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

Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

fiod.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

541–550 of 827 posts

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#541

Post by sweetbitter »

sph wrote: post #46
chaosite wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or that he has lost the private keys.

Although Bitcoin is resistant to the "charismatic leader" problem, his second coming would give him incredible fame, following but also personal danger. Yet I do not think any human would resist a moment in the spotlight, if not to renounce its child and its current direction.

I'm sure there are plenty of humans who don't care for fame/money/power. You just don't hear about them because... well...

Though in this case Satoshi could have just kept a smaller number of coins not tied to him.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#542

Post by forgetfulness »

Tepix wrote: post #29

Wow, just wow. Am i alone in thinking this is not going to fly if all he did was write some software that helps with your financial anonymity? There must be more. Perhaps he also deployed it? That would be a different story. The article is quite murky in that regard. Perhaps they don't know yet. In there is an interesting paragraph explaining what Tornado Cash is: … The ( criminal ) origin of the cryptocurrencies is…

How often are cryptocurrency projects developed with no interest in personal gain? This isn't the DeCSS days of hackers just wanting to stick it to the RIAA and MPAA. Chances are that the developer was involved in running a for profit service based on their software.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#543

Post by Vespasian »

diogenes1 wrote: post #139
ChrisLomont wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I’m pretty sure the majority I'm pretty sure that's not true. 1-1 we tied :) And again , not equivalent. If local duffel bag makers knew duffel bags were used significantly for crime, and added features to facilitate crime, and ignored laws requiring tracking criminals (which is what money processors have to follow), then the duffel bag maker would be criminally liable. In the cast at hand, the company processes the…

Source - ChrisLemont get off your high horse, use of tornado cash is quite common among crypto natives, otherwise it's like broadcasting your pepsi purchases on instagram

Tornado cash could have (for example) implemented AML or KYC policies to achieve the same without coming under the suspicion of assisting criminals.

Given the high data protection requirements warranted by operating a financial service, users could be reasonable sure that their Pepsi purchase remains private.

Of course such measures would run counter the intended use of Tornado cash, including money laundering, but that is their problem and no one's else.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#544

Post by Scoundreller »

joelthelion wrote: post #514
squeaky-clean wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His unsold hoard is currently worth about 20 billion dollars.

It's not. Trying to sell it would crash the market. Still worth a lot, obviously.

Can he just pay off some kind of smart contract with it that ignores the provenance of the Bitcoin?

Like, get a loan for $20b in a stablecoin with the payback being $21b in btc in a year?

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#545

Post by [deleted] »

dlubarov wrote: post #481
kube-system wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody has said it is not a privacy tool. It is a privacy tool that has documented use in money laundering. Building tools is generally legal, using them to commit crimes is something different. The developer here is not accused of building privacy tools, they are accused of knowingly being in on the money laundering and profiting from it.

It's not clear from their vague, weasely language whether they're accusing him of any involvement beyond building the privacy tool. If they had any evidence of that, presumably they would have said so. > suspected of involvement in concealing criminal financial flows and facilitating money laundering

[deleted]

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#546

Post by haakon »

april_22 wrote: post #482
closewith wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The law also applies to barter with equivalent Euro thresholds, so cryptocurrencies aren't excluded. Anyway, the point stands, financial privacy (from the State, at least) is not a feature of life in the Netherlands (or anywhere in the EU, with AML3/4/5/6).

But wasn't the whole point of cryptocurrencies to be anonymus? or am I missing something here?

No, the point (if we go by Bitcoin's whitepaper) was to be digital cash transactable without middle-men.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#547

Post by kube-system »

dlubarov wrote: post #481
kube-system wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody has said it is not a privacy tool. It is a privacy tool that has documented use in money laundering. Building tools is generally legal, using them to commit crimes is something different. The developer here is not accused of building privacy tools, they are accused of knowingly being in on the money laundering and profiting from it.

It's not clear from their vague, weasely language whether they're accusing him of any involvement beyond building the privacy tool. If they had any evidence of that, presumably they would have said so. > suspected of involvement in concealing criminal financial flows and facilitating money laundering

Press releases are usually summaries, not all encompassing dumps of evidence.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#548

Post by WFHRenaissance »

croes wrote: post #525
MrPatan wrote: post #522

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like how the Assault Weapons Ban in 94 in the US is leading to the complete and total restriction of guns in the US.

I see nothing of a ban

No ban, just increasingly restrictive laws on ownership and use that end up resulting in something tantamount to a ban. Look at gun ownership in most countries in Europe if you want an idea of what the future could look like.

Then give some thought to what Europe was like in the early 20th century!

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#549

Post by Fnoord »

sph wrote: post #225
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need 15yr of foresight. I can see someone keeping their mouth shut for the first X years on the basis of "things are going well, my project is being adopted, I had better not F with it by increasing the number of coins in play lest there be unintended consequences" and then at some point deciding that things have gotten out of hand, the stakes are too high, pulling the hard drive off the shelf, drilling it…

I can't see anybody having that self-control is my point. I can't think of any person in history that has shown this level of restraint, especially about a very valuable and very controversial invention. Occam's razor says it's easier to assume he's dead than trying to imagine him as the most patient Buddhist monk, with deep economic and cryptographic knowledge, the world has ever seen. But we could go on with this d…

i would be able to control myself. After all, if I had enough money to be rich I wouldn't require more.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#550

Post by shkkmo »

phpisthebest wrote: post #540
alsetmusic wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's the same argument people make for banning guns in the US. To be fair, I think most are arguing to restrict guns rather than ban. I’m not saying you did this, but many people deliberately distort that into “they wanna take all your guns” in bad faith.

To be Fair, based on the History of " restrict guns " it is clear no amount of restrictions is enough to satisfy those that want to restrict guns, confiscation and total ban is the clear end goal it is NOT "bad faith" to say that, when there is clear evidence that no matter how many times compromise is reached they return the very next day asking for more and more restrictions

Factually false, if you believe this you are in an echo chamber. Yes, there are a few who want to ban guns, but I know many people, some of whom are gun owners, who support reasonable restrictions.

Trying to paint the entire movement with the views of it's most extreme members is absolutely bad faith communication.

Post reply on HN