• Forum has been upgraded, all links, images, etc are as they were. Please see Official Announcements for more information

DASH PrivateSent mentioned in BTC-e case

Legal risk to who?

I'm just offering my ill-informed opinion, but I think the risk would be to any business that could be defined as a "money transfer" business, especially those nearest to fiat exchange.

My personal opinion is that every government or taxing authority will always be hostile to a currency with strong privacy features.
 
Maybe splitting hairs but PrivateSend doesn't provide a mixing service, it only facilitates one. The masternodes don't handle any user funds.
 
jimbursch said:
My personal opinion is that every government or taxing authority will always be hostile to a currency with strong privacy features.
Click to expand...

Of course, they would! They would call it anything they'd like, like "money laundering", "terrorism", "mail fraud", whatever..

stan.distortion said:
Maybe splitting hairs but PrivateSend doesn't provide a mixing service, it only facilitates one. The masternodes don't handle any user funds.
Click to expand...

Macrochip said:
This should answer that question:
https://dashpay.atlassian.net/wiki/...eCriminallyLiablefortheTransactionsTheyRelay?
Click to expand...

I'm aware about this link and I know that masternodes don't handle any user funds.

Yet, if state officials like to go after the project, they would find a good looking cause, like it was in btc-e: I know people that have lost big amounts of legitimately earned money on the btc-e, and they're not the US residents and have not touched USD in their trades.

So, the question: is this a sign that the Feds are going for Dash and other privacy-focused crypto, or not yet?
 
akhavr said:
Of course, they would! They would call it anything they'd like, like "money laundering", "terrorism", "mail fraud", whatever..





I'm aware about this link and I know that masternodes don't handle any user funds.

Yet, if state officials like to go after the project, they would find a good looking cause, like it was in btc-e: I know people that have lost big amounts of legitimately earned money on the btc-e, and they're not the US residents and have not touched USD in their trades.

So, the question: is this a sign that the Feds are going for Dash and other privacy-focused crypto, or not yet?
Click to expand...

I'm noticing a trend along those lines in the mainstream media, here's one implying Shapeshift is a money laundering service for example:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...e-shapeshift-to-launder-bitcoin/#21e683ee3d0d

Something seems to be stirring, the exchanges are the lowest hanging fruit so would likely be the first targeted but Masternodes are a pretty low hanging fruit too, certainly lower than entirely privacy-centric bloatcoins. If Shapeshift is a target then it could well backfire, Atomic transactions do the same thing in a totally decentralised way so putting pressure on Shapeshit to jump through all the AML and KYC BS would hasten their adoption.

Kind of worrying for Dash but the same thing would apply, PrivateSend can easily be turned off if it looks like the AML/KYC brigade are a serious threat and masking the identity of Masternodes has always been on the cards, it would just raise its priority.

Imho it's a serious threat but not because of PrivateSend. Laundering is easy, banks get away with laundering billions with nothing more than a slap on the wrist if caught but DAOs threaten the entire corporate model and imo that's why Dash would be targeted, PrivateSend would just be the easiest approach. Another unwinnable "war", the DAO genie is out of the bottle and it will be just as hard as to get back in as the cryptocurrency genie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top