/biz/ - Business & Finance

based
welcome to the XMR path my brother
quite the opposite atomic swaps are gonna be a game changer
people would give "untainted" BTC at a premium I reckon

>>25622776
So you'll be able to see whether the coins you are receiving are tainted before the trade?

I just got started today. DCAing in 3k dollarinos to start. what's the process for withdrawing into my own wallet?

>>25622852
no, he doesnt know what hes talking about
tracking tainted coins requires centralized database. wont work with atomic swaps. at that point its a DEX if anything
i like lebanon but hes misinformed on this point
atomic swaps are priced in.

>>25623048
thank you for clarifying
was gonna ask on the telegram group
I think someone did mention something about tainted BTC once

Stay away from monero unless you want to bleed sats and get the same return as everything else 10 years slower

>>25623131
>monero isn't volatile enough to play the lottery with, which prevents me from dreaming about a lambo. Why would I want a less volatile more fungible currency when I could instead buy a shitcoin with no adoption that fluctuates out the ass so I can pretend I'll be a millionare in 2 days?

retarded

>>25623241
kek'd

>>25622589
Tainted bitcoins are a meme, 99% of the exchanges don't care.
If in a hypothetical scenario some exchanges started refusing tainted bitcoins, there will always be dexes and many other exchanges in other countries where you can cash out. If you can cash out, it doesn't matter where your coins are from, only the amount you have.
Do you pick and choose between limit orders on binance based on which one is "tainted"? didn't think so.

>>25622589
It's entirely possible that the introduction of atomic swaps will either lower bitcoin's price, increase monero's price, or both, relative to eachother.

Once atomic swaps are introduced people will want to swap into monero. Once people realize that tainted bitcoins are also being swapped, they will want to be paid more in bitcoin as to hedge their bets, thus swap prices would require much more BTC per XMR. People with clean bitcoin who want to get into XMR would thus be forced to pay this premium as well.

People with XMR would not want to swap into bitcoin, as not only is it less fungible, but they have to roll the dice as to the possibility of tainted BTC, thus they would need to be paid more bitcoin to incentivize them to swap. Overall both these factors will likely see monero's price increase dramatically.

It's also possible that over time the value of 'tainted' coins would slowly rise to meet that of untainted ones as the currency continues to transact and people care less and less about it's history and more about its utility, but then again BTC fees, transaction times, etc. all reduce it's utility as a true currency.

>>25623318
Thanks, makes sense

>>25623587
Boom! Best answer in this ITT thread

>>25623694
sorry I misinformed you at first
guess we both learned something

>>25623587
Wait, I got a question now. Why would increasing the "fee" of swaping from BTC to Monero contribute to increasing the Monero's price? Makes sense it would contribute to decreasing it (relatively, not absolutely), as less people now want to switch to XMR from BTC because of those fees?

>>25623766
shit happens mane. You were even correct, in a way.

>>25623918
I mean, wouldn't the premium you have to pay create a barrier to buying XMR, since you now how to pay more in BTC than what you're getting in XMR? That would turn away some people, thus leading to the XMR price not increasing as much as it otherwise would.

>>25623587
>People woth XMR would not want to swap to bitcoin
not true, what does xmr.to do? I've used it many times myself.

>Once people realise that tinted bitcoins are also being swapped, they will want to be paid more in bitcoin to hedge their bets
this is unlikely as most people don't care about this, and the few that do will just be priced out of they ask for a higher price. Additionally, arbitrage traders will take care of price fluctuations.

In many of your points you are forgetting that there are other exchanges influencing the price. Swaps rarely if ever drive a crypto's price in any direction, they are not the dominant force in setting prices, if they deviate from other exchanges arbitrage will take care of it.

>>25623918
Not sure what you mean by fee, when I said fee I meant that the actual blockchain fee that you pay to send bitcoin from one address to another makes bitcoin less useful as a true currency for everyone to use on a daily basis.

As far as the swaps go, needing more BTC to swap into XMR would increase monero's price purely relative to BTC, but many factors, including increased monero demand as more people try to buy it up, as well as it's fungibility and ability to seemesly swap back into BTC if need be, would increase it's actual market price relative to fiat as well.

>>25624046
>not true, what does xmr.to do? I've used it many times myself.
You took my statement out of context, I tried to state that they would not want to swap into BTC for the same price relative to fiat/btc and fiat/xmr, thus increasing XMR's price relative to BTC in order to create market forces that would incentivize XMR holders to swap.

>>25623998
>Swaps rarely if ever drive a crypto's price in any direction

Wouldn't BTC whales have an incentive to move to XMR immediately after Atomic Swaps start working?

>>25624182
All is clear now. Thanks MoneroChad

This reply: >>25624209
Is meant for this dude:>>25624046

>>25624209
No, why would they? they can already buy xmr anonymously via btc in many ways. I understand that atomic swaps are trustless, but that doesn't really matter for btc whales who would want to buy xmr, if they really did want that, they already did it.

>>25624182
seems like you ignored all my other points too. Exchanges currently don't care about tainted coins, arbitrage traders even less. If some traders get picky about tainted coins they will be priced out and won't be able to make a trade if they ask a significant premium. Swaps are just markets the same way any other exchange's market behaves. If there is deviation, daytraders and arbitrage bots will get rid of it.

https://cipherblade.com/blog/tainted-bitcoin-isnt-what-you-think-it-is/

>>25624410
>seems like you ignored all my other points too. Exchanges currently don't care about tainted coins, arbitrage traders even less. If some traders get picky about tainted coins they will be priced out and won't be able to make a trade if they ask a significant premium. Swaps are just markets the same way any other exchange's market behaves. If there is deviation, daytraders and arbitrage bots will get rid of it.

Absolutely fair, but assuming that's true, that only means good things for XMR. Why would whales want to store value in BTC when they can store it in XMR, increasing their privacy ability to hide their wealth. This is especially true with swaps since they would be able to seamlessly swap back to BTC if need be, i.e. if exchanges didn't want to deal with Monero. If 'tainted' and untainted bitcoins were functionally and monetarily equal this doesn't mean that monero won't still go up by a large degree as a result of swaps, it only means that the market forces related to tainted coins and the specific impact that would have on relative XMR/BTC price would reduce.

In terms of actual value, large transfers of wealth into XMR would only result in a much higher market cap for XMR, and increase in per-coin value.

>>25624568

source: I'm a blockchain analyst, happy to verify, just let me know how

Exchanges (compliant ones) do care about source of funds. Let's start with compliant exchanges: there is significant variance here, but you've got ones like Coinbase, Gemini, and Kraken, then you've got on the opposite end of the spectrum exchanges like Huobi, OKEx, KuCoin, etc.

To be more accurate, "tainted coins" isn't whats checked for; receiving exposure is. "Taint" is commonly understood as "well, the system says X% of this dude's coins are from ransomware". If X% is <10%, -and- it's shown as, say, 30 "hops" away, it's probably a false positive (mixer) and ignore. If X is most%/all, and it's a direct transaction or within a few hops, well yeah, an exchange is going to catch that and possible lock an account.

There is a ton of misunderstanding posted by people in this thread and elsewhere.

>>25624765

I can post "henlo biz" to my Twitter or something btw. I will not post sharpie in pooper

Exchanges like OKEx, Huobi etc strategize to facilitate dirty funds, e.g., their business model is quite literally to NOT catch dirty deposits/cashouts for purposes of preserving their fees.

There is a massive disparity in degrees of exchange compliance programs.

>>25624765
If you look at my original posts I was stating that they of course do care, and that tainted btc would impact swap prices of XMR/BTC relative to eachother. However, I was just responding to that one particular anon under the assumption that their premise is infact true.

There are people commenting suggesting XMR fixes this. It doesn't -- you can still be asked for SOF, and if using a privacy coin, you're far more likely to be asked this. SOF checks will become far more frequent if privacy features are more widely adopted (very little use as of now); privacy-by-default coin sees wider adoption (XMR flippens BTC), privacy-by-default for widely-adopted wallets on an existing blockchain takes place (imagine Wasabi, but CoinJoin is automatically executed for any transaction -- note, not just as an opt-in but by default) -- blockchain analysis tools will become a lot less useful, and exchanges will be asking for SOF.

Not saying I agree with it, but saying I'm in the know and that's the reality.

XMR is badass and I love it, but to suggest that it's the solution to avoid SOF is inaccurate.

>>25624941

Makes sense, my bad. It's been a long day of staring at wallet addresses

>>25624994
Np stay based anon

>>25625013

I've only recently started posting as a non-anon (I've always lurked, and only occasionally posted) -- but I'll proudly accept the title of 'based' /biz/ public-anon. https://twitter.com/Raindropactual is me btw

>>25624568
There are two major points for why I think atomic swaps will have little impact on monero's price by whale activity. (Besides the psychological hype from the media, let's ignore that for now)

First, the educated whales who truly care about privacy and are 'in it for the tech' have nothing stopping them from buying xmr, many of them already did, there are plenty of ways to anonymously get monero, as we saw with the ukranian politician for example, so I don't see why atomic swaps will make such a difference, if a whale had their eyes on monero they wouldn't wait a year just for a slightly more private who knows how liquid way to buy to come out.

Second, lots of (no idea of the percentages, but I'm thinking a majority) bitcoin whales are exclusively in the market for gains, simply capitalizing. Atomic swaps will not change monero's market outlook and it's financial potential (again ignoring the media hype) and so it will not influence btc whales that much. Monero currently is just not that well known, and bitcoin gets much better gains, hence why institutional investors are mainly buying bitcoin, they don't give a shit (or maybe don't even know) how it works. Look at grayscale's portfolio for example. This again will not change will atomic swaps. And then there's another thing to consider: besides the developers, whales don't know of all top cryptos. We're currently top 16, many people just aren't aware of monero or don't really know how exactly it works. You are assuming whales have a perfect knowledge of every crypto and will make educated decisions comparing every coin in the toplists, this obviously isn't the case. I would say a good percentage of monero holders even don't know how it works and aren't aware of what atomic swaps are, you are overestimating the rationality of investors.

1/2

>>25624568
>>25625142

Last thought because of word limit:


With all that said, I do agree with your point that BTC whales will start flowing towards monero, the original whales from many years ago anyway, not the new institutional investors that got in a couple of months ago. But what I'm saying is that will come gradually with organic growth rather than with atomic swaps which will have relatively little influence in this case.

>>25625142
>>25625166
Absolutely, people who want monero will already buy it, but the thing is in terms of the core technology (things like max cap of potential currency, terrible transaction fees and fixed block size) demonstrate that bitcoin is incredibly overvalued. In terms of funcitonality as a currency, BTC is really not very strong relative to monero. The advent of swaps will just make it that much easier to transfer into monero without activating any taxable events in the process. No need for exchanges, etc.

I think this would increase monero adoption, as well as further introduce people into bitcoin's core flaws, and monero's ability to solve them.

Sorry I didn't respond to each part of your post I'm just tired.

>>25623117
What telegram group are you referencing?

>>25623048
>atomic swaps are priced in
Lmao you are retarded.

>>25623318
Tainted bitcoins means that they will investigate you, possibly get a warrant. They have to rule you out. It’s an albatross around your neck. This is maxi cope

>>25626123

No. This is not true. Please stop spreading misinformation. The answer is "it depends."

The most likely thing an exchange will do is contact you to ask questions. If an exchange chooses this option, it's likely because there is room for doubt. If you're able to provide a suitable SOF, odds are, they will leave it at that. If you do not, they will file a SAR with FinCEN. From there, law enforcement may act, but for context, most SARs aren't acted upon.

It's obviously different if you're withdrawing directly from the address Ivan received ransomware payments in and he sends it directly to an exchange. That's a lot more obvious.

>>25624974
“I won my XMR in a poker game”

>>25626219
Because having my transactions scrutinized unjustly is what satoshi intended. You’re accepting a suboptimal reality when you could have so much more with XMR maximalism. BTC is fundamentally flawed.

>>25626123

It is important people don't avoid mixers because of fear of being investigated by law enforcement. It's simply not true. Mixers, and privacy coins for that matter (XMR view keys), and generally any solution has a way for someone to provide SOF to a compliance officer. It is the people that are not willing to do that, provide suspicious information, etc. that may get investigated.

If people think the feds will come knocking on their door for using CoinJoin or XMR, people won't use it, and that's really shitty for the adoption of those things, and bad for privacy.

I'm a blockchain analyst, and I said all of this, so that probably should tell you something.

>>25626232

Okay -- what poker game? Do you have a way to verify this? If not, that's on you. Hence my post earlier about a likelihood in the increase of SOF requests. Yes, traders will need to grow up and start keeping personal records like grownups :)

>>25626316

As I posted above, whether I, you, or anyone else agrees with it isn't the point of my responses here. I'm letting y'all know what the realities are right now. I'm not here to debate what should or shouldn't be, but to give y'all insight

>>25626331
Yeah, no. I could say I mined all of my XMR in 2015, moved wallets recently, and lost my previous keys.

>>25626384
>>25626364
And guess what conscientious objectors get when using Bitcoin? Bricked. What do XMR users get? Not shit because there isn’t enough evidence to flip from innocent to guilty. The burden of proof rests with prosecution.

>>25626316
Based

Bitcoin is heavily overvalued on speculation by investors who really don't understand the technology. It's hard to justify BTC's existence when you can buy monero.

>>25626331
Yeah and there is also no way for people to know that you have monero, in contrast to BTC. There is also no way to know how much you have, whether or not you even have access if you have transferred monero to a wallet in the past. If you use strictly KYC exchanges it's quite easy to make a guess that you still have all that monero, but there's no proof that you didn't spend it, transfer it to someone else, etc.. If you don't have the keys, you effectively don't have the coins.

The idea that the feds will actually do anything against you for simply owning (or merely having owned in the past) monero is entirely unrealistic. Ontop of this, as more widespread use of monero spreads, the idea that monero is strictly used for illegal things will continue to decrease, and the idea that the feds will prosecute or go after EVERYONE who ever had monero or uses it will become even less realistic.

>>25626384
As a blockchain analyst, I hope you realize that you are contributing to the downfall of satoshi’s coin

>>25626568
Bitcoin hasn't been actively developed for a very long time. The sooner people realize that it's dead the better it is for every other crypto

>>25626461

Listen, anon. I know you're trying to play "I'm a hardcore internet badass that's going to single-handedly stand up to exchange compliance officers", but you're doing so pointlessly. I'm a privacy advocate. I love XMR. Fluffypony and I are fans of each other.

I'm letting you know that the reality is, if blockchain analysis becomes less effective than it is now (like XMR becoming the most adopted digital asset), SOF will increase immensely -- because it will have to. The public nature of BTC transactions create a lack of necessity to ask about SOF.

If you mined XMR in 2015, you'd have something to show -- equipment receipts, and presumably you kept some records -- to pay taxes. If you moved wallets, you can provide data from one or both of them to verify you did that based upon the very features XMR had. In your scenario of moving wallets recently and losing your previous keys, you can still do SOF -- in different ways.

I can assure you nobody gives a shit about the 6 XMR in your stack that you don't want to pay taxes on.

Exchange compliance officers have better shit to worry about. If you're not a jackass and have some jeet KYC an account for you, then log in from the US and try to float $100,000 through an exchange then autisticly screech when the exchange asks for SOF, you're going to be fine.

Almost everybody, and this probably includes you, has what they need to demonstrate SOF.

>>25626364
grownup aka govcuck

never paid never will moving to third world when im 1m

>>25626568

Is that so?

Funny, since I'm assigned as an expert to numerous cases -against- the government, questioning their use of the same analysis tools and demonstrating how this analysis needs to be used appropriately and carefully.

But you've clearly done your research <3

>>25626608
Yeah, I can tell you live in a nice western society where excess information on the net gets a simple follow up question. What the actual fuck do Hong Kong protesters, Uigher Muslims, Rohingya Muslims, or any other wrongfully persecuted group need from a surveillance coin or SOF? You don’t understand that having certain access to money, in places that aren’t democracies, can get you killed

>>25626618

Third world would be your best bet. You'd also be pretty shitty-off with only $1M. If you're going to go with that plan, shoot for at least $10M and a third world country, or $100M and a first world.

And don't post about it.

>>25626658
The existence of the tools in the hands of democratically elected leaders is one thing. Creating tools that can be used by authoritarians and depots means that people can be subjugated and coerced. It’s Pandora’s box.

>>25626694

There's a reason why the best tools for blockchain analysis aren't sold to the CCP etc.

You also clearly aren't in the know about how people like me use these tools to fuck over the CCP (more accurately, their homies with the DPRK)

I concur in full with the groups you mentioned having access to privacy coins for those very reasons of persecution -- which is why privacy coins need to not fall under scrutiny for stupid fucking reasons, like the edgelord LARPers talking about evading "millions in taxes" when irl they have about tree-fiddy XMR

>>25626800
>we don’t sell them to the CCP
Do you know how rampant corporate espionage is? I guarantee that technology from two years ago is in the CCP’s hands. My problem is with the normalization of chain analytics by the acceptance of a public ledger. Its a trustless system for executing transactions but requires trust in the majority to not coerce the minority.

>>25626508

> The idea that the feds will actually do anything against you for simply owning (or merely having owned in the past) monero is entirely unrealistic.

You're right and wrong here. This is currently not the case, but people like you need to be getting off your ass NOW to make sure this doesn't happen by speaking (verbally and with your vote). You seem based, so you're likely not naive to ongoing conversations about regulations that would be awful.

>>25626800
They probably already got it unauthorized or developed it themselves. the anon you replied to has got a valid point though.

>>25626861

Funny you mention corporate espionage because I've used that as an example of concerns I have about the future of these tools on podcasts, unprompted, so you're quite possibly one of the first folks to be contemplating that.

First of all, there's no "we" -- my firm doesn't provide a forensics tool. We have some internal ones, for niche situations, but we use tools provided by other firms. All of those other firms would refuse the CCP as a client. I would not provide them with the attribution data I do otherwise. The CCP can not be trusted with attribution relevant to, as an obvious example, DPRK hacks. Which there a fucking shitload of in crypto.

>>25626927
I’m sure someone in your firm would sell the tools for XMR

>>25626899

They do have access to blockchain analysis tools, but they are dogshit tools.

And really, their tool could have a UX as good as that of Chainalysis, but it will be effectively dogshit without extremely good attribution. None of those tools have a fraction of a percent a tool like Chainalysis has. Hence, it's presently not an issue.

Could that change in the future? Yeah, and it scares the shit out of me for just dissidents in China -- and that's why I want privacy coins to not fall under scrutiny elsewhere, for the wrong reasons.

My 6D chess here is probably starting to make a lot of fucking sense to some of you. It's hard to "do both" but I'm trying my best to do the impossible for all of us

>>25626953

What tools for XMR? Because anything publicly discussed or alluded to about that is bullshit.

There are some ways, to possibly and with a degree of error that I would absolutely not be willing to include in one of our reports (let alone my testimony) do some degree of XMR tracing but it is for all practical purposes worthless.

And I think that's fucking good, btw.

>>25626986
Do you know that for a fact? Because everyone knows that China's good at stealing everything and they're not too transparent about what they have, could easily be that they want you to think they can't easily track bitcoin just like you do.

>>25627031
No, they would sell a blockchain tool to an agent of X organization in exchange for XMR.

>>25627066

Obviously, I can't pull open access records to Chainalysis servers, but I'm extremely confident the CCP has no Chainalysis access. Chainalysis is extremely selective about their clients. They monitor use of the tool and people like me are in frequent communication with their users for unrelated work. It'd be difficult for them to get an insider.

It's also a matter of tiered access, e.g., someone like me has a higher tier because of the nature of the work I do (CSAM/HT cases, shit involving DPRK etc. -- and I work with agencies that vetted that).

The reality I can tell you is that they do have access to tools from non-US/western based firms, but again, the attribution in those tools is severely, SEVERELY lacking to the point of making them very ineffective.

The concern I have is that any jeet can code a blockchain analysis tool, if the definition if a blockchain analysis tool is visualizing a blockchain -- that's been done dozens of times over by now. But if the CCP get as good at attribution as we are in the west? Yeah, that'll be an issue for dissidents in China, for sure

>>25627072

Your posts are kinda lazy, anon. Who is "they"? How much XMR?

I promise you that a random team of coders isn't going to just crack XMR if you just throw them bags of cash. If it was that easy, the government would've done it by now. They wouldn't need to take payment in XMR or in secret (though I'd love to get paid in XMR by the government, I would never accept a request to break XMR not even just because of ethical reasons, but because I don't think it can be done in any effective way with existing computing and I'm not a piece of shit that'll have hundreds of millions of tax payer dollars thrown at me for something I know I can't deliver on, because of this crazy thing called ethics)

>>25624765
>source: I'm a blockchain analyst,
What kind of skills do you need to get a job doing this? I'm a stats grad student, but I assume you need some CS skills?
I don't want to derail the thread but if there are any resources you could quickly send I'd much appreciate it

>>25626072
they are not any more useful than DEX like bisq

>>25626219
why even bother. just dont even touch garbage like btc. btc is a fedcoin

>>25627072

Re-read your post and realized it's not about breaking XMR, so I'm a dumbass and ignore the above, unless that topic also interests you.

But I did address your theory in my other post. The nature of the payment also wouldn't be the only identifying factor in such an access exchange, so no, you missed the mark on what "they" would do again, how viable it is, how easy it would be to get away with etc

>>25627250
Why are you assuming chainanalysis is the only company that does that? I'd guess china surely made their own tools, they don't lack the budget nor the IQ for it, nothing's really stopping them it's not like discovering singularity.

>>25625687
an XMR group posted every now and then here
I don't have the link but I'm sure it'll be posted on the XMR generals

>>25627338

You'd be be best off, right now, getting into a compliance role with an exchange so you can get familiar with Chainalysis/etc. That, to me, is much more relevant experience than anything else.

There aren't any courses, degrees etc. that set someone up to do this currently. The closest things to that are Chainalysis CRC, which... you kinda take if you're going to have access to the tool (e.g., work for an exchange)

I've recruited all of my current folks off judgement of their reachability, problem-solving skills, basically if they pass my "not a Windex taste taster, and I think I could teach this person how to write a report, testify, etc." shit test.

Re: CS skills, not relevant to specifically blockchain analysis roles. They're not bad to have, but we have people that can make us the tools we need for outlier scenarios. I care way, way more about "street smarts" than I would about CS talent. One good exception maybe is red-teaming experience. If you can show me you know how the naughty crypto people would think, you're a candidate

>>25627414

I've explicitly said multiple times they have made their own tools lol.

I've said Chainalysis is the only company doing it extremely effectively. Tools like Elliptic and CipherTrace aren't bad, they're just not "great", and those are still quite beyond the tools offered by those in Asia, which are little more than blockchains visualized with Etherscan-tier attribution at best.

>>25627498
Thanks anon

>>25627540
every intelligence agency in the world is probably using fully developed tools we know nothing about. 5 eyes probably has its own internal network for blockchain tracing

>>25627587

np anon <3

>>25627609

Yeah, so I'm not going to talk about things I can't, obviously, nor does anyone know everything, but I can tell you pretty fucking confidently there isn't some crazy advanced blockchain analysis tool the USG has access to I haven't heard of -- because I'm one of the people they pick the brain the most of. As in, tied with one only a few others.

No, 5 eyes does not. Because of how blockchain tracing works on a fundamental level. That would require every exchange to opt-in to providing 100%, limitless data to governments. That's insane and would never be complied by with any exchange, and if they were required to do so by some new regulation, you'd know about it way in advanced and crypto would become worthless... so no. Don't talk out of your ass anon <3

>>25627732
dude, practically every exchange is kyc now. that data is available to governments on request. do you really think they arent compiling all that + data on what crypto went where from every exchange, and tracking basically everything? why do you think KYC even exists. for fun?
also i think youre lying about working in the space

>>25627866

KYC has nothing to do with the transaction analysis you alluded to. Those are entirely different types of data. Obviously, relevant in a larger data set, but you're comparing apples to oranges if the context of your statement was "5 Eyes can see all crypto endlessly and forever". I could have real-world KYC, no KYC, or a pick of my dick as my KYC on an exchange, but that doesn't provide them access to my deposit and withdrawal records from an exchange.

It sounds like you may not know this, but blockchain analysis stops at exchange deposits, and then requires subpoenas to continue, for a reason. I'll let you think about what that reason could be (hint: think volume), and if you get it right, I'll do shoe on head. Let's get weird and educated tonight.

>>25623318
white spaces are walled USD garden. instituitions care, anyone who wants usd cares...

>>25626866
> with your vote

you already lost.

>>25627992

Institutions (presuming you mean compliant ones in the US) aren't buying their BTC from places that would be cause for concern. Those places do analysis. Sometimes, so do the institutions. It's a requirement for them to be doing these checks, and have these tools, that would identify the tainted tools to begin with -- so no.

Chinese OTCs? They don't give a shit.

All coins, "tainted" or otherwise, end up with happy homes.

>>25628053

Cute virtue-signaling. Maybe scroll up and see that I'm part of the privacy advocacy team before posting cringe feel-good messaging that belongs on Reddit.

There is a reason the Monero team doesn't advertise with "break the law using our shit." Because, and this may blow your mind, XMR is fucking awesome and doesn't need to be marketed as a tool for illicit activity.

Evading taxes on your stack of 6 XMR isn't meaningful protest, it's being a greedy moonboi jackass.

Meaningful protest is to do something of value regarding regulation, and being a "privacy advocate" that was too lazy to read a few posts up is not meaningful protest.

>>25628053
>not voting because of privacy
this is the dumbest thing I've heard this year, and I already know nothing will top this in 2021

>>25628146
>virtue signalling
>tells you to don't break the law
kek. I'm sure the law is in my favor

>>25628146
But you have to admit, that technology will improve to such a point that trends can be detected on the blockchain and that profiles will be made of individuals’ behaviors. It’s inevitable. Chain analytics wasn’t even a consideration in 2010

>>25628277
It’s no different than Facebook’s Dien coin except every person on the planet will have access to the dataset required to understand your financial behaviors. That is a terrifying thought and exactly why XMR will kill BTC in the long run. It may take decades for the tech to make public ledgers untenable, but it will certainly happen in our lifetimes.

>>25628229
>YOU NEED TO VOTE BECAUSE THEY WILL FOLLOW YOUR INTERESTS TRUST ME

>>25628265
>>25628053
>>25628333
And there it is. A /pol/ faggot finds the thread and shits all over it, well it's late anyway I might as well head off to sleep.

>>25628265

>>25628265

Again, scroll up and you'll see that I said clearly I don't agree with all laws. But the people breaking them, in the context of tax evasion, aren't doing so on behalf of privacy advocacy or meaningful protest. They're doing it because they're moonboi gambling addicts that just want a hire stack. The motives are plain for most.

But I don't expect you to be able to comprehend why it might be far more potent to, say, write your elected officials (or choose better ones), instead of "advocate" by making a jeet-tier plebbit virtue-signal post that is better placed on a moon-farming thread.

Back to plebbit with you.

>>25628277

You're missing the point. The tech isn't what "detects" things. You don't understand how these tools work on a fundamental level.

In order to profile behaviors comprehensively and effectively, I'll spell it out for you since you failed the test: ANY activity post-deposit to an exchange would need to be provided. This is presently only doable via (in essentially all situations) subpoena.

So unless you literally reuse the same address for everything, AND posted it on your Twitter with your real name, I don't know shit about you until the first subpoena. And then I can trace funds from whatever wallets I learned of in that subpoena, all the way up to new exchanges, where I will need new subpoenas. There is a reason why the work I do is an intensive pain in the fucking cock.

You're suggesting that entire process would magically disappear for your 5 Eyes theory to be in effect. That's insane, anon, and I hope I just educated you on why lol

>>25628417
>I'm a privacy advocate
>you need to have privacy for the reasons that I like

Maybe we should elect you in power so you can control people how you wish, oh wise one ?

>>25628509
>public wallets
>public transactions
>p2p widespread activity
>person A can learn the entire transaction history of person B by engaging in a transaction with them
When I engage in commerce with someone, I’d rather not expose my entire history or irreversibly link my identity with a wallet address. There is no way for BTC to get around this. You are focused on AML/KYC compliance which I completely understand as being necessary for a functioning society. But how can you expect individuals to use a coin that can expose their financial history to everyone that they transact with?

>>25628567

That's not what I said at all.

It's pretty plain that I was stating that actual effective advocacy is what I described. People that LARP they're advocates because they edgelord-talk about tax evasion (and, in most cases, they're LARPing about it anyway) are typically lazy and uneducated.

Maybe let's compromise on at least fucking do both. ;)

>>25628567
>>25628333
>>25628265
You are not forming coherent arguments anon, just seething with cringe facebook tier pictures. If you have a point, make an argument with complete sentences like others have done in this thread.

Otherwise what you're doing is equivalent some 12 years old teenager spamming emojis in a group chat.

>>25628600
Linking wallets to identities is how Bitcoin fails as a trustless currency because you have to TRUST that whoever you engage in a Transaction with is not a potential adversary or willing to exchange your wallet linked identity. BTC only works for online basement dweller commerce who do not lose fungibility by public human interaction.

>>25628600

Again, as I described, that's literally not how this shit works. anon.

If you re-use the same wallet, for everything, that's on you. Any jeet can open Etherscan and see your shit.

That has nothing to do with blockchain analysis or exchanges.

Practice common sense OPSEC. This isn't even privacy 101, this is just being responsible with wallet management.

If someone as you described is able to have everything about their activity ascertained via one wallet, they have much deeper issues to address first.

There are plenty of ways to get around the situation you described. Legally, too, and that are at no threat of being outlawed.

>>25624765
>>25627732
>source of funds
Thank you for posting in this thread. Interesting stuff, but I just can't believe the exchanges (American ones anyway) are going to continue to operate so freely as you seem to allude to. I was in the XMR general the other day debating with another anon about centralized exchanges potentially scrutinizing privacy coins like Monero due to the new language coming out from governments based on the FinCEN recommendations.

His contention was that Monero and Bitcoin will be under equal amounts of scrutiny and thus more people will be likely to show an interest in conducting transactions in Monero. I may be mistaken, but my argument is that while this may be true, the long term outlook for usage of Monero on centralized exchanges must be somewhat in jeopardy if governments are beginning to put pressure on exchanges to verify source of funds from their users in any meaningful sense, as well as potentially requiring KYC information on what they call "covered wallet counterparties." This is pretty antithetical to even conducting transactions in Monero so when you say
>That would require every exchange to opt-in to providing 100%, limitless data to governments
While this probably won't happen (especially to the foreign exchanges that GNF) I think the real risk, as a Monero holder, is that some exchanges just say "this coin isn't worth the trouble because its users, as a percentage, will be far more likely to be 'non-compliant'" and just decide to delist it so they don't have to deal with the specter of a subpoena or some kind of sanction.

I love Monero, but it does face unique existential threats.

>>25628687
>There are plenty of ways to get around the situation you described
Not without Monero.

>>25628687
So every hosted wallet that John G noralmperson uses needs to have an automated tumbler so that they don’t have to use clunky Bitcoin which requires wallet hopping to engage in day to day commerce? That is an untenable situation for “digital cash.” You might as well just use XMR and comply with SOF orders when transacting with institutions.
>that’s not how chain analysis works
You may mean that the current application of chain analysis does not work in that way, but have you heard of the NSA? There is no area of life that is sacred when it comes to “public welfare.” You can speak for yourself when you say that you and your company do not use chain analysis for individual behavior tracking, but it will not make me think that other people are less inclined.

>>25628626
Still didn't show how it's more effective to vote every 4 years and wish that someone has your best interests in mind, because since in 2020 alone we went from "wash your hands" to "you need to have substances forcibly injected in your bloodstream and you need a license to go outside" I don't see how they will so gladly help us in our goal of privacy.

>>25628762
Basically, Bitcoin is perfectly fine as digital cash for cypherpunks who understand OpSec. XMR is the standard for anonymous digital cash because it is made by cypherpunks so normies can have OpSec tools baked into the protocol. The leap for Bitcoin to serve as digital cash is too great for widespread adoption.

>>25628745

How freely exchanges can operate in the future will largely be based upon what efforts to self-regulate exchanges take now. Right now, it's not enough. It's a problem.

I don't want to see government regulate, whenever avoidable, which is why I continue to suggest exchanges figure out better solutions to the problems. Unfortunately, those solutions cost money, and it's easier for exchanges to not give a shit -- because a compliance program means less volume (because less dirty problem.)

There isn't enough incentive to be a good exchange, and there is incentive not to be. This is why, if anything, in the US, the more likely thing is foreign exchanges increasingly not allowing US residents. Which will just be US enforcement action increasing, but we've seen that cycle.

I share your concerns about how an exchange could view XMR, but those of us in the know, know better. I can count on one hand how many cases I've investigated (and I investigate exclusively crimes involving digital assets) that involved XMR (this isn't including cases where someone has a seed phrase compromise and loses all types of crypto, but the point I'm making here is comparing illicit use of, say, BTC, relative to illicit use of XMR)

Perkins Cole put out a solid paper that addresses this sort of thing and I echo almost all of their sentiment. Consequently, I can tell you that the concerns about privacy coins and exchange compliance are largely ill-founded.

>>25629018
>How freely exchanges can operate in the future will largely be based upon what efforts to self-regulate exchanges take now. Right now, it's not enough. It's a problem.
https://www.fatf-gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/recommendations/RBA-VA-VASPs.pdf
Does something like this actually have any sway or is it just something an organization puts out to justify their budget?

>>25628762

You're missing the points. Entirely.

Every John G should give a shit enough to practice privacy now. Normies don't give a shit, which is why I said that a privacy-by-default approach is how to fix this problem.

Whether that is XMR, or CoinJoin by default, or some privacy tool that spawns out of my cock every time you transact is irrelevant. All of those routes (maybe not the one with my cock) have a way for people to provide SOF.

The NSA to your point certainly creeps the shit out of even someone like me based upon their track record, but everything about decentralized digital assets kills your mass surveillance fear. Could they do profiling? To the extent OSINT goes, and that's it. Anything more requires them to be given data from exchanges, completely. This isn't Google search results. These are considered financial records. They're not given out for no reason. Governments get told "no" a fucking lot, and justifiably so. Look at Kraken's yearly reports on this for some context, anon -- it'll likely make a bit more sense to you after

>>25629185

Not as much sway as some would think -- people (the public) have misunderstood parts of this and internet-riots ensued.

But yeah, it's deemed a relevant initial launchpad, though most RBAs are figured out through common industry practice (which is a lot more complicated to describe than I have energy for rn)

Maybe another night to elucidate on that one, but I've gotta pass the fuck out. Was fun chatting with you and all the other anons. I'll try to post again sometime instead of just lurk.

>>25629396
sleep tight
I've tried but it's hard to make heads or tails over that one from the outside

>>25628081
yes but wouldnt the incoming regs apply equally to their customers. and it only matters for last trade to USD - cashing out. what are the tiers of volume which trip a wire?

>>25629298
Not missing any points here. I think we have two different perspectives. You are in the KYC/AML world and see BTC in that light. I am concerned about BTC’s transparency creating an environment that is conducive to a surveillance state.

>>25623587
>Overall both these factors
You described the same factor twice.

>>25623587
Tainted bitcoin is tracked by the central exchanges. Those are the ones you need to use in order to cash out to fiat.
Thus, someone with clean bitcoin on a CEX who didn’t want to pay a premium on the btc/xmr pair (due to the possibility of tainted btc) would simply swap btc/usd then usd/xmr. Voila, no premium.
So who would use Atomic Swap? Someone with tainted btc, that’s who.

>>25629832
That's exactly what I said retard. It would increase the relative price of BTC/XMR because of it.

>>25624410
>Exchanges currently don't care about tainted coins
Tell me about the time you cashed out some tainted coin to fiat. Did you have to meet some guy in a bar via localbitcoin.com?

>>25628509
>You're suggesting that entire process would magically disappear for your 5 Eyes theory to be in effect
5 eyes doesnt exist to enforce kyc/aml compliance. stop being naive. your objection is a legal one. you sound like those who doubted the existence of global information harvesting back in the 90s. if there is a will, there is a way. there is a record...pressure will applied...they already have everything they need. hell they probably have a split fiber for all traffic out of every major exchange.

>>25627363
Atomic swaps are not priced in kek. Not even sure if it can be done. It will get priced in when it's closer to completion.

If it can be done however you can be damn sure darknet markets will provide instructions on how to convert to monero and a ton of people will buy BTC and swap to monero.

Not to mention all of the stuck traced bitcoin. Jesus christ. The price will explode towards 1000 or much more.

Also the protocol make swaps possible with any coin. If monero is the first to do it the price increases will be tremendous

this is not how I imagined the decoupling to look like

>>25623131
I had a gut feeling thats been building up about Monero being the true King. The true Bitcoin. With all these regulations the more attractive it becomes.

>>25626364
Just make an onlyfans and donate to yourself lmao

>>25630288
yeah NFTs already utilized for this

>>25622589
XMR is dead anon. Don't fall for old dead maxi's.

Loki is about to rebrand to OXEN. I suggest you get in under a $35M marketcap and hold to a $350M marketcap.

>>25631193
Shoo pajeet

>>25629832
What you arent paying for a premium you're paying in exchange fees doing that