Quote from: franky1 on Today at 11:47:37 AM

why is it the same group of a dozen people* are stupidly advertising things that will get people put on watchlists just for using certain services no matter if their coins were good or bad to begin with.

using something that is guaranteed to put you on a watch list is not "privacy"

doomad, windfury, loycev, blackhatcoiner, notatether, n0nce, o_e_l_e_o, pooya87, lucius, tadamichi and a few others

I never advertised for a mixer, im talking about the taint that centralized services are introducing and that we shouldn’t accept it no matter what, this is bigger than just mixers. Because in my opinion best practice for a currency is no taint, no matter what.

It’s always brought up what criminals are using(who are a minority), so let’s ban mixers, shun everyone who uses it and not accept their coins anymore, then what? Criminals just use another platform and we just lost a piece of freedom again and are forced to be controlled harder again. In our fight in "saving the world", we should maybe once think about how these measures actually affect us. It’s weird that the proposed solution to every problem is always the same, less privacy, less freedom, more controls.

We’re becoming completely transparent and have to justify every single step we’re making, are forced to share sensitive data to companies, to just use the simplest services. The only barrier they still have are some data protection policies, but if you’ve ever looked behind the curtain and seen how employees/ companies actually handle it, i wouldn’t put too much weight on it. So stop acting like regulation equals real practice, execution is a whole other topic. If mixers put people this easily on watchlists, then people should be beforehand. But let’s not act like we’re not already, just because a spaghetti law promises so.