Here's why we, the people, need privacy, security, and anonymity (the state can deem you a criminal whenever they want): "The Bitcoin network has a governance structure in which roles are assigned to identified individuals. Authorities could decide that these should be prosecuted in view of the large scale of illegal payments using Bitcoin. Decentralised finance can be regulated as forcefully as the legislator considers necessary."
Related discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39484482
I hear your point and it's a valid one. Consider the recent case of Tornado Cash and the Open Source Is Not A Crime movement. Two individuals were arrested for developing open-source code on GitHub. Just last week, GoFundMe shut down the Tornado Cash legal defense crowdfunding. This suggests that the state is more interested in protecting itself from individuals rather than defending their rights. This could potentially set a precedent where inventors or developers of decentralized technologies could be targeted, even if they've done nothing inherently wrong. If interested you can learn more here: https://wewantjusticedao.org/
Oh this is bullshit and you know it. Another example of "we didn't call it a security so it's not a security"
They weren't arrested for the code. They were arrested for actively participating and profiting off money laundering with North Korea being a customer.
Zero-knowledge proofs are different from public ledgers. That's where the issue comes in to play. The Treasury Department has already given guidance that cryptocurrency mixers fall under Know Your Customer laws and the Bank Secrecy Act, and are required to know who exactly is using their services and how.
It's not "Criminalizing Open Source". You live in a society with laws. Obfuscating classic financial products with tech jargon worked for the first half of the decade.
Y'all are just mad it doesn't work anymore and claim "You just don't understand the technology. You haven't issued guidance on specifics of crypto currency. You can't use hundred year old laws"
Yes, you can use 100 year old laws. At the end of the day, the financial shenanigans of most crypto, exchanges, and tokens are fundamentally the same things that have already been regulated. You just have new words.
Tornado Cash is a protocol which can be used by both good and bad actors. Saying TC was responsible for bad actors laundering their crypto through the protocol is like saying auto makers are responsible for car crashes or Bob Kahn is responsible for all the illegal activities on the internet.
The technology behind Tornado Cash could also be used for instituting something like truly fully anonymous group surveys (such as those employee surveys big companies always ask you to take that they claim are "anonymous")
It doesn't have to be used for money laundering, and even if using it to move funds anonymously, that doesn't mean you're money laundering. There are good reasons to not want individuals and state actors whose jurisdiction you're not under to track your financial movements, even if you are reporting your income accurately with your own government.
> even if using it to move funds anonymously, that doesn't mean you're money laundering
The whole point of tornado cash is to "pool" funds to obfuscate who owns what. If your funds get "pooled" with funds from a criminal enterprise, then you become an accessory to that crime. Good luck using your hypothetical to convince a court otherwise.
"I didn't ask where the (other) money came from" is no defense.
“ In August 2022, the U.S. Department of the Treasury blacklisted the service, making it illegal for US citizens, residents and companies to use.” [0]
Regardless of how you feel about it, you can’t deny that they were doing something illegal under US law, and a consequence of that is that the Feds can come down on you, even if the law seems ad hoc and unfair.
