Altcoins Talks - Cryptocurrency Forum
Cryptocurrency Ecosystem => Bitcoin Forum => Topic started by: NotATether on May 09, 2024, 01:12:55 PM
-
Let's take a look at the section of Congress who appears to be totally against Bitcoin privacy of any kind.
Late yesterday afternoon news broke of the House Financial Services Committee Democrats' new crypto legislation. First things first I want to acknowledge the monster in the room concerning this and don't worry this legislation is already dead on arrival. Moves like this are sadly to be expected in the coming months as these bills are introduced with the Members knowing it doesn't have the slightest chance to get a vote but instead is done as a messaging thing that they can point at.
Who is Behind This Legislation
Another HUGE thing to highlight is Rep. Sean Casten and his ties to the crypto industry. Guess whose brother was on his staff and served as a Legislative assistant?
None other than SBF's brother Gabe! While Rep. Casten says that Gabe played no role in his crypto views or did anything in that realm Gabe was able to use his relationship with Casten to help his brother out whether anyone wants to admit to it or not. I would bet that the contacts that Gabe had were a huge boost for his brother.
Looking at who else has already come out and been in support of this legislation we have the expected actors, Reps. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.), Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo.), and Bill Foster (D-Ill.). Having worked or currently work on the other side of the aisle of these people it's to be expected. In particular, Rep. Sherman is someone who truly I do not understand how he got his job and more importantly what technology did to him to hurt him. The guy is consistently against cutting-edge innovation and made what I find to be the funniest comment about crypto years ago.
> He asked a witness testifying before a Committee why we don't "just flip the switch and turn off crypto".
I wish I had made up that quote but sadly.... nope.
What Would This Do
While the full text has not been released as far as I can tell, I also cant even find a circulating draft so it is clear they left this on the Dem side exclusively, the bill is rather straightforward. The legislation would place a 2-year "prohibition" on financial services (CEXs) from dealing with crypto that has been funneled through mixer.
During the two year "prohibition" the SEC, CFTC, and Justice Department are required to study the use of mixers and what role they play in helping to facilitate illicit finance. Below is Casten's comment.
> "The presumption should be that these are money laundering channels," Casten said, unless sufficient audit work shows otherwise. "Let's go through and get that cleaned up and fixed."
Why This is a Stupid Waste of Time
Within the released text this bill is only going to affect entities that the US government is already monitoring/controlling. This legislation further fails to address what if some of your BTC had previously been through a mixer? Would Coinbase or whoever else was in possession of it have to divest it and then buy "new" BTC that wasn't touched by a mixer? We also already have the Justice Department working with numerous blockchain analysis companies that are able to track BTC that has passed through mixers. We literally have these answers yet this group of Congressman either A) are not being kept in the loop by their staff or B) just ignoring what we know to push an agenda that is knownly NOT POPULAR with people.
The executive summary here is three parts.
Number one: The bill they are trying to pass is dead in the water (at least as long as there is a republican-controlled House, although it goes on to show that if Democrats take control of it, they will use it to completely destroy crypto privacy).
Number two: This bill was co-authored by SBF's brother. Let that sink into you for a second. It underscores why SBF deserves to rot in jail for an eternity. He does not care about crypto, but he is for "Big Government".
The third and most important thing is that the lawmakers is just going to automatically assume that mixing == money laundering and not change their opinion about it, as if a bunch of stuborn 10-year olds are writing the laws! It doesn't matter what sort of explanation or analysis you give them, it's "guilty unless proven innocenent" and it fits into their sinister plan to strip every crypto user of financial privacy worldwide.
-
The executive summary here is three parts.
Number one: The bill they are trying to pass is dead in the water (at least as long as there is a republican-controlled House, although it goes on to show that if Democrats take control of it, they will use it to completely destroy crypto privacy).
Number two: This bill was co-authored by SBF's brother. Let that sink into you for a second. It underscores why SBF deserves to rot in jail for an eternity. He does not care about crypto, but he is for "Big Government".
The third and most important thing is that the lawmakers is just going to automatically assume that mixing == money laundering and not change their opinion about it, as if a bunch of stuborn 10-year olds are writing the laws! It doesn't matter what sort of explanation or analysis you give them, it's "guilty unless proven innocenent" and it fits into their sinister plan to strip every crypto user of financial privacy worldwide.
BTC mixing is a serious problem in this market and we still haven't found the most appropriate way to view them. Many people support Mixers because they care about anonymity, but many others also oppose Mixers because Mixers can be exploited by criminals. Personally, I just want BTC to be more widely accepted, which means BTC needs to comply with anti-money laundering laws. I don't want BTC to be delisted from CEXs like many other privacy coins in the market.
I also don't find this proposal feasible, it could affect many investors in the market, they cannot guarantee that every satoshi in their account has never been involved in crime or Mixers. I just hope that the lawmakers can find a way that is both effective in limiting money laundering through Mixers and protecting the rights of users. Of course, I also know that this is a complex issue 8)
-
This bill was co-authored by SBF's brother!!! What a painful and ridiculous thing at the same time, :P and also a number of old Democrats who probably don't understand anything about technology and still live in the corrupt era of central banks, but unfortunately they are in control.
They really know that it is difficult to isolate the mixed Bitcoin because when this mixed Bitcoin enters the CEXs how can it be isolated from the clean Bitcoin? On the other hand, can they assure us that every dollar bill is a clean bill that has not been used by criminals before?
-
To be honest on this matter, Democrats are more of an enemy to the whole cryptocurrency industry, at least compared to Republicans. Many of them actually do not have a comprehensive grasp of the industry and the positive impact that this industry can create if allowed to bloom with minimum government interference. Yet a lot of these Democrats were actually beneficiaries of the "kindness" of SBF by donating millions to their election coffers. I could not imagine what can happen to crypto if both the House and the Senate are controlled by Democrats. I am hoping that the White House will welcome back Donald J. Trump in January 20 and that both legislative bodies can be controlled by Republican lawmakers as the election in November is getting nearer. I am looking forward that a better and more viable regulatory framework can be established in the second term of Trump as he is known to be more open and friendlier to crypto than the senile Joe Biden who could not even define cryptocurrency and Bitcoin is.
-
To be honest on this matter, Democrats are more of an enemy to the whole cryptocurrency industry, at least compared to Republicans. Many of them actually do not have a comprehensive grasp of the industry and the positive impact that this industry can create if allowed to bloom with minimum government interference. Yet a lot of these Democrats were actually beneficiaries of the "kindness" of SBF by donating millions to their election coffers. I could not imagine what can happen to crypto if both the House and the Senate are controlled by Democrats. I am hoping that the White House will welcome back Donald J. Trump in January 20 and that both legislative bodies can be controlled by Republican lawmakers as the election in November is getting nearer. I am looking forward that a better and more viable regulatory framework can be established in the second term of Trump as he is known to be more open and friendlier to crypto than the senile Joe Biden who could not even define cryptocurrency and Bitcoin is.
Like I wrote in the chat - politicians hate crypto until they receive it.
But yeah, it certainly doesn't help that since Bitcoin was built on libertarian frameworks, the dems see it as "anti-government" currency that aids "cyber-criminals" that needs to be "regulated" (but hey please don't prosecute me for receiving customers' crypto from FTX I beg you :o).
I do not know about other countries, but I imagine that the situation is quite similar there.
-
Like I wrote in the chat - politicians hate crypto until they receive it.
Or in case when they purchased coins early and now have financial benefit to support Bitcoin, one example is Cynthia Lummis.
However, there are not so many politicians like this in reality, and on other side most of them are against Bitcoin, including Trump, Biden and other puppets from all political parties.
There is one website showing list of politicians holding Bitcoin:
https://bitcoinpoliticians.org
-
BTC mixing is a serious problem in this market and we still haven't found the most appropriate way to view them. Many people support Mixers because they care about anonymity, but many others also oppose Mixers because Mixers can be exploited by criminals. Personally, I just want BTC to be more widely accepted, which means BTC needs to comply with anti-money laundering laws. I don't want BTC to be delisted from CEXs like many other privacy coins in the market.
I think that mixers aren't the problem, but the criminals who use them (with are just a small part of their users).
Sadly, privacy is becoming harder and harder to achieve just because this anti money laundry war doesn't care about citizens rights for privacy.
-
Sadly, privacy is becoming harder and harder to achieve just because this anti money laundry war doesn't care about citizens rights for privacy.
Well, I mean they do care about some citizens' right for privacy, just not the person-kind, but the legal document charter-kind ;)
<seriously> they will continue to give banks the right to privacy.</endseriously>
-
I think that mixers aren't the problem, but the criminals who use them (with are just a small part of their users).
Sadly, privacy is becoming harder and harder to achieve just because this anti money laundry war doesn't care about citizens rights for privacy.
According to everything we could read from the publications of the most famous US whistleblower, three letters agencies have been dealing with BTC since at least 2013 by developing tools that can track users and their transactions and identify them. I don't know when the first mixer appeared, but it is obvious that such a tool bothers them a lot, especially since they constructed stories about how countries like Iran or North Korea circumvent sanctions by using BTC and mixers.
I read that the EU will ban mixers and USDT soon, so all those who continue to use them would be treated as criminals? Let's be honest, "they" actually consider us criminals in a way, because it's not a problem to invest in BTC through full KYC CEXs, it's a problem to be your own bank and that bothers them the most.
-
I think that mixers aren't the problem, but the criminals who use them (with are just a small part of their users).
Agree. There is no problem with the mixers. They are just tools to make us having a more privacy in crypto. It is our right to have a privacy. Why it is a problem? Sure, the problem is the bad people who use the mixers. They used it for criminal purposes, they misused the mixers. I think the US authority must focus on the bad people, they must got the punishment. The government can suggest the mixer platforms to tighten the rules of using mixer services. They don't need to close the mixer platform. ;)
Sadly, privacy is becoming harder and harder to achieve just because this anti money laundry war doesn't care about citizens rights for privacy.
The government always hates the privacy. They want to know everything about the citizens. Meanwhile we are fighting for the right of privacy. Crypto world offers the privacy, it is against the government. So, it is not surprising if the government dislike mixer services. The want to control everything, including the ecosystem of crypto business.
-
I read that the EU will ban mixers and USDT soon, so all those who continue to use them would be treated as criminals? Let's be honest, "they" actually consider us criminals in a way, because it's not a problem to invest in BTC through full KYC CEXs, it's a problem to be your own bank and that bothers them the most.
Well, USDT doesn't have any sort of privacy at all and is not a coin I will be shedding any tears over if it gets banned. DAI is the better usd-pegged stablecoin with no asset freezing feature.
The government always hates the privacy. They want to know everything about the citizens. Meanwhile we are fighting for the right of privacy. Crypto world offers the privacy, it is against the government. So, it is not surprising if the government dislike mixer services. The want to control everything, including the ecosystem of crypto business.
They want to know everything, that's true. I'm not sure that they will actually use all that data though.
-
The government always hates the privacy. They want to know everything about the citizens. Meanwhile we are fighting for the right of privacy. Crypto world offers the privacy, it is against the government. So, it is not surprising if the government dislike mixer services. The want to control everything, including the ecosystem of crypto business.
They want to know everything, that's true. I'm not sure that they will actually use all that data though.
They won't use all data of everyone. But they want to have it available in case an individual is suspicious of "money laundry " ow whatever...
-
Well, USDT doesn't have any sort of privacy at all and is not a coin I will be shedding any tears over if it gets banned. DAI is the better usd-pegged stablecoin with no asset freezing feature.
That's true, but it's no secret why stablecoins are so popular - because they can be transferred very easily and cheaply, and many people use USDT in the EU for this very reason. I don't think it's a coincidence that mixers and stablecoins are banned at practically the same time when something similar is happening in the US.
-
Well, USDT doesn't have any sort of privacy at all and is not a coin I will be shedding any tears over if it gets banned. DAI is the better usd-pegged stablecoin with no asset freezing feature.
That's true, but it's no secret why stablecoins are so popular - because they can be transferred very easily and cheaply, and many people use USDT in the EU for this very reason. I don't think it's a coincidence that mixers and stablecoins are banned at practically the same time when something similar is happening in the US.
I think it has some privacy. Better than using a bank (in privacy)
For example, you can pay me 200 USD without knowing my real name or bank account. The only other way to do that is buy using cash (or other crypto currency).
-
Or in case when they purchased coins early and now have financial benefit to support Bitcoin, one example is Cynthia Lummis.
However, there are not so many politicians like this in reality, and on other side most of them are against Bitcoin, including Trump, Biden and other puppets from all political parties.
There is one website showing list of politicians holding Bitcoin:
https://bitcoinpoliticians.org
This is an official list, unfortunately, we will not know about the anonymous crypto addresses of corrupt politicians.
btw. Didn't Trump provide crypto addresses for donations to his campaign?
https://www.theblock.co/post/293384/donald-trump-crypto-campaign-donation
-
Number two: This bill was co-authored by SBF's brother. Let that sink into you for a second. It underscores why SBF deserves to rot in jail for an eternity. He does not care about crypto, but he is for "Big Government".
Did he also put his own brother in jail? :o
They are all just puppets who are only following orders, and they don't want people to have any privacy.
I think this is last chance for us to try and resist new laws that are coming, or most people will end up as slaves soon.
I think it has some privacy. Better than using a bank (in privacy)
For example, you can pay me 200 USD without knowing my real name or bank account. The only other way to do that is buy using cash (or other crypto currency).
It actually has worse privacy than banks because it's public and everyone can see and track all your transactions on blockchain.
-
I think that mixers aren't the problem, but the criminals who use them (with are just a small part of their users).
Sadly, privacy is becoming harder and harder to achieve just because this anti money laundry war doesn't care about citizens rights for privacy.
Mixer is just a service in this market, and it can be abused by criminals. Cash, gold, traffic routes, and weapons can all be abused in this way, we do not ban people from using these things, but we find ways to manage them.
This new proposal related to Mixer could make it impossible for Mixer to continue to exist strongly in the market, meaning that criminals will lose many tools for money laundering. However, its negative impact on users and the crypto market may be even greater, hindering the market and infringing on the ownership and use of crypto assets by many people: it would be unreasonable for someone who is completely innocent to have their assets frozen just because a few satoshi in their account was related to Mixer years ago, when he has never used Mixer.
I don't think privacy is an issue in this event. This proposal is just a rush in the effort to manage the crypto market and fight money laundering!
-
Number two: This bill was co-authored by SBF's brother. Let that sink into you for a second. It underscores why SBF deserves to rot in jail for an eternity. He does not care about crypto, but he is for "Big Government".
Did he also put his own brother in jail? :o
They are all just puppets who are only following orders, and they don't want people to have any privacy.
If I recall correctly, his entire family was trying to keep him out of jail, so I don't think so. They all have a background in law and legislative stuff too, so it's not like some sort of pleading is what they tried doing.
Nearly the entire democrat party was bought out by SBF's "donations" to them using customers' stolen funds, so that would shed some light on why they would want to protect him and keep grinding crypto at the same time.
-
~snip~
btw. Didn't Trump provide crypto addresses for donations to his campaign?
https://www.theblock.co/post/293384/donald-trump-crypto-campaign-donation
As it seems from the article, it is only about NTF that T sells at his donor gatherings, but no coin is mentioned anywhere. I think he will be very careful here, because no matter how attractive the donations are, when it comes to cryptocurrencies you can always have problems with someone sending you something that is considered "dirty coins". A man like him has many enemies who would gladly harm him in any way.
That's why I think he will stick to those good old sayings - America first, the dollar above all else.
-
Considering Mixing isn't something that they would be getting any benefit from, I would guess that it is not really that complicated for them to have something like this. There will be a lot of politicians all around the world who would be against mixers if they knew what they are good for. I feel like we are not going to get any politicians who would end up with anything crazy, it wouldn't really be all that complicated, it will definitely be something that could benefit everyone if they are all gone. I have never used any person who used mixers for a very good reason, most of the time its always something shady.
-
You say the bill they are trying to pass is already dead in the water, but I don't think that's actually happened, I mean SEC, DOJ, and other authorities are keeping an eye on all mixers, they are studying them, seizing them, not doubt they are doing the good stuff by keeping an eye on these mixers, because people using, promoting, building them, don't want to be a part of something that fakes everything, (means that fakes its real purpose of ML).
So for the wise adoption of the BTC and crypto overall, such steps are welcomed by me, but speaking of this particular legislation so-called as dead, I don't really think it is, or maybe it has given a purpose to authorities to keep an eye on all the mixer possible. They are doing everything to hold onto something so that they can seize another one. The points discussed in the quoted post, are valid that its quite hard to pick the infected tx from the last 2 years, although not impossible.
-
Nearly the entire democrat party was bought out by SBF's "donations" to them using customers' stolen funds, so that would shed some light on why they would want to protect him and keep grinding crypto at the same time.
Yes I remember that, he supported Biden on last elections and send a bunch of money for his campaign.
I don't think situation would be any different for him if he supported Trump and republic party, all this politicians are puppet liars who work for the same bosses.
If sometimes it does appear like they are arguing it's only a circus show for the people as a distraction.
Nobody should fall into another of Trump's trap, now it's with crypto.