3 ms·
Too easy to game. I just send you 0.001 bitcoins and you are screwed. Add a limit and I will just go under it. Ultimately though there is an even more effectiv
by Guvante 13y ago
Too easy to game. I just send you 0.001 bitcoins and you are screwed. Add a limit and I will just go under it.
Ultimately though there is an even more effective method. New coins are always clean, trading pristine coins for tainted coins at a discount is damned effective, even if it requires a lot of computing power to pull off. The trick is you have infinite wallets, so avoiding any way of figuring out which is which is not difficult, especially since distributing pristine coins is standard practice.
- hollerith 13y ago>Too easy to game. I just send you 0.001 bitcoins and you are screwed You seem to assume that a regulator must mark all the BTC in a wallet as tainted just because 0.001 of tainted BTC was sent to it, which seems to me a false assumption.
- Guvante 13y agoIt is so easy to send transactions that you have a problem, do you ignore transactions under a certain amount (leading to a potential group going under the limit for mixing) or do you introduce these problems. If you don't mind false positives it will be easy enough, but I don't know how you would develop a system that would work. Well I would say someone brought forward the concept of the US or other entity marking bitcoins, that could definitely work, but I don't know if that would solve the problem of laundering non-marked bitcoins.