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

711–720 of 827 posts

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#711

Post by HarryHirsch »

akomtu wrote: post #663
babypuncher wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would that really be a bad thing? Most other developed nations seem to get by fine with very strict rules on gun ownership, and coincidentally they have far lower rates for gun violence. When something has far more capacity for harm than practical utility, it makes sense to regulate the crap out of it. Most people buying AR-15s in the US are not buying them to keep pests off their farm.

If reincarnation exists, I hope that such people who are busy restricting others freedoms get all assembled together on a big island where they all get to live a very long life restricting each other to the ground, and when their nation makes Orwell blush, they get to live another 1500 years, enjoying each others company in a zero-freedom society, until they finally learn that it's not their f-ing business messing wi…

What a country where you can buy as many guns as you could possibly afford but when you try and put up a clothesline or solar panels the HOA will come and foreclose on you.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#712

Post by pksebben »

pitaj wrote: post #581
MaysonL wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, banning guns seems to also ban mass shootings.

At face value, it may seem to, but whether it practically would, in the US especially, is a totally different question.

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/australi...

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#713

Post by pksebben »

peyton wrote: post #609
MaysonL wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, banning guns seems to also ban mass shootings.

Only when you ignore all the countries it doesn’t. Somalia banned guns.

a comparison between the us and somalia making about as much sense as it appears to at face value.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#714

Post by pksebben »

JeremyNT wrote: post #611
carlosdp wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, in June—when the link says they began the investigation—it was publicly known Tornado was being used to launder money. If the developer kept working on it, they knew what they were doing. People keep saying this in this thread. Is everyone at WhatsApp also guilty of a crime for continuing to work on WhatsApp even though they know the Taliban uses it for communication?

Cryptocurrency mixers exist solely to launder money. This is literally all they are useful for. WhatsApp has legitimate, non-criminal use cases.

Whatsapp has no legitimate uses, being an encrypted app owned by a company that gleefully shares data with like, everybody.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#715

Post by vkou »

phpisthebest wrote: post #672
vkou wrote: post #667

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, you get a bloodbath, like what happened in Kenosha, where everyone (except the first person who was killed) involved was convinced they were the good guy with a gun. In the fog of war of an active shooting, nobody has any idea of who is the threat, and who is responding to the threat, and nobody has time to sit around and wait for 8 months for a jury to determine whether the shooting was justified or not.

We are going to have to agree to disagree on what happened in Kenosha.... Because your rendition of events as no match for what was reveled in trial, and other sources

When you're in an active situation you don't have time to wait 8 months for a trial to clear things up. Rittenhouse believed he acted in self-defense... And at the time, so did Huber, and Grosskreutz.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#716

Post by thrownaway89865 »

colechristensen wrote: post #475
dcolkitt wrote: post #260

A lot of the apologists for this are making arguments along the lines of "being decentralized doesn't make you exempt from the rules" or "imagine if a bank laundered this much money". The problem is it doesn't make sense to treat protocols like companies. And it definitely doesn't make sense to treat protocol devs as if they were the executives of those companies. The CEO of a bank and the lead dev of a protocol have…

Starting a money laundrymat and expecting not to get charged with a crime is a bit absurd. Pretending that it's totally fine because it's "privacy" not money laundering because crypto is special... is likewise absurd.

>Pretending that it's totally fine because it's "privacy" not money laundering because crypto is special... is likewise absurd.

Privacy is definitely a legitimate use for something like Tornado Cash, what are you talking about? Hell, if someone found out what my address is and it's not in my best interest that this person knew about it, I would definitely use it just to move my funds to another address.

If you sell me a screwdriver and then I go and kill someone with it, should you be prosecuted for it?

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#717

Post by dylkil »

louwrentius wrote: post #538
dylkil wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tornado cash doesnt facilitate money laundering, it just obfuscates the source of eth, like converting debit into cash, those funds still need to enter the real system in some "legitimate" manner in order to be considered laundered.

Any kind of mixer is intended to anonymise transactions and that doesn't really have any legitimate, legal use case. Que remarks about 'privacy' in 3,2,1...

the classic tale of "privacy is only needed to do illegal things"

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#718

Post by Alupis »

alangibson wrote: post #571
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.

Laughable. Nearly 30 years later someone shot up a school with an AR-15. Yep, that government gun grab is riiight around the corner

Is anyone proposing without access to an AR-15, or any firearm for the matter, this mentally-troubled yet ignored by all the appropriate authorities youth would not have lashed out violently?

It's not too long ago homemade explosives were a seriously real threat in this nation (and others with much more strict regulations, such as the UK). Mass knife stabbings aren't that uncommon around the world, and driving a vehicle through a crowd remains one of the most effective means of violence readily available.

The point is... the tool isn't the problem it's the person. It's a figurative band-aid to think we can solve mental health issues by taking away objects and ignoring the actual core problem... which is mental health.

Stable, mentally healthy people do not commit these mass violent acts. Full stop.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#719

Post by Alupis »

MaysonL wrote: post #684
pitaj wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At face value, it may seem to, but whether it practically would, in the US especially, is a totally different question.

Are there countries where guns have been banned, and mass shootings increase? Are there countries where banned guns have been allowed, and mass shootings increased?

Other countries have their own version of mass shootings. They often involve knives, explosives, or vehicles instead.

You trade one for the other. Mentally unstable/unhealthy people commit mass violent acts regardless of the tools available.

In practically zero cases of mass shootings was the assailant completely mentally healthy. Taking away one particular violent tool is not going to solve the mental health problem in this country.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#720

Post by legutierr »

ajhurliman wrote: post #501
rvnx wrote: post #9

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.

You mean the miners? Mining Ethereum doesn’t allow for much inspection of what you’re validating in each block. It’s just a program that runs and guesses a bunch of salts that hopefully result in a hash that meets some particular parameters (e.g. starts with 5 zeros). You want to be the first to guess correctly so you win the reward for that block, so any sort of investigation doesn’t make sense. From what data was s…

> Mining Ethereum doesn’t allow for much inspection of what you’re validating in each block.

Yes and no. It depends on what you mean by “validating”.

If your objective is to restrict the types of transactions that end up in the blocks you yourself create, you can recompile geth with a custom mempool implementation, and use that custom mempool to inspect the data of any pending transaction you want. This is how MEV works.

In other words, it is 100% possible for a technically-competent miner to only create new blocks that exclude blacklisted accounts, or that restrict transactions according to any number of criteria.

On the other hand, once a new block has already been mined and propagated to the network, there is nothing that a single miner can do to stop it.

If you start rejecting otherwise-valid blocks because they include blacklisted transactions, you will only fork yourself from the network. The rest of the miners will keep on building on top of the block you wanted to drop.

Post reply on HN