/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>30421333
>Not their keys, not their coins.

That's not how it works.

1. Your coins are blacklisted for "suspicious activity"

2. You're not aware of this.

3. You send your coins to your usual exchange to trade/cash out/whatever

4. Your coins are frozen and seized the moment they touch the exchange.

5. You now have to prove they are not the proceeds of shady dealings or forfeit the lot.

TL;DR: the government doesn't need to directly seize your Bitcoin, it just needs to bully others to do it for them under threat of regulatory action.

Pic related.

>>30292737
>when it starts impacting their business they will have a change of heart and won't care.

They're complying with regulations, not fucking with customers for the hell of it.

Bitcoin is fundamentally broken: if you don't mix, you're potentially in for trouble. If you do mix, you're potentially in for trouble.

And even if you do jump through all the necessary hoops you can still get fucked simply by receiving tainted coins from somebody else. Pic related.

Yet all of these headaches are a non-issue if you #JustUseMonero.

>>29897596
>What kind of retarded scaremonger picture is this? I look at the TXT file, and there are like 20 people in total with banned XBT addresses, and all of them are Russians, Chinks, North Koreans, or Arabs.

Well, for one thing people need to be aware and careful to not transact with sanctioned persons and their tained coins. Second, just the fact that the government is even able to do this to ANYBODY should be setting off alarm bells since it invalidates the whole "censorship resistant" premise of BTC.

No fungibility = no future.

>>29775176
>So if my crypto get "blacklisted" and that taints anyone I transact with, what's stopping me from trolling everyone I hate by sending them 100 sats each? Now they're guilty of transacting with "a criminal" and have no way to prove their innocence.

There is obviously some kind of minimum threshold that activates the red flag. In any case, the point of blacklisting addresses is to make the funds they hold so toxic that they're rendered less valuable or outright worthless since you can't send them to exchanges and most people won't want anything to do with them.

This will become an issue when atomic swaps go live, we'll see a plenty of coins on the OFAC blacklist on offer.

>>29755469
>>seized
>Explain how they "seize" 12 words you have memorized?

1. Your address/coins are blacklisted.

2. You're not aware of this.

3. You send your coins to an exchange to trade or cash out as per usual.

4. The exchange automatically seizes your coins as is required by regulation.

5. Now you have to prove you haven't been involved in related criminal activity, otherwise your coins are gone.

This is exactly what happened to some poor Iranian bastid a few years back, he unknowingly received tainted Bitcoins and ended up on the OFAC blacklist. Pic related.

THIS is why privacy and fungibility are so critical.

>>29523751
>bitcoin turns most people into nervous addicts

Just that fact that unknowingly receiving tainted Bitcoins could potentially get your address blacklisted and coins seized is reason enough to never use BTC.

Who the fuck needs all that stress when you can just use Monero?

>>29295123
>>sorry sir your coins have a 43% taint level, we are locking your account and you will receive a visit from law enforcement shortly

Scary thing is that has already happened, a couple years back some Iranian Bitcoin dealer unknowingly received tainted BTC, got blacklisted by Uncle Sam and then had his coins seized by an exchange. Pic related.

This is why fungibility matters, folks

>>28850980
>so really BTC's current method is not that bad. Not many people use it, so lower anonymity set

Hence why optional privacy = no privacy.


>but on the upside the coin is not seen as "hax0r black coin" and is not blacklisted on many exchanges by pressure from stupid gov.

Actually, "suspicious" BTC addresses are being blacklisted by the US Treasury with increasing frequency. Some poor Iranian bastid received tainted Bitcoins a while back and had the lot declared toxic by Uncle Sam. Pic related.

The issue here is that the moment these "toxic" coins touch a compliant exchange they'll automatically be seized, and with Bitcoin, unless they're freshly mined you can never be 100% certain your coins are sufficiently "clean" enough to evade scrutiny

>>28780254
>why don't you think BTC will survive the next 10 years?

1. Its fundamental technical limitations mean it will likely never achieve a reliable i.e. Monero-tier degree of privacy and fungibility.

>Bitcoin Will Never Be Truly Private Says Andreas Antonopoulos

In a livestream Q&A on Antonopoulos’ YouTube channel on July 7, he said Bitcoin (BTC) was unlikely to ever implement privacy features similar to those used by Monero (XMR).

Antonopoulos said creating such features on a cryptocurrency like BTC “would create an enormous amount of controversy.” In addition, he said the structure of Bitcoin simply doesn’t allow ring signatures and stealth addresses.

“I think what we’re going to see soon is Schnorr, Taproot, and Tapscript, which open the door to a lot of improvements,” Antonopoulos said, “But they still do not involve zero-knowledge proofs or the types of ring signatures and stealth addresses that are done in Monero. Bitcoin is not a privacy coin.”

Bitcoin can be better thought of as pseudonymous rather than fully anonymous, as many transactions on the BTC blockchain can still be traced even with these privacy improvements.

>https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-will-never-be-truly-private-says-andreas-antonopoulos

2. Insufficient privacy and fungibility mean BTC taint issues will continue to snowball and thus BTC will continue being blacklisted by governmental agencies, primarily OFAC aka the US Treasury. Pic related.

3. As Bitcoin develops a reputation for being vulnerable to governmental blacklisting and effective seizure, confidence will inevitably erode and hodlers will start to jump ship to more secure protocols, primarily XMR.

How do I avoid receiving tainted coins? Not keen on having my address blacklisted by Uncle Sam.

>>27966651
>How is Monero safe from blacklisting?

Untraceable transactions render blacklisting useless. Bitcoin CAN be effectively blacklisted because all transactions are transparent and traceable.

>>27297059
>I said it once and I will say it again. It relies on intermediary coins which actually have a store of value. Id rather just hold BTC/LTC and only swap when I need an extra layer of security.

BTC/LTC are inherently non-fungible and thus vulnerable to being blacklisted by the US Treasury

Happened to some poor Iranian bastid, unknowingly received tainted BTC and had the lot seized by Uncle Sam.

"Store of value" lolololol

>>26586810
>Buy Bitcoin

>Unknowingly receive tainted coins

>coins get blacklisted by US Treasury

>move coins to exchange in desperate attempt to cash out only to discover they've been seized

>learn lesson and only use Monero moving foward

>>26215128
>Is it even possible to shut down bitcoin at this point?

The network, probably not. But addresses are vulnerable to being blacklisted since BTC isn't fungible.

>>26174948

Make sure not to accept any tainted bitcoins!

>>26111638
>BTC will remain in the top, and if you don't get it I have no time to explain it, sorry.

Because being non-fungible and thus ending up on govt blacklists is a good thing?

>>26018385
>It will reach BTC levels because all the normies who think BTC is the future of money haven't realised that the ledger is 100% transparent.
>Once they finally catch on that perhaps they would like at least some privacy, then XMR will start gaining.

Indeed, BTC's inherent non-fungibility has been making more headlines recently but currently very few normies realize the US government actually maintains a blacklist of tainted digital currency addresses.

>US Treasury Department Blacklists 20 Bitcoin Addresses Tied to Alleged North Korean Hackers
https://www.coindesk.com/us-treasury-department-blacklists-20-bitcoin-addresses-tied-to-alleged-north-korean-hackers

So as BTC taint continues to proliferate we're going to see more higher-profile cases of people having their BTC blacklisted, which doesn't bode well for the Bitcoin Empire.

Fungibility matters.

Friendly reminder that Bitcoin's inherent infungibility has real-world consequences and that the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a blacklist of tainted digital currency addresses.

>>25933400
>cuz we'll never get past bitcoin in the public mind.

Once the public understands that the US government maintains a blacklist of tainted digital currency addresses, things might change.

Friendly reminder that Bitcoin's inherent infungibility has real-world consequences and that the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a blacklist of tainted digital currency addresses.

Friendly reminder that Bitcoin's inherent infungibility has real-world consequences and that the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a blacklist of tainted digital currency addresses.

Sauces:

https://www.coindesk.com/iranian-bitcoin-trader-on-us-sanctions-blacklist-says-hes-innocent

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm556

https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/646

Daily reminder that Bitcoin's inherent infungibility has real-world consequences and that the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a list of tainted digital currency addresses.

Daily reminder that Bitcoin's inherent infungibility has real-world consequences and that the US Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) maintains a list of tainted digital currency addresses.

Sauces:

https://www.coindesk.com/iranian-bitcoin-trader-on-us-sanctions-blacklist-says-hes-innocent

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/sm556

https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/financial-sanctions/faqs/646

>>25756182
>Stores of value are not supposed to go up 402% in just a year. A store of value is supposed to be safe and non-volatile. No one knows where bitcoin will be in a week, let alone 10 years. But gold in 10 years will have slow, steady increases beating out inflation, which is what makes it a store of value.
>
>This isn't even to say it's a bad investment, it's just not a store of value.

Not to mention that actual stores of value are fungible and thus won't get blacklisted by the US government.