pull down to refresh

Request for comment: government controlled AML bitcoin-address whitelists?
32 sats \ 8 comments \ @Brunswick1 14 Mar 2022 bitcoin
After the most recent Coinbase and Wasabi debacles, I began to wonder if there could be a similar centralizing attack on cryptocurrencies.
To blacklist UXTOs is not necessarily a legitimate use-case for 'fraud prevention' as the colored coins could exchange hands in other ways and this could create legal trouble for any agency that engages in this sort of blacklisting. However a wallet whitelist is potentially a legitimate way to surveil and regulate crypto within an economy bounded by a sophisticated political tyrant.
As we all know from experience, blacklisting-as-a-service is a valid business model. There are federated blacklists for email servers (RBL), a credit agency cartel, do-not-fly lists and sex-crime felon lists maintained by the state. Not incompatible with the idea of the blacklist business model is a federated whitelist provider.
A potential way for the state to control bitcoin is to control the 'banking institutions' (e.g. Coinbase) by requiring them to maintain a whitelist of 'allowable spending addresses'. This means that if you buy bitcoin on a regulated exchange, that exchange could force you to 'stay in-network' by only allowing you to spend directly from their wallet to another registered wallet address. This means that your 'self-sovereign wallet' would not be able to accept crypto from a fiat-on/off-ramp nor spend it with a domestic merchant without first registering your wallet addresses with the whitelist provider. This way merchants (businesses) could only accept bitcoin into their books from wallets that are on the whitelist. Naturally the merchants would be closely monitored for compliance with this "anti-money-laundering whitelist" and they wouldn't be able to accept bitcoin until they register their wallets with the whitelist. Of course the fiat on/off ramps would only allow bitcoin to be transfered into wallets that also prevent spending to addresses that aren't on the whitelist.
This government/corporation controlled whitelist would be enforced for any entities within the regulatory boundaries, and this would effectively eliminate all privacy and freedom afforded by cryptocurrency. Any crypto that isn't considered 'clean' and enters the economy from 'outside the system' would have no way to enter circulation.
Question, are there mitigating technologies that would circumvent a government-enforced whitelist in:
  1. A technology that already exists that is part of Bitcoin?
  2. A technology that already exists in another crypto that would prevent this regulation (that can be incorporated into bitcoin)?
  3. A proposal for a technology that has not yet been implemented that could avoid this problem?
  4. Does L2/lightning already avoid this problem?
  5. Is there an enhancement to L2/lightning that could avoid this problem?
  6. Is this not a real problem?
Please comment below
write
preview
related posts
0 sats \ 7 replies \ @DarthCoin 14 Mar 2022
People should stop bitching about gov "bans", blacklisting, regulation and all that crap bullshit.
Is fucking simple: NOBODY have any jurisdiction or authority over your own money and labor. A gov is there TO WORK FOR YOU not against you. But yeah people always cry hard about "gov ban". STOP COMPLYING DAMN IT!
If somebody comes to you to ask about your x BTC address or stash, ask politely: "please provide any document that, me as a living man, I signed and give full consent to you (gov or other living man) to have full authority or jurisdiction over my own money, labor and body.
NOBODY in this fucking world can come up with such paper, because it doesn't exist! They cannot act WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT! They can do shit about. Please stop being scared shit rabbit, be a fucking lion and confront them!
Personally I don't give a shit about all this gov meddling into BTC. They fuck you because you comply. Stop complying.
reply
21 sats \ 6 replies \ @Brunswick1 OP 14 Mar 2022
You are referring to the 'social contract' fallacy. I agree that no such contract exists (as was publicly acknowledged by Benjamin Franklin), but that doesn't stop people with guns using it as a justification to cage you for not paying your tithe to the civil religion. You can be a lion and still be put in a cage.
reply
0 sats \ 5 replies \ @DarthCoin 14 Mar 2022
come and get it... again you are using scare tactics.... I am not afraid of men with guns. I use paper, is more powerful https://www.bitchute.com/video/yxBfLX9POuPT/
reply
3 sats \ 4 replies \ @Brunswick1 OP 14 Mar 2022
Say that to the IRS
I don't think you understand. You may be willing to confront the government, most business owners however are not. You can keep all your bitcoin, but good luck spending it if every business (a.k.a. compliant with every government regulation) requires you to be on a good-boy list.
reply
1 sat \ 3 replies \ @DarthCoin 14 Mar 2022
If you are so afraid, please send me all your BTC. I will take care of them, no worry.
  1. ofc LN is a better solution... here you have some examples: https://darthcoin.substack.com/p/lightning-cleaning-machine and https://darthcoin.substack.com/p/node-liquidity-guide
reply
92 sats \ 2 replies \ @Brunswick1 OP 14 Mar 2022
You are not engaging in a good-faith discussion. I am not 'trying to create fear', nor am I afraid. If I were afraid, why are you offering an ad-hominem attack? Are you a sadist that likes to make people in fear even more fearful? If I were afraid, I wouldn't be asking if there are ways to avoid government tyranny. I would be so afraid, I wouldn't even engage in such thoughts, rather I would be hiding under my covers wearing a mask, vaccination needles still hanging from my arms, and my phone's home-screen filled with a CNN widget. If I'm 'trying to create fear', why would I be asking people to engage in problem solving? If I were trying to create fear, I would be writing in your voice of anger and hostility and telling everyone to run for the hills rather than asking them to plan a counterattack.
reply
0 sats \ 1 reply \ @DarthCoin 14 Mar 2022
I just told you the simple plan: stop complying. I mean it, about all gov says. Just be yourself. But yeah you prefer bitching around laws, regulations, avoidance etc, that will not help in any way.
You are not constructing anything if you always go back to the "state cage". If you want to stay in that cage, so be it, is your choice. I chose to stay out.
reply
43 sats \ 0 replies \ @Brunswick1 OP 14 Mar 2022
The reason bitcoin is successful is because it circumvents the state. It is a step ahead of them. As long as the state controls the minds of half the people that surround you, you will be in a minority, there are no numbers for you to seek safety in. The government has reached the acceptance phase of having lost control over currency. They are already beginning to emulate the movement by coopting it with CDBCs. If they find a way to regulate it, and this phony worldwide Ukraine nationalism is exposing a crack in the security of crypto, they will seize the moment. I asked you to discuss the problem that I took the time to describe. If I wanted a psychoanalyst I would seek help from that profession, and your phony 'stop being scared asshole' response only shows that I've triggered cognitive dissonance. What you're really saying is "stop making me scared asshole!". You do not prove the concern invalid, rather you confirm that I may be looking where others dare not.
reply on another page