salaries which make FAANG employees weep with envy.
- pavlov 4y ago
  Who can receive $400k today from an unknown source without any questions asked? Nobody — not an ordinary person, not a small business, not a foundation. What exactly makes an open source project so special that it should be exempt from the regulations that apply to everyone else? And if that were the case, what would prevent an open source project from being just a smokescreen for something else? Obscure API implementations paying pseudonymous developers for PRs with anonymous donation money seems like a fine kind of laundering operation.
  - Ajedi32 4y ago
    > Obscure API implementations paying pseudonymous developers for PRs with anonymous donation money seems like a fine kind of laundering operation. If that happens then you investigate, find out if it is a money laundering scheme, and bring a criminal prosecution if it is. You don't just assume they're guilty because the transaction was anonymous, or ban privacy tools and conduct mass surveillance on every transaction to make sure none of them are suspicious. It's kinda wild how many people on HN suddenly become anti decentralization and pro mass surveillance whenever the topic of cryptocurrency comes up.
bergenty 4y ago
What are you talking about? You just sell the thing immediately.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
ascar 4y ago
> To put it this way: would you accept [350,000] dollars from me if it would take you 100 hours of your life to receive? Fixed the amount for you. Yes, absolutely. I would spend 100 hours to receive the 350,000. That's 3500 per hour.
- ram4jesus 4y ago
  Thank you for the correction. Assuming the money would be ethical and cleared by the government (two separate things), I too would absolutely take it. :P

colesantiago 4y ago

Or just send this most likely sanctioned laundered cryptocurrency to a dead wallet and not deal with a incoming legal headaches

TrapLord_Rhodo 4y ago

Thanks for this comment even though it's being downvoted. This is a huge overstep to sanction a set of open source protocols. Funny enough, even VB himself has 'Tainted' Eth in his wallet. He's used tornado cash on three different occassions.

belltaco 4y ago

>Absolutely tragic that the US government's war on anonymous transactions is getting in the way of FOSS receiving donations here No, the intent of the donation is to cause trouble to FOSS projects and waste their time. Not sure why you're appreciating this. It's like donating stolen property to the local orphanage.

anvic 4y ago
Is the money known to be stolen?
- loeg 4y ago
  Dirty money in, dirty money out.
- solveit 4y ago
  If the donor is making a statement, it would be strategically best if the money could be proven at the donor's convenience not to be stolen.

kube-system 4y ago

The sanctions caused the donation. Criminals with big bucks in their account are blowing it on donations because they can't convert it to Lamborghinis, hookers, and mansions anymore. Tornado Cash wasn't some haven for big money philanthropy pre-sanctions.

solveit 4y ago
You seem to be going so far out of your way to be uncharitable that you've stopped caring about whether your statement makes the slightest bit of sense. Surely there's still some form of mindless consumption available that would provide more entertainment than donations to FOSS projects? It's not a very high bar to clear?
- kube-system 4y ago
  The folks running ransomware rings make a lot of money. Sending $400k to a project they like might be their mindless entertainment. There's only so many ways to spend money that doesn't involve meatspace transactions... which you'd probably want to avoid if you know your wallet is being scrutinized by the best-funded investigators on the planet.
xur17 4y ago
Do you have evidence to back this assertion? > Tornado Cash wasn't some haven for big money philanthropy pre-sanctions. Vitalik used it to donate to Ukraine [0], and there are several other examples here [1] as well. [0] https://forkast.news/vitalik-buterin-says-used-tornado-cash-donate-ukraine/ https://forkast.news/vitalik-buterin-says-used-tornado-cash-... [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-08/coinbase-backs-lawsuit-against-us-treasury-for-tornado-sanctions https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-08/coinbase-...
- kube-system 4y ago
  I'll go further than your examples: I am sure hundreds of Ethereum enthusiasts have sent pocket change to Ukraine with it. Nobody was sending a half-million dollars to FOSS projects with it pre-sanctions.

mmastrac 4y ago

Are you sure this money isn't stolen? We just don't know. If I was a charity and got a suitcase full of dirty cash, I wouldn't necessarily be upset if I had to jump through hoops to make use of it.

drdrey 4y ago
If someone pays you in cash, how do you know the money was not stolen?
- mrgoldenbrown 4y ago
  You don't know. That's why there are rules about when to report large cash transactions. For example: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understand-how-to-report-large-cash-transactions https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understand-how-to-report-large-...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

mrgoldenbrown 4y ago

If the donor tried to make a statement by getting a FOSS developer in trouble with the IRS, that is not something to applaud! The people being who would be punished here are not the people attempting absolute financial control. I would not very publicly send a "donation" of valuable but illegal drugs to my favorite charity, even though I support ending the war on drugs.