491–500 of 544 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever tried to make a wire transfer on a weekend? Having access to your money outside of banking hours is just one of many use cases I can think of off the top of my head.
SEPA Instant works in seconds regardless of time of day. Next question?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you ever tried to make a wire transfer on a weekend? Having access to your money outside of banking hours is just one of many use cases I can think of off the top of my head.
The vast majority of the time, you don't need a wire transfer. And if your debit/credit card doesn't work on the weekend, you need a new bank; That's not the fault of banking as a whole.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My poor, so-very-put-upon friend: you can choose to leave . But there is a collectively hashed-out social contract you accept by staying, and it should be of no surprise that the law takes that contract as table stakes and acts according to it.
US Citizens can't leave. They must pay tribute to the United States globally and beyond until they die. Income earned in outer space is taxed as income earned in country.
Or you can choose to live in a country that has a tax treaty with US; either way you get to deduct local tax rate paid so you're not double taxed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> not tell the customer that their transaction is flagged The teller is not allowed to disclose this to customer. > Any numbers you will see might be from the government In my experience, the board of directors of the bank get a monthly roll-up of the numbers.
Yeah, but those numbers are not reported beyond those parties and for a good reason. That is why I listed FinCEN as a source, because they typically put some data out.. just nothing that could be useful for this discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Structuring though is one of the dumbest, laziest and most arbitrary law ever. If you say that the limit is, say, max 100 K USD for something but plan to attack for structuring the person who did 5 times 100 K USD, then simply make the law clearer: make the law say 100 K USD max and, say, max 200 K USD over five years. But don't come after people who did respect the numbers written in the law for "structuring". It's…
I must say that I dislike the rationale for banning structuring. It's basically a law that bans attempts to comply with the letter of another law without complying with its spirit. Complying with any law should be completely straightforward.
So there are two possibilities.
1. You think the government shouldn't be allowed to track money laundering
2. You have a suggestion on improving money laundering tracking without anti-structuring laws
If you believe the government has a legitimate vested interest in stopping money laundering and you set a $10,000 limit before something must be reported, the reporting requirement might as well not exist if someone can deposit $9999.99 literally 100 times per day without a report being generated.
So what would your suggestion be on how to track money laundering? Or do you just think that's none of the government's business?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They apply to what the president can apply them to. So if he's able to apply them to code, then they do apply.
I think the First Amendment might have something to say on the matter of "the president" unilaterally prohibiting people from interacting with code, something that has already been determined to be protected by the right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An ATM machine is not protected as speech. Courts have consistently ruled that software is protected speech. So, yes blockchains do make a substantial difference because they divorce the act of writing software (protected by the 1st Amendment) from the act of operating the business around that software. SCOTUS has consistently required an extremely high bar to regulating speech, so it's simply not enough to say "well…
An ATM isn't a dog either. Executing code isn't free speech. The code may be. The execution not so much.
If you want to make the argument that the persons executing the code are liable, than it should be the Ethereum network nodes, not the developer who deployed the smart contract. As it stands, it's pretty unlikely that the Treasury department has the political capital or the operational reach to shut down Ethereum. And that's why blockchain is different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
450m is a whopping 6% of all deposits on Tornado Cash[1]. The total percentage of illicit activity on the protocol is reported to be in the 10-30% range[2]. What percentage of activity in an E2EE chat application like Matrix is illicit? If a significant but minority percentage of its use is facilitating criminal discussion, should those open protocols also be sanctioned? [1] https://dune.com/poma/tornado-cash_1 [2] h…
It's worth noting your second reference only mentions illicit activity volume in passing, linking to this study as a source: https://blog.chainalysis.com/reports/crypto-mixer-criminal-v... It's also worth noting the headline of that link: "Crypto Mixer Usage Reaches All-time Highs in 2022, With Nation State Actors and Cybercriminals Contributing Significant Volume" Quoting from later in that study, "Overall, if we la…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Tornado Cash is a service, _run by an individual_ who was warned to cease serving sanctioned entities, and failed to do so. This is false. The (vast majority of the) Tornado Cash contracts were either deployed to Ethereum as immutable contracts, or updated in 2020 to revoke mutability (once the final zkSNARK parameters were included) [0], meaning that they could not later be updated by the user(s) that deployed the…
>The (vast majority of the) Tornado Cash contracts Thousands of little contracts doesn't absolve a financial institution from a few many-billion dollar illegal transfers, especially after they've been warned repeatedly.