Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 09:27:53 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 07:54:35 AM

One service might classify it as $1,000, others might classify it anywhere between $1k and $100k depending on their "algorithm".

Totally. According to this mixer, it has been noticed that a "100% tainted" bitcoin mixed with a "clean" bitcoin produces a "50% risk" bitcoin. Often times, we observe centralized exchanges acquiring "tainted" coins and then deeming them "clean". These are just examples of completely subjective interpretation of money laundering "risk" they enforce.

Now that you say that, it reminds me of a theory I had once, now somewhat validated by this post, to do with the possibility that Centralized exchanges have found a way to benefit from this AML score garbage. They might even be affiliates with some of these mixers, as I still am baffled to this day as to how mixers can use centralized exchanges with so much volume, while bypassing the "aml score" upon depositing funds into exchanges.

Quote from: BlackHatCoiner on Today at 09:27:53 AM

Quote from: BenCodie on Today at 07:54:35 AM

TLDR: Results will always be inaccurate, at least until privacy is dead.

On the extreme scenario that there is zero privacy, then their software source code is neither private, so we can all see how their accuracy function works, which is the first step to devaluing it.

That's a very good point, and somewhat comforting as at least the fight will not be over for long in this case. Hopefully not the way things play out though...