51–60 of 827 posts
So a software developer is held responsible for the software. If the software is largely SaaS, then I can see the sense in that. A software developer of SaaS is also a service developer, arguably even a service operator although that depends on how the service is developed and operated. I'm sure the judge will be thrilled to have to listen to arguments about the with the nuances of dev, ops, devops and a distributed…
In this case, will the Tornado developer benefit from the smart contracts? I think the service charge about 0.3%, so that money mainly go to the TORN holders?
Sad to see the EU bow down to the criminal racket that is the US financial system. Even if this developer is not extradited, the US has again succeeded in maintaining the culture of fear, where they can get their slimy hands on anyone anywhere for any reason they want.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Should knife makers be held responsible if someone stabs someone? TC was designed for privacy and bad actors _also_ took advantage of that. Prosecutors basically need to prove that privacy is bad, good luck with that.
>Should knife makers be held responsible if someone stabs someone? Not a valid comparison. Courts and law have long held the completely reasonable position that if the main intent of a product is not to commit crime, that those using it for a crime are held responsible, not the producer. Conversely, if a product is designed to facilitate crime, or is used significantly more for crime than not, then the liability star…
You're stating this as if it's fact when it's really not. Tornado Cash was certainly not designed with the intent of criminal activity, but for privacy - and as for "significantly more for crime than not", I've not seen any actual evidence for this, only evidence to the contrary. People claim it's mostly used for crime, but those are purely conjecture, at least the ones I've seen are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems reasonable to expect that Ethereum operators share responsibility in case of usage of their network for malicious or criminal activity. They have the technical means to control what goes on there or not. Otherwise it's like if you run P2P nodes and claim pedo pictures aren't your problem.
> it's like if you run P2P nodes and claim pedo pictures aren't your problem. It's more like being arrested for developing a Bittorrent client
Nearly every time someone gets arrested for developing software they where also advertising and in some cases outright advising people on how to get away with illegal shit using their software.
So a software developer is held responsible for the software. If the software is largely SaaS, then I can see the sense in that. A software developer of SaaS is also a service developer, arguably even a service operator although that depends on how the service is developed and operated. I'm sure the judge will be thrilled to have to listen to arguments about the with the nuances of dev, ops, devops and a distributed…
It seems reasonable to expect that Ethereum operators share responsibility in case of usage of their network for malicious or criminal activity. They have the technical means to control what goes on there or not. Otherwise it's like if you run P2P nodes and claim pedo pictures aren't your problem.
Imagine the scenario wherein potential "illegal" crypto is mixed through another service. How would you expect Tornado to verify that without straight-up blocking specific services through transaction patterns?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Should knife makers be held responsible if someone stabs someone? Not a valid comparison. Courts and law have long held the completely reasonable position that if the main intent of a product is not to commit crime, that those using it for a crime are held responsible, not the producer. Conversely, if a product is designed to facilitate crime, or is used significantly more for crime than not, then the liability star…
> This is the latter case. How is privacy not a legitimate use case? > According the to article, 14% of money moved through the mixer was of criminal origin. I’m pretty sure the majority of duffel bags sold in cartel controlled areas of Mexico are used to transport drugs or drug money, that doesn’t mean selling them should be a crime.
A textile mill producer who gets an order for 5000 duffle bags likely has no vision in mind for the use of the bag beyond "sell to N stores at X price for profit". The storeowner who buys the duffle bag likely also has no criminal motive and instead just wants to sell inventory at profit.
Tornado Cash devs will be scrutinized to understand their main goals, and their communications/advertising strategies, likely as well as any correspondences will be considered for this determination.
If this developer only created the mixing service smart contract and wasn't actively operating it or advocating for it, I doubt Dutch judges can rule him guilty for money laundering. The 9/11 reference made by others is very much on par.
Sensible position given he isn't actually being charged with money laundering.
He is being charged for facilitation and since you're a little sloppy with the facts there will assume that you're not a EU/NL lawyer with expertise in these matters. I know as a layman I will assume that FIOD/Public Prosecutors wouldn't arrest him if they didn't anticipate a successful conviction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems reasonable to expect that Ethereum operators share responsibility in case of usage of their network for malicious or criminal activity. They have the technical means to control what goes on there or not. Otherwise it's like if you run P2P nodes and claim pedo pictures aren't your problem.
> it's like if you run P2P nodes and claim pedo pictures aren't your problem. It's more like being arrested for developing a Bittorrent client
Privacy is not a crime, it’s a human right! Sorry that it makes the polices job harder, but our rights are more important.
And didn’t we go through all this already in the 90s? Are we now gonna start arresting all cryptographers?
This is because they don’t like money that is independent from state control. They hate the idea of bitcoin and eth not being $ or €. The large majority of money laundering happens through banks, who just pay a fine and sweep it under the rug.