6 ms·

So much for anonymity of Bitcoin.

baby 13y ago
I think you never really understood how bitcoin works if you make that statement. All bitcoins wallets, and their transferts, are public.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- BlackDeath3 13y ago
  I'm surprised that anybody visiting this site could still be so ignorant about Bitcoin.
  - dmix 13y ago
    I don't think there is a single topic that exists right now, that people are willing to debate while being completely ignorant of it, more than Bitcoin right now. That applies to HN/reddit, TV talking heads, and real life.
    - gph 13y ago
      Besides healthcare, taxes, foreign policy, evolution ...
  - Kiro 13y ago
    Most people don't care about Bitcoin.
    - BlackDeath3 13y ago
      Here? On this site? Why? How?
dmix 13y ago
Bitcoin is pseudonymous by default, not anonymous. Anonymity is a choice. CoinJoin [1] and other trustless mixing software projects are aiming to make anonymity a push of a button. This is being implemented into DarkWallet [2] where mixing happens automatically in the background. [1] http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6630/ http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6630/ [2] http://www.indiegogo.com/at/darkwallet http://www.indiegogo.com/at/darkwallet
- dllthomas 13y ago
  Though I have every expectation of mixing falling afoul of AML laws, if not presently then soon.
  - Karunamon 13y ago
    The legislators can make whatever they want illegal, but that doesn't make it necessarily enforceable. Thing about mixing is, since any person (or autonomous process) can generate wallets and send BTC to those on the fly, how do you prove that you used a tumbling service and not that you gave coins to a guy who gave coins to a guy who split them up into separate wallets who each gave coins to a guy, etc etc etc. As Bitcoin picks up steam, this problem only gets harder. Remember that the block chain only consists of hashes and signatures. Proving who owns those is a much more difficult process.
    - dmix 13y ago
      High adversarial costs + increased uncertainty = ineffective regulation. But it's not like that won't stop them from trying. Probably via a bunch of high-profile "busts" to keep the law enforcement agencies financed.
    - aidenn0 13y ago
      It's trivial to make it enforcable. Whenever BTC leave the mixed wallet into a regulated area, bust the person doing so for violating money laundering laws if they used mixing. If they didn't use mixing, but received mixed funds you can probably impound some fraction of their funds to. Either way you now have enough evidence to raid their PC to check for further laundered funds and generally make their lives miserable. When people complain just find a fraction of a BTC that was used at some point in the past to fund the social demon of the day (child porn, terrorism, drugs, sex trafficking, etc.) to justify it.
smtddr 13y ago
It's like the AOL search-data leak. It's anonymous until you do a bit of research; then you can narrow it down to general area, maybe gender and perhaps eventually who exactly it is. Now, since one person can have multiple wallets and addresses... I'd recommend this person to never use this address again! ...because people(and authorities) will be watching and gathering clues on it from now on. I'm sure the folks at 4chan/neogaf/reddit would love to put on their sherlock-homes hat and find this person.
- sliverstorm 13y ago
  Well, you can't just never use a wallet with millions of dollars again. The main way to get out of that wallet though is money laundering. Convert the BTC to some real asset, and slowly (and untraceably) funnel to a variety of places.
- Keyframe 13y ago
  The thing though is that all transactions are available to be seen. So even if you don't use the same wallet ever again, you can follow the trail of the money - FOREVER. This is not something I am comfortable with. This was also primary reason why I never considered bitcoin as serious alternative, but then again I don't see a way around it.

baby 13y ago

I think you never really understood how bitcoin works if you make that statement. All bitcoins wallets, and their transferts, are public.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
BlackDeath3 13y ago
I'm surprised that anybody visiting this site could still be so ignorant about Bitcoin.
- dmix 13y ago
  I don't think there is a single topic that exists right now, that people are willing to debate while being completely ignorant of it, more than Bitcoin right now. That applies to HN/reddit, TV talking heads, and real life.
  - gph 13y ago
    Besides healthcare, taxes, foreign policy, evolution ...
- Kiro 13y ago
  Most people don't care about Bitcoin.
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    Here? On this site? Why? How?

dmix 13y ago

Bitcoin is pseudonymous by default, not anonymous. Anonymity is a choice. CoinJoin [1] and other trustless mixing software projects are aiming to make anonymity a push of a button. This is being implemented into DarkWallet [2] where mixing happens automatically in the background. [1] http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6630/ http://bitcoinmagazine.com/6630/ [2] http://www.indiegogo.com/at/darkwallet http://www.indiegogo.com/at/darkwallet

dllthomas 13y ago
Though I have every expectation of mixing falling afoul of AML laws, if not presently then soon.
- Karunamon 13y ago
  The legislators can make whatever they want illegal, but that doesn't make it necessarily enforceable. Thing about mixing is, since any person (or autonomous process) can generate wallets and send BTC to those on the fly, how do you prove that you used a tumbling service and not that you gave coins to a guy who gave coins to a guy who split them up into separate wallets who each gave coins to a guy, etc etc etc. As Bitcoin picks up steam, this problem only gets harder. Remember that the block chain only consists of hashes and signatures. Proving who owns those is a much more difficult process.
  - dmix 13y ago
    High adversarial costs + increased uncertainty = ineffective regulation. But it's not like that won't stop them from trying. Probably via a bunch of high-profile "busts" to keep the law enforcement agencies financed.
  - aidenn0 13y ago
    It's trivial to make it enforcable. Whenever BTC leave the mixed wallet into a regulated area, bust the person doing so for violating money laundering laws if they used mixing. If they didn't use mixing, but received mixed funds you can probably impound some fraction of their funds to. Either way you now have enough evidence to raid their PC to check for further laundered funds and generally make their lives miserable. When people complain just find a fraction of a BTC that was used at some point in the past to fund the social demon of the day (child porn, terrorism, drugs, sex trafficking, etc.) to justify it.

smtddr 13y ago

It's like the AOL search-data leak. It's anonymous until you do a bit of research; then you can narrow it down to general area, maybe gender and perhaps eventually who exactly it is. Now, since one person can have multiple wallets and addresses... I'd recommend this person to never use this address again! ...because people(and authorities) will be watching and gathering clues on it from now on. I'm sure the folks at 4chan/neogaf/reddit would love to put on their sherlock-homes hat and find this person.

sliverstorm 13y ago
Well, you can't just never use a wallet with millions of dollars again. The main way to get out of that wallet though is money laundering. Convert the BTC to some real asset, and slowly (and untraceably) funnel to a variety of places.
Keyframe 13y ago
The thing though is that all transactions are available to be seen. So even if you don't use the same wallet ever again, you can follow the trail of the money - FOREVER. This is not something I am comfortable with. This was also primary reason why I never considered bitcoin as serious alternative, but then again I don't see a way around it.