I'd hold onto your horses for now:
This just came in:
Texas District Court reverses Tornado Cash sanctions: https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-texas-court-reverses-tornado-cash-sanctions-crypto-privacy-win
Texas District Court reverses Tornado Cash sanctions: https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-texas-court-reverses-tornado-cash-sanctions-crypto-privacy-win
This could be precedent/catalyst for a relaxed policy on privacy-preserving services like mixers. However, I just hope that my response to the meta thread is considered if the forum re-allows them...
...as I believe the bigger problem is the scamming, and the nefarious activities that mixers conduct outside of any irresponsible usage from some of their "less legitimate" users.
Tornado Cash is decentralized so it is quite different from custodial mixers. A protocol and its developers should not be held responsible for how people use their code. It was clear that OFAC overstepped its authority. I don’t really have much hope that the government will become friendlier towards privacy.
If mixers became more decentralized and had less risk of scamming there would not be a problem with allowing them on the forum. Ginger Wallet is currently running a signature campaign and Wasabi Wallet was also allowed to run a campaign after the mixer ban.
Yes, though I do think that the ruling creates rightful grounds for bitcointalk to keep custodial mixers banned while allowing non-custodial mixers (like Tornado) to be discussed and built within the community...as now that even government differentiates the two, why should decentralized technology be banned from this forum and treated the same way as a custodial/centralized technology? The reason I told Excimer to hold their horses is because theymos may eventually see that logic (or, for whatever reason, re-enable mixers due to a perceived relaxation on both centralized/decentralized mixers, I personally hope this isn't the case though as I believe custodial mixers do more harm than good).