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

Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

lancengym.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 328 posts

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#141

Post by throw10920 »

TigeriusKirk wrote: post #128
SevenNation wrote: post #41

That's because when most people use "blockchain" or "DeFi" they're using AML/KYC entities that post their transaction logs to public servers. Law enforcement eats this up because it saves them the trouble of getting warrants for investigations. Bad for customers to be sure. Most have no idea what they're doing and have fallen for a scam hook, line, and sinker. They (loudly, incessantly) proclaim to their friends the…

Quoted post unavailable.

This comment is one of the laziest ones that you can make. "No it isn't" is literally the top (least useful) strata of the argument pyramid, provides precisely zero extra information, and doesn't belong on Hacker News.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#142

Post by FullMetalBitch »

blantonl wrote: post #137
alexb_ wrote: post #80

I have refused to shop at numerous stores because they make a point of not accepting cash. Cash is incredibly important for modern society due to actually being untraceable and allowing for private transactions. Plus, a society without cash is one where you are forced to use central banking. Blockchain is just trying to imitate cash digitally, which as it turns out is really hard to do. So it just ends up that people…

Cash is definitely not untraceable. There are literally serial numbers on every bill printed in the United States.

You can't track all transactions done with cash, you probably can pick a bill from 10 years ago and locate the bank it originally came from but you can't know all transactions done with that bill.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#143

Post by alexandre_m »

blantonl wrote: post #137
alexb_ wrote: post #80

I have refused to shop at numerous stores because they make a point of not accepting cash. Cash is incredibly important for modern society due to actually being untraceable and allowing for private transactions. Plus, a society without cash is one where you are forced to use central banking. Blockchain is just trying to imitate cash digitally, which as it turns out is really hard to do. So it just ends up that people…

Cash is definitely not untraceable. There are literally serial numbers on every bill printed in the United States.

You can trace when/how it was printed, but not who owned it.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#144

Post by DannyBee »

soupfordummies wrote: post #126
alexb_ wrote: post #80

I have refused to shop at numerous stores because they make a point of not accepting cash. Cash is incredibly important for modern society due to actually being untraceable and allowing for private transactions. Plus, a society without cash is one where you are forced to use central banking. Blockchain is just trying to imitate cash digitally, which as it turns out is really hard to do. So it just ends up that people…

I don't understand how it's legal for vendors to actually refuse cash. I get it that there's multiple reasons they wouldn't want to and they can say it's their policy, etc but it's on the paper money itself "LEGAL tender for ALL debts public and PRIVATE". It's like when you hear the stories about people paying debts with buckets of coins. Obviously a huge PitA but technically allowed.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/currency_12772.htm

The legal tender law is about what forms of payment can validly settle a debt denominated in US currency.

That is a far cry from "what must businesses accept in daily consumer purchases".

Congress could likely force businesses to accept all forms of legal tender, but hasn't.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#145

Post by TigeriusKirk »

throw10920 wrote: post #141
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

This comment is one of the laziest ones that you can make. "No it isn't" is literally the top (least useful) strata of the argument pyramid, provides precisely zero extra information, and doesn't belong on Hacker News.

It's not worth going point by point when there's so many fundamental misconceptions. Best to reject the entire comment.

What HN needs is less engagement with useless, time consuming misinformation, and more outright rejection of it.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#147

Post by yellowapple »

AlexandrB wrote: post #32
gonzo41 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The most sensible thing to do with blockchain is to track produce from when it's picked to when it's sold for QC. Every other use suggested, like voting, is just stupid trouble.

> The most sensible thing to do with blockchain is to track produce from when it's picked to when it's sold for QC. I don't understand why even this is sensible. Why not just use a database? The only miners/validators on a produce blockchain are likely to be agri-companies anyway.

> I don't understand why even this is sensible. Why not just use a database?

Who's gonna run it? Any individual company in the chain has a vested interest in fudging the data, and the technical means to do so. A private third-party lacks oversight (and thus could also be given a vested interest in fudging data). A government agency could do it (assuming one's government is trustworthy, which is often a poor assumption), but that would likely preclude international cooperation unless it's something like the UN running it (and even then).

> The only miners/validators on a produce blockchain are likely to be agri-companies anyway.

Preferably you'd use an existing public blockchain rather than spinning up an entirely new one.

Even if there was such a blockchain solely for tracking produce, the fact that no individual agri-company has control over its data makes it more trustworthy/impartial than some centralized database.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#148

Post by [deleted] »

soupfordummies wrote: post #126
alexb_ wrote: post #80

I have refused to shop at numerous stores because they make a point of not accepting cash. Cash is incredibly important for modern society due to actually being untraceable and allowing for private transactions. Plus, a society without cash is one where you are forced to use central banking. Blockchain is just trying to imitate cash digitally, which as it turns out is really hard to do. So it just ends up that people…

I don't understand how it's legal for vendors to actually refuse cash. I get it that there's multiple reasons they wouldn't want to and they can say it's their policy, etc but it's on the paper money itself "LEGAL tender for ALL debts public and PRIVATE". It's like when you hear the stories about people paying debts with buckets of coins. Obviously a huge PitA but technically allowed.

[deleted]

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#149

Post by t-3 »

Communitivity wrote: post #74
t-3 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Got examples? I can't see how an untraceable blockchain could still be considered a blockchain (or what use it would be). Isn't the whole point to be perfectly traceable?

Private blockchains. Imagine a crime cartel with a private blockchain. Obviously they are not KYC. You can withdraw funds from the cartel, or pay for cartel services with the coin. Ironically, a version of this was in private fiat currency - the coins in the John Wick movies were used this way.

That's still a traceable blockchain though, just privately kept. As soon as you start keeping a ledger, you make transactions traceable. With a single or low number of ledgers, network analysis becomes easier the more heavily each actor uses the currency as well, compromising anonymity.

Re: Chainalysis CTO said blockchain is easier to trace than paper money

#150

Post by mywittyname »

soupfordummies wrote: post #126
alexb_ wrote: post #80

I have refused to shop at numerous stores because they make a point of not accepting cash. Cash is incredibly important for modern society due to actually being untraceable and allowing for private transactions. Plus, a society without cash is one where you are forced to use central banking. Blockchain is just trying to imitate cash digitally, which as it turns out is really hard to do. So it just ends up that people…

I don't understand how it's legal for vendors to actually refuse cash. I get it that there's multiple reasons they wouldn't want to and they can say it's their policy, etc but it's on the paper money itself "LEGAL tender for ALL debts public and PRIVATE". It's like when you hear the stories about people paying debts with buckets of coins. Obviously a huge PitA but technically allowed.

Well, paper cash isn't the only way to pay for goods. The spirit of the "legal tender" statement is that that it applies to U.S. Dollars broadly, not necessarily the paper. After all, a Treasury Bond is exactly as good as paper cash.

If you look at the edge cases, it becomes more clear why the federal government doesn't require businesses to accept paper cash. Imagine someone attempting to purchase a sky scraper in Manhattan with cash. That would be a mountain of bills which would be unwieldy to carry, transport, and count. Or what about if someone insisted on buying your house with all pennies. Would you like being required to accept that payment?

The idea that cash shouldn't create an undue burden to a business is an important one. And that's why the federal government doesn't require the acceptance of cash for transactions. It's best to let the parties involved decide what method of payment is most appropriate.

Post reply on HN