(no title)
cobookman | 4 years ago
Or what if he decided to create his own crypto-currency and it just so happened that his dirty wallet was an early investor of ETH to his fund.
Seems like he could have done more to distance himself.
cobookman | 4 years ago
Or what if he decided to create his own crypto-currency and it just so happened that his dirty wallet was an early investor of ETH to his fund.
Seems like he could have done more to distance himself.
arcticbull|4 years ago
Bitcoin's public ledger makes transactions into prosecution futures.
This is why it's such a poor choice for revolutionaries and funding the marginalized. You leave a permanent indelible public record in posterity that will in the course of time be de-anonymized, automatically, and traced back to you.
cobookman|4 years ago
is the onus on an artist or on an "auction house" to vet buyers. If post sale it turns out the money was fraudulent, does the artist need to pay it back?
In crypto terms. You the artist simply put a NFT up for auction at OpenSea. You the scammer happened to purchase the artwork on OpenSea. However KYC is not well enforced, enabling for money laundering between the two wallets.
dragonelite|4 years ago
raducu|4 years ago
toomuchtodo|4 years ago
On a value system with an inherently public ledger that eventually has to hit a fiat off ramp with KYC/AML requirements? Nah. Everyone has quality opsec until they don't, and the record of your criminal activity is immutable and highly durable.
voldacar|4 years ago
also, as time goes on, the proportion of btc that are "dirty" approaches 1, so these chainalysis strategies become less effective, assuming you aren't stupid enough to do some criminal act then cash out at a kyc exchange the next day from the same wallet
EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK|4 years ago
saalweachter|4 years ago
twox2|4 years ago
classified|4 years ago
jacquesm|4 years ago