Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 526 posts

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#481

Post by 8note »

vel0city wrote: post #448
IG_Semmelweiss wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What matters is notthe list of competitors, but instead the market share. I don't think anyone can say Nike has 20% of all US customers of shoes. But its almost certain that Github has > 20% of all US customers in software development. Here lies the point. In order to enforce antitrust, there should be a clear line that once crossed, you are deemed a common carrier or something to that effect. I think even as low as…

Nike has >30% of the revenues of the sports clothing industry. I guess Nike is a common carrier, they have to let me in their stores and the government must force them to sell their shoes at government regulated prices. If there's not a store near me, they must build one for me or offer me shipping at equal prices to everyone else. After all, they can't discriminate just because I'm far away from their closest distri…

Can I use Nike to design shoes that they will make for me or something? What makes them common carrier like?

On the other hand, they are a common carrier - they aren't limiting which countries or streets I'm allowed to wear their shoes on, nor what kinds of sports I choose to play with them.

I don't think anyone would be favourable to giving Nike more control over how people use their products

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#482

Post by 8note »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #201
dingleberry420 wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure, thoughtcrime is a thing now in modern America?

> thoughtcrime is a thing now in modern America? Nothing wrong with writing code. Code is speech, that's settled law. But the Tornado Cash team wasn't just publishing. They were building a tool. Semenov styled himself as a co-founder and the group advertised open positions on its website.

Is that settled law? Have the anti-circumvention parts of the DMCA been struck down?

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#483

Post by fragmede »

tromp wrote: post #205
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> only had to block accounts that contributed after establishing the sanction The people who built Tornado Cash are already in trouble. The crime--facilitating money laundering--has already been committed. OFAC is an enforcement office. Its lists are more like wanted posters than rules. GitHub is cutting ties with people likely to be charged with federal crimes. If some of them are going to continue contributing to t…

> The crime--facilitating money laundering Did the people who built blockchains with built-in mandatory mixing (Monero) or optional completely obscured transaction inputs (ZCash) also facilitate money laundering? If not, what is the crucial difference? Am I myself in trouble for having (co-)designed a mixing service [1]? [1] https://forum.grin.mw/t/mimblewimble-coinswap-proposal

I mean probably not, but given what has come to pass, if I were you, I’d be looking for an actual, reputable lawyer in this area to ask, not some randoms on the Internet.

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#484

Post by 8note »

whatisweb3 wrote: post #364
zaphar wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be arguing as if this is an all or nothing proposition. Instead there are definite degrees of intent and interaction here. In the E2EE case the degree of interaction and intent is quite low. In the mixer case the degree is quite high. The line I believe should be drawn somewhere in the middle. But the Mixer case definitely is on the wrong side for me.

E2EE is all-or-nothing. You don't see Matrix adding a special case in the encryption technique to notify authorities if the phrase "nuclear" or "minor" appears in a message. The intent of E2EE and Tornado Cash is exactly the same: privacy. The line you draw here is arbitrary based on your own subjective view of the space.

E2EE has to terminate somewhere, likely before the screen unless you can decrypt and encrypt in your head

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#485

Post by 8note »

bluGill wrote: post #178
withinboredom wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite possible these contributors had forks, which is why they were blocked.

More importantly, these contributors are likely to have local forks when they can quickly upload under a different name. They can still create new accounts though.

And GitHub can continue to ban them under OFAC compliance?

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#486

Post by 8note »

ncmncm wrote: post #59
5350-uiop-1130 wrote: post #26

It's ironic, Tornado cash is something closer to the true spirit of "crypto" currency. guess only rich insiders are allowed to launder money.

Lately real estate has been the favored avenue for money laundering, as it retains all the necessary loopholes. Or did, last I checked. Houses in Vancouver BC have, e.g., been favored among mainland Chinese. Dunno the current status.

I imagine it helps to launder money in countries that done honour the predicate crime's illegality

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#487

Post by vel0city »

8note wrote: post #481
vel0city wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nike has >30% of the revenues of the sports clothing industry. I guess Nike is a common carrier, they have to let me in their stores and the government must force them to sell their shoes at government regulated prices. If there's not a store near me, they must build one for me or offer me shipping at equal prices to everyone else. After all, they can't discriminate just because I'm far away from their closest distri…

Can I use Nike to design shoes that they will make for me or something? What makes them common carrier like? On the other hand, they are a common carrier - they aren't limiting which countries or streets I'm allowed to wear their shoes on, nor what kinds of sports I choose to play with them. I don't think anyone would be favourable to giving Nike more control over how people use their products

> On the other hand, they are a common carrier - they aren't limiting which countries or streets I'm allowed to wear their shoes on, nor what kinds of sports I choose to play with them.

That's...not a common carrier at all. Traditionally, a common carrier is "a person or company that transports goods or passengers on regular routes at set rates." So traditionally, a rail line is a common carrier. A pipeline is a common carrier. Air freight and truck shipping, kind of, but you're then getting away from that "regular routes" kind of thing. This was then logically expanded to things like telecommunications, since they're essentially transmitting data along regular routes aka the actual telephone wires.

A big thing about becoming "common carriers" was this idea of regular routes. Competition gets challenging/impossible when there's really a single route for some things. There's really only going to be one set of rails connecting towns. There's not going to be a bunch of different companies stringing telephone wires to everyone's houses. There aren't going to be a lot of fiber runs through a neighborhood. These things are all common carriers and are natural monopolies.

I can go buy an apple at the grocery. I can eat that apple raw. I can turn it in to apple sauce. I can bake it in a pie. I can juggle with it. I can give it to a friend. I can donate it to charity. The fact I can do all these things with it does not make the apple producer or the grocer a common carrier. It's entirely unrelated.

The person I was replying to was stating any company with 10% market share in any kind of metric should be considered a common carrier. Nike has more than a 10% market share in total revenue of sport clothing. So they say Nike should be a common carrier. This makes no sense to me.

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#488

Post by ETH_start »

tiahura wrote: post #458
akiselev wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual prison time wasn't on the table until the federal prosecutors took over and tried to make an example of him [1]. Until then, everyone expected a slap on the wrist. I remember those events clearly and even JSTOR, the "victim" in the case, backpedaled on the prosecution before he committed suicide. He was driven to suicide by an overzealous federal prosecutor trying to make a career for themselves. [1] https://w…

He made the choice. No one else. Or, if you blame the prosecutor for driving him, do you also blame his friends and family for not being supportive enough?

The primary responsibility falls on the prosecutor. The prison sentence they sought for Swartz was not by any stretch justified. This injustice seriously endangered not just Swartz's mental health, but his prospects for a fulfilling life, even had he lived.

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#489

Post by mbrochh »

junon wrote: post #7

People on Twitter are either wilfully dumb or simply ignorant. GitHub had to do this. It was required of them by law. Tornado was sanctioned . > These prohibitions include the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any blocked person and the receipt of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services from any such person. This is, unambiguously, di…

"People on Twitter" are the exact same people that are also on HN, Reddit, Facebook, TikTok etc etc etc.

Re: GitHub deleted accounts of people who contributed to Tornado Cash repos

#490

Post by nuclearnice1 »

PeterisP wrote: post #123
nuclearnice1 wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with your analysis. Ex post facto criminal laws are barred by the constitution for good reason. Retroactive punishment leaves people guessing what actions might or might not be punished.

Well, Github blocking an account is not considered "punishment" according to criminal law or constitution, only standard contract law would apply and I believe Github has the right to terminate such contracts if they wish. This consideration would apply if and only if the government would actually pursue criminal charges against someone who contributed to TornadoCash - which they possibly would if someone would do st…

Well, you misunderstood me.

I agree that GitHub’s actions are not regulated by the constitution or criminal.

Additionally I imagine Guthub’s contract terms are such that they can cancel at any time for any reason.

What I intended to say is “I agree the poster who complains of retroactive account deletion. We can look to the constitutional process for some reasons why retroactive punishment might be a bad idea.”

I did not mean to imply that GitHub’s actions were unconstitutional. They were bad actions for the same reasons that the constitution bars retroactive punishment. It’s hard to guide current behavior based on future law. They were likely legal.

Post reply on HN