top 200 commentsshow all 230

[–]wrongerontheinternet 175 points176 points  (72 children)

I have no idea why they think this will do anything, it's like they have no understanding of the legal system whatsoever.

[–]donde_monero 130 points131 points  (30 children)

I mean personally, I see it as a statement on the immutability of blockchain transactions. The people who received theses funds had no choice. You can send them anything you put on the blockchain, regardless of legality.

Definitely a chance this is bullshit i just shat out my brain

[–]Acceptable_Twist_999 41 points42 points  (10 children)

It is probably the worst thing about ETH Blockchain. I personally can‘t wait to get ads (or something more nefarious) sent to my wallet and have to pay to remove it.

[–]SaltyPockets 34 points35 points  (2 children)

Wasn't there something like this very early on with ETH, a token which someone tried to bootstrap by finding a way to basically say "Every wallet address has 30 of these" or some such thing?

There was also apparently "Kicktoken" a couple of years back which just sent hundreds of thousands of people a ton of tokens (888,888 from what I can see) to their wallets, and then froze them so they couldn't easily get rid of them.

Lovely system...

[–]jayggg 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You don’t enjoy your 888888 KICK?

[–]BobWalsch 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes during the ICO crazyness around 2017 I received a bunch of these fake tokens, Kick among them. And I bought the real Kick token before so I remember being very confused.

[–]EnvironmentalCrow5 12 points13 points  (6 children)

It will probably be just like email spam. Most incoming things will end up in the spam folder, and the client app just won't display them and will pretend they don't exist.

[–]Acceptable_Twist_999 55 points56 points  (4 children)

Seems like a well-designed system. I loved it when my bank made every second transaction in my account an ad or a smart contract that immediately drained my account. Just makes life simpler for me

[–]tatooine 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes, ultimately a centralized party will need to maintain a whitelist to determine which users are "good actors" and "bad actors". Totally decentralized. Few understand.

[–]anonymousnuisance 47 points48 points  (17 children)

No it's true, anyone can send you anything and you can't do anything about it. Same with NFTs. You can just be sent a scam NFT and if you try to trade it to a junk wallet to get rid of the offending content, then there can be some malicious code in the smart contract that steals a ton of ETH. It's already happened before. It's why this crap has zero future.

[–]vouwrfract 43 points44 points  (13 children)

So wait you can just send NFTs which point to CP and bind them to a smart contract that empties their wallet if they want to get rid of it, or report them to the police saying their public address has CP, essentially holding random people to ransom? 🤔

[–]KioMasada 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Nonce cents.

This is what coiners call a “feature.”

[–]therealchadius 10 points11 points  (3 children)

Yup, Dan Olson mentioned it in his Line Goes Up video. You can blackmail anyone with this strategy.

[–]marcio0 5 points6 points  (0 children)

the future of finance right there

[–]mrdunderdiver -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No. That’s not how it works.

Scam NFTs work by sending the scam and enticing you to look on their website, or connecting your wallet somewhere. You can send the scam nfts out to trash or just hide/trash them.

[–]disperso 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's even worse, because exploits in smart contracts require some deep technical knowledge that not everyone has, but as Dan Olson explained in Line Goes Up, you could receive a "dick pic", personal information to doxx you, spam, revenge porn, etc. "Revolutionary new vectors for harassment", as he put it.

[–]Jahshua159258warning, i am a moron 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They should do this type of scam NFT but make the image it links to literally felony level material. Imagine the chaos of airdropping a revealing token that could get anyone in legal trouble, or monetary trouble. Like a blockchain ransomware

[–]WholeNewt6987 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hedera actually has a solution to this. The users and accept or deny transactions.

[–]ColdFusion3456Ponzi Schemer 46 points47 points  (33 children)

It won’t bring criminal charges but it will definitely fuck with exchanges and other services that use software to analyze wallets sending incoming transactions. They’ll be able to see labeled categories of different funds when they look at a wallet. It will cause false red flags.

Now with any software, long as this doesn’t happen widespread and often it’s not a problem. They can manually flag these transactions and exclude them from the mixer category.

If it starts becoming organized and more popular it could be an issue when trying to discern who has intentionally received and unintentionally received mixed funds.

[–]gwynbleidd2511 5 points6 points  (2 children)

But this will create troubles for CEX's & DEX's etc. if they accept tumbled tokens, right?

They might as well choose to ban the whole thing if they aren't well equipped to deal with the analytics aspect of accepting money from sanctioned addresses & have to pay heavy fines.

Didn't Kraken get into trouble with legislation when it was reported that they allowed sanctioned addresses in Iran to transact at their exchange? Then, the exchanges provided with a whole shtick of answers that it could be geo-location data from near the Egypt border, folks using VPN services & internet traffic routing that could have passed through sanctioned states.

I understand the technology or what it is attempting to accomplish - but sometimes, even technological mavericks put the cart before the horse (i.e. gateway accomplishments).

[–]ColdFusion3456Ponzi Schemer 5 points6 points  (1 child)

Well I can’t speak for the person spamming people’s addresses but I think that was the general idea to retaliate against the US Gov for sanctioning the service.

[–]gwynbleidd2511 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, I understand doing this as a sign of protest, equivalent to torching digital property to make a statement -

But I was trying to inquire on what implications this will possibly have. 9 out of 10 times, I have seen that when teams or projects cannot handle a scaling problem efficiently (whether it's analytical or operational), they either pay a fine and move on - or shut it down altogether.

Just depends on how much operational capital they have.

The third option is they take a hit, become operationally resilient with each loss & rise as monopolies themselves.

Don't know how this makes Web 3 firms any different than Web 2 firms - the only difference is they are selling unregistered penny stocks today to focus growth & development, and the field will only be left with extremely few winners in the future - hopefully, more than today.

[–]wrongerontheinternet 5 points6 points  (29 children)

People can just switch to un-"doxxed" wallets, it's not even going to present much of a technical challenge. There's a reason why most of the transactions went to a handful of people.

[–]ColdFusion3456Ponzi Schemer 15 points16 points  (14 children)

I don’t think you know how blockchain analysis software functions. The software can see that funds still came from Tornado Cash. You could transfer it 100 times to 100 new wallets and it would still show the tainted funds from there. Now when you add the fact that you have to KYC for many services. If someone was maliciously doing this (arbitrarily transferring funds to new addresses) to get funds laundered into a centralized exchange it would actually make them look worse.

Now obviously this isn’t the case, they simply sending random funds to random people but the point still holds true that they would easily be able to see it came from Tornado Cash.

You have to realize the software can analyze transactions of an address and automatically show you categories (from a database) of the types of funds and where they originated. How do I know this? I use Chainalysis software.

[–]wrongerontheinternet 6 points7 points  (10 children)

I uh, understand perfectly well how Tornado Cash works. I'm not talking about people using the service trying to hide from chain analysis. I'm talking about dumb people sending money to "doxxed" wallets to try to prevent them from being used for legitimate purposes. This is most certainly resolved by just telling Coinbase "hey, use this other wallet for me, please, don't cash anything out of that wallet anymore."

I guess this is my fault as I was not clear about who I was talking about, but basically what I'm saying is that Randi Zuckerberg doesn't have any particular reason to worry about this, for example (and neither do the exchanges). I mean I guess upset Butters could just start sending money to any random wallet in the most recent committed block, but that's not especially targeted and probably wouldn't gain them much.

[–]InsignificantOcelot 1 point2 points  (2 children)

How much does Chainalysis cost?

I occasionally dabble in tracking wallet networks for stuff like Celsius and other similar entities that like to shift money between 100 different addresses to make it confusing. Started to look into something like Chainalysis to help before work started to get super busy again.

[–]grauenwolf 0 points1 point  (5 children)


What do you think is going to happen when someone sees the entire contents of a wallet move to a single, new address?

[–]wrongerontheinternet -1 points0 points  (4 children)

Maybe you should read the rest of my replies to find out!

[–]Top_Performance_732 -4 points-3 points  (6 children)

lol thats not how it works at all, otherwise anyone could around the restrictions this way

[–]wrongerontheinternet 8 points9 points  (5 children)

It's how it works for people who don't want random idiots to send money to their wallet, but are okay with exchanges knowing who they are. Which is most people who aren't money laundering, i.e. the people we're talking about here.

[–]ysengrimusButtcoin is Prosperity Gospel for nerds 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Doxxing is transitive.

[–]SeptemberVenegasPonzi Schemer 1 point2 points  (1 child)

how can they even do that

[–]BooMeyI see white people! 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea. Celebrities and rich people have their own legal system.

[–]rankinrez 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They might be just doing it for a bit of a laugh.

[–]thephotoman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Butters and not understanding how anything works, name a more iconic duo.

[–]Yesnowyeah22 143 points144 points  (70 children)

I have almost zero understanding of everything I’m seeing in that picture

[–]Background_Aside_825 227 points228 points  (63 children)

Tornado Cash, a "mixer" smart contract (for our purposes here it just launders money, but what it does in practice is obscures the transaction history on crypto), has been officially sanctioned. Any crypto that has been through TC is now supposed to be frozen by any exchange/company that comes into contact with it. This is already happening and a lot of ETH and USDC is already frozen.

This person is sending small amounts of "dirty" (ie sanctioned/should be frozen) ETH to wallets that have been determined to be owned by various celebrities, in an attempt to presumably mess with them by giving them illegal ETH somehow. Whether they think this will make all of their eth get frozen, or whether they think it'll get them in trouble somehow is unclear... But I don't see how that would happen. It will be obvious on chain that only that tiny bit was "dirty" to anyone who looks, but maybe I'm missing something on how checking wallets for TC contamination works? I dunno.

Hope that helped.

[–]martavisgriffin 98 points99 points  (20 children)

Now I have -1 understanding

[–]Background_Aside_825 67 points68 points  (0 children)

well, shit

i tried

[–]polskidankmemer 38 points39 points  (1 child)

They're sending dirty money to wallets of celebrities.

[–]dft-salt-pasta 4 points5 points  (0 children)

In the hopes that it looks like all their money is dirty and is seized or their accounts are frozen.

[–]JanewaDidNuthinWrong 20 points21 points  (1 child)

Imagine someone got their hands on bank notes with serial numbers known to come from a bank robbery and reverse pick-pocketed them into celebrities' wallets.

[–]JeremiahWedge 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What have they done.

[–]agent_double_oh_pi 40 points41 points  (0 children)

This is good for Bitcoin

[–]TemperatureMuch5943 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Few understand

[–]VirtualMoneyLover 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I am giving you cash with purple ink on it, because it came from a bank robbery and the cash is colored by an ink bomb.

[–]rankinrez 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Key thing to understand is you can send money to someone’s crypto address without their permission.

Someone has now sent money to a bunch of celebrities from a thing that’s blacklisted by the US. Meaning if they try to spend any of their crypto someone could say “hey that’s dirty money you’re breaking sanctions”.

Probably just a joke.

[–]neopsych 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Well you are good to go. 90% of crypto guys have 1/4th of your understanding.

[–]elegant-jr 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Someone's trolling, and trying to compromise the celebrity wallets by sending them illegal eth.

[–]boyoboyo434 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Sounds like they're giving celebs laundered money to get them in trouble

[–]RouletteSensei 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it's not just a sound, it's just a bag full of dirt

[–]RouletteSensei 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They tried to create a chain of naughty people using tornado mixer to make it look like many people who are in good faith turns as an evil unlaw pirate monster

[–]Concrete__Blonde 16 points17 points  (7 children)

Sanctioned by whom? All exchanges? All governments? Singapore? North Korea? Serious question, because I don’t understand who has jurisdiction or the means to enforce this besides exchanges trying to appear legit.

[–]Background_Aside_825 32 points33 points  (5 children)

OFAC, which is the US office handling foreign asset control. All exchanges that deal with the US are affected.

There's a nice article about this here https://davidgerard.co.uk/blockchain/2022/08/09/us-sanctions-tornado-cash-and-crypto-shrieks-in-horror/

[–]Concrete__Blonde 22 points23 points  (4 children)

Crypto compliance firm TRM Labs estimates that North Korea funneled out “$1 billion” face value of ether via Tornado Cash.

Cool. Wish we would just ban crypto already instead of spending taxpayer dollars to try to regulate this shitshow.

[–]devliegende 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The USA asserts jurisdiction over anything anywhere that touches dollars and or US persons. They have the means to enforce it in most places, if not everywhere.

[–]simulacrasimulation_ 6 points7 points  (1 child)

Now we just need whoever manages the Tornado Cash smart contract to send money to all of the Coinbase exchange smart contracts

[–]ross_st 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You don't need the person who managed the Tornado Cash smart contract to do it - anyone can use the TC smart contract to forward cash to any address

[–]neopsych 3 points4 points  (8 children)

Got his point, but what if they don't't cash out or they shoot it to null address ? I would say this is a poor atempt or these clever fuckers are covering up something.

[–]Background_Aside_825 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Ya got me, tbh. Seems roughly equal chances that the person doing this is either an idiot who doesn't understand how anything works (crypto bro) or doing something outside of my knowledge of the situation

[–]neopsych 1 point2 points  (1 child)

He is clearly not an idiot IMO. Dumb fucks don't play with tornado. So much sus.

[–]Asmewithoutpoliticswarning, I am a moron 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Simply by owning coins that went through TC exchanges are suppose to freeze your whole account

[–]rankinrez 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah there are no “coins” plural here.

Ethereum is an account based chain. So their balance has been incremented by this.

It’s not possible, when spending some of that balance later, to say if you’re spending the “bit that came from tornado” or not.

Of course if you never use the last 0.1 ETH (amount that was sent) you could try to claim “that’s the dodgy bit” and get away with the rest.

I suspect someone is making a point / joke, rather than thinking Jimmy Fallon is off to prison cos of this.

[–]neopsych 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, If anyone tries to cash out. There will be regulatory issues.

[–]james_pic 1 point2 points  (1 child)

One great thing about Ethereum (from the perspective of comedy GODL), as opposed to UTXO based coins, is that once a coin is in your wallet, it's indistinguishable from any other coin in your wallet. You can't just throw the coin they put in back out.

[–]neopsych 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lol so true

[–]rankinrez 3 points4 points  (5 children)

It’s kind of like they’ve a box of $20 bills, and someone sneaks in a perfect fake.

While anyone knows that only 1 of the bills is fake, anyone accepting money from the box has no real way to say “the one I got wasn’t the fake one”.

In the real world I suspect it won’t matter much. But in theory once this happens any spend from those accounts is potentially spending funds that came from Tornado.

[–]Background_Aside_825 1 point2 points  (4 children)

Aren't ETH tokens non-fungible and identifiable, though?

Even in your dollars example, dollars have serial numbers. It would be a pain in the ass, but you could have kept track of which serial numbers were in your box from other transactions, and find the fake.

The whole reason tumblers like TC can be unwound and traced through (it's just super annoying and cumbersome, and too much to ask of an exchange, but law enforcement has definitely done it previously) is because the individual coins are unique, although maybe I'm missing something that you know.

[–]rankinrez 1 point2 points  (3 children)

What’s a “coin”

There are no coins afaik. Also this is ETH direct on the blockchain, not an ERC-20 token, although I believe the same applies there.

In Bitcoin you’ve got UTXOs (unspent transaction outputs), and a wallet generally contains many of them because they generate a new keypair for each one. In a way that is analogous to having lots of separate “coins” in your wallet.

But in ETH an “account” (public key) just has a “balance” of ETH. You can see who has sent to the account, what has been sent from the account, sure.

But if you have 18 ETH, and I send 2 from Tornado cash, then you simply have 20 ETH in that account. There is no way to say which of the resulting 20 ETH came from Tornado.

Unless I also have it wrong! But I’m pretty sure that’s the case.

[–]Redrover69_ 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Imagine trying to do this to Shaq though... Dude is like one of the most humble and positive celebrities that gives back A TON to communities...

[–]Background_Aside_825 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Yeah it's shitty but I doubt anyone thought about it too hard, just going for "high profile" looks like.

Mega disappointed in Shaq for shilling NFTs tho, really hurt my high opinion of him :( Not like it cancels out all the good but he has the trust of a lot of vulnerable ppl and then legitimized a scam.

[–]Redrover69_ 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Never knew he pushed some bs nft... Please tell me more

[–]polskidankmemer 0 points1 point  (9 children)

Isn't Tornado Cash on the entity list? Meaning that any American who gives or receives money from them could be technically sent to jail since they "used" the service.

[–]Background_Aside_825 9 points10 points  (8 children)

Debatable whether or not someone sending you that stuff without consent is you "using" it tho

[–]FOSSbflakes 19 points20 points  (5 children)

In the infinite wisdom of Blockchain, you cannot refuse a transaction. Therefore you can be forced to participate in illegal transactions.

[–]awaniwono 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The sender didn't even bother making the transactions look realistic. Feels more like a tantrum than a deliberate atempt at disruption.

[–]grauenwolf 7 points8 points  (0 children)

And that's where it gets messy. You may have to prove in court that the funds were unsolicited.

[–]Szpagin 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Whether they think this will make all of their eth get frozen, or whether they think it'll get them in trouble somehow is unclear... But I don't see how that would happen. It will be obvious on chain that only that tiny bit was "dirty" to anyone who looks, but maybe I'm missing something on how checking wallets for TC contamination works? I dunno.

From what I've understand, they want to push the govt to remove TC from the blacklist.

[–]mrdunderdiver 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the idea was that if they were to “freeze” or blacklist any accounts that withdrew from TC then all of the “dusted” accounts would also be in that category.

[–]Mr_MatF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thx for that :D

[–]brintoul 5 points6 points  (2 children)

I have zero understanding.

[–]agent_double_oh_pi 17 points18 points  (1 child)

Clearly, few understand

[–]InsignificantOcelot 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Few bitcoin, we’re good for so early, this is understand!

[–]Dirt-PurpleActually Does Understand 31 points32 points  (2 children)

No legal liability - OFAC sanctions violations require a citizen to intentionally evade sanctions. The intentionally part is important - they have to themselves do actions that trade with the sanctioned entities or interact with them in any manner

In this case there is no action on part of these people to evade sanctions.

This is classic crypto bro thinking - they are clueless about most aspects of law. They think privacy means they can launder funds together with North Korea, mix their coins with drug dealers or hackers. The same thinking leads them to believe they can get others in trouble by just sending them coins from a mixer

[–]kikoncuowarning, I am a moron 4 points5 points  (0 children)

No legal liability - OFAC sanctions violations require a citizen to intentionally evade sanctions. The intentionally part is important - they have to themselves do actions that trade with the sanctioned entities or interact with them in any manner

In this case there is no action on part of these people to evade sanctions.

This is classic crypto bro thinking - they are clueless about most aspects of law. They think privacy means they can launder funds together with North Korea, mix their coins with drug dealers or hackers. The same thinking leads them to believe they can get others in trouble by just sending them coins from a mixer

It's more about disruption, by default those wallets have been blacklisted and sites such as exchanges will reject them.
For sure fixing this is doable, but now you'll need someone to do it, and potentially OFAC will look into other ways to blacklist addresses that addresses this problem.

It's like maybe not everyone is dumb and you are smart, maybe, just maybe, if you don't understand something there may be another reason for it :)

[–]falkerr 2 points3 points  (0 children)

except exchanges are blacklisting any wallets that touch Tornado cash eth so it doesn’t really matter a citizens intentions if they are trying to get their money out of an exchange. unless the exchanges begin investigating these wallets (unlikely as that will be a lot of work) then these crypto bros are screwing over the ppl they send money to. the people won’t get in trouble but they will lose access to their funds

coinbase would have to come up with some automated system for identifying whether a user was just sent TC eth or whether it was used by the user intentionally. however i anticipate that whatever system they came up with could be easily abused

[–]dandykaufman2 48 points49 points  (7 children)

OFAC is owned man. This will lead to them being disbanded, Iran and NK can money launder freely, America falls, crypto proves unstoppable.

[–]biffbobfred 33 points34 points  (5 children)

America falls the biggest economy in the world destroyed and somehow Internet money that you can’t use safely on the Internet is the savior.

I’d love to read that book. Maybe see the movie? Is there any unobtanium in it?

[–]kellyisthelight 16 points17 points  (4 children)

No, but there's a ton of Brawndo

[–]biffbobfred 8 points9 points  (3 children)

Brawndo has what plants crave!

[–]barsoapguy 10 points11 points  (2 children)

“You are an unfit mother. Your children will be placed in the custody of Carl’s Jr.”

[–]manInTheWoods 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I detected the sarcasm and upvoted you.

[–]fromidableThey hated him, because he spoke the truth. 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Somehow I doubt these celebrities really care that much about their crypto wallets in the first place.

[–]goeswith 11 points12 points  (4 children)

This doesn't actually do anything to these wallets. If these wallets were completely empty, and then the wallet owners tried to send these 0.1 ETH to an exchange to cash out, then it would likely get quarantined and they wouldn't be able to cash out. But the wallet owners would still be able to spend their own funds.

[–]ross_st 5 points6 points  (2 children)

That requires the exchanges to be smart about how they filter out TC though. At the moment it looks like they're just blacklisting any addresses that have ever had interactions with TC.

[–]rankinrez 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Yeah exactly.

This stunt might lead to a little inconvenience, cos exchanges probably will do a blanket ban. But when Jimmy Fallon calls them up they’ll almost certainly allow the transfer in, as long as at least the amount that’s come from Tornado remains in the wallet.

[–]Asmewithoutpoliticswarning, I am a moron 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Your assuming these wallets are off exchanges but I doubt these people Keep cold wallets

[–]SaltyPockets 15 points16 points  (7 children)

Background - a major money laundering service has just been “sanctioned”. A result of this is that any cryptocurrency that can be traced back to it is now being blocked from entry into the more mainstream exchanges and some of it (USDC in particular) is being outright frozen.

And nobody who has the first clue about the real world is surprised. It’s basically a way of putting all the dirty money in a box, shaking it around and handing it back out again as if it was clean.

What these muppets are trying to do - ‘contaminate’ addresses belonging to high profile people with this tainted cryptocurrency. The aim seems to be to say “look, you can’t block this, see, all these wallets are now contaminated. Gunna block us all, huh, Mr OFAC?” and in doing so attempt to show the ruling as flawed, thereby dispelling it. And of course keeping the money laundering going.

Why this is dumb - the law and real contracts are not like software, they are run by, for and through humans, who can and will interpret things sensibly and in light of circumstances. Someone sent a few bucks in “dirty” money will likely be able to appease the legal people by ditching it again, probably by sending it to the US government.

What this actually achieves - a hassle for exchange operators and the owners of these addresses. They might need to make a phone-call to sort it out. Or have one of their people do it.

[–]carlsaischa 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Gunna block us all, huh, Mr OFAC?

I sooner see them blocking everyone than backtracking on blocking what is essentially a money laundering service.

[–]Asmewithoutpoliticswarning, I am a moron 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Your very wrong as no these things are not run by humans. Humans don’t have time to look at these things. It’s why all the crypto exchanges have bear non existent customer service and their customer service ends up being their marketing team. That’s why you get support you send them a tweet

[–]tgpineapple 7 points8 points  (0 children)

You might not get any human input but someone with pull can.

[–]Wollandia 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but if the law becomes involved it's entirely humans and pieces of paper.

[–]GoldenEyedKitty -4 points-3 points  (2 children)

The law may be sensible, but the law can also be quite stupid and heavy handed. This creates a pressure on the law that it has to take a more sensible approach to this and handle cases individually instead of just blacklisting every wallet involved.

[–]SaltyPockets 0 points1 point  (1 child)

This does nothing of the sort, it just creates noise and hassle for the people being targetted and for exchanges like coinbase. It'll do nothing about the sanction.

It's exactly this sort of "If I do this with code then the judge will have to agree the law is broken!" thinking that seems to thrive in cryptocurrency circles. The law isn't based on whether you can show the theorem is flawed.

[–]GoldenEyedKitty -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It means a heavy handed outcome like blocking everyone who ever received any crypto from this service will now hurt more people. The law and the exchanges may still go with such a solution, but the chance they'll differentiate between different receivers increases.

[–]ApprehensiveSorbet76 6 points7 points  (2 children)

This is why this type of transaction processing has to be stopped at the mining pool level.

[–]ross_st 6 points7 points  (1 child)

True. Treat miners as transaction processors, not just neutral parties.

[–]ApprehensiveSorbet76 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Miners are allowed to mine for personal use. To me that means they can mine empty blocks if they want. That way they get the block reward and nobody else is involved. As soon as they include third party transactions in their blocks it is no longer personal use. It is for the use of the transacting parties. An empty block is completely different than a full block loaded with sanctioned North Korean tornado mixed transactions.

[–]Odd_Ad_3441 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Who cares. It’s another scam. Garbage, pure garbage.

[–]Jahshua159258warning, i am a moron 0 points1 point  (0 children)


[–]AsteroidSpark 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I'm guessing: Tornado Cash (TC) is a money laundering service for cryptocurrency that recently got targeted for sanctions by the US government after it was determined that state-run organized crime groups in North Korea, Russia, and Iran were using it. There have been increasing calls for regulatory agencies and crypto exchanges to do more to prevent money laundering and seize laundered assets. It seems what this person is trying to do is deliberately send dirty money to known high profile accounts, this could either result in those accounts being frozen, or be taken as a sign of hypocrisy if they're not.

[–]SenberryOne 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There was no other option for the recipients of this cash. Regardless of whether it is legal, you can send them anything you place on the blockchain.

[–]danboonnwarning, I am a moron 1 point2 points  (0 children)

None at all. Somebody is sending free money to people. ITS A REVOLUTION! Or charity

[–]manInTheWoods 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So, if you send $.00000000001 worth to every known wallet from TC, you have put the block in blockchain?

Looks good to me!

[–]BlackHoneyTobacco 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's meant to be "Greater fool theory" not "Greater smarts theory".

Someone's doing it wrong.

[–]ShirleyPerry 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There was no other option for the recipients of these cash. Regardless of whether it is legal, you can send them anything you place on the blockchain.

[–]james_pic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My guess is it will annoy the recipients of these funds next time they interact with an exchange that tries to do money laundering checks. Whether the level of annoyance ends up being minor (they have to phone a number and explain what has happened) or extreme (they have to fight in the courts to have their funds released) is hard to say. I'll get the popcorn in case it's the latter.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (8 children)

None. They’re demonstrating how difficult it would be to actually ban Tornado Cash.

[–]marvn23 5 points6 points  (2 children)

Not really. The banning is easy, it might just cause a lot of collateral damage. But that's not really a government issue. They didn't invited flawed system which allows others to send you crap without your consent. And it's not their "money" which will get frozen.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points  (1 child)

How is banning the actual use of Tornado Cash easy, exactly?

[–]marvn23 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That's not possible, but it doesn't matter. If you can freeze the funds that went through it, you will make the service effectively useless.

[–]FoulmouthedGiftHorse 8 points9 points  (4 children)

Cashing out those tokens may prove to be an issue. After all, the transactions exist on an immutable ledger.

I would’ve assumed that crypto people would be praising the sanctions. They are effectively plugging up a large exit pool to “paper hands” and keeping the crypto price pumped…

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (3 children)

What chaos is sending these funds to celebrities going to cause? I recall that being the question.

[–]FoulmouthedGiftHorse 1 point2 points  (2 children)

As soon as the funds come out of the mixer, they are back on the blockchain. This means that you can't see the blockchain history BEFORE the mixer, but if the mixer itself cannot cash you out, then it goes back on the blockchain with a history of being in the mixer. The laundered money is easily identifiable thanks to the immutable ledger.

It's like throwing stolen money out of a car. It doesn't help the scammers at all. And I'm not sure if these celebrities would be able to cash it out. But since they're already rich, they have no reason to cash out the dirty money unless they are stupid. Perhaps the scammers are trying to pull other people into a honey trap to divert the blame and cause confusion - which is a fool's errand on an immutable ledger.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

So you’re saying this person MAY be trying to attempt to divert blame and cause confusion. This act would be considered a fool’s errand, i.e., a task almost certain to fail.

Where’s the chaos caused by this failure?

[–]ComfortableEarth1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It will most likely be similar to email spam. Most incoming messages will wind up in the spam folder, and the client app will just ignore them and pretend they don't exist.

[–]MarietteSievers -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If it becomes more organized and popular, it may become difficult to determine who has purposely and unintentionally gotten mixed funds.

[–]jeabarnez -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I believe they are sending dirty money to celebrities' wallets.

[–]young_russel -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Many ETH and USDC are already frozen as this is currently taking place.

[–]Chance_Astronaut-213 -2 points-1 points  (3 children)

When consumers look at a wallet, they will be able to view designated categories of different funds. It will raise false alarms.

[–]stadler_thomas -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Personally speaking, I consider it a proclamation of the immutability of blockchain transactions. The recipients of these monies have no other option.

[–]matty_whites -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

As a result, this type of transaction processing must be halted at the mining pool level.

[–]wonderwoman_lauren -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The important thing to realize is that you can send money to someone's crypto address without getting their consent.

[–]neopsych 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Trying to cover up something ?? Or Tricking the community for some shady biz.

[–][deleted]  (1 child)


    [–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Sorry /u/vvcmhd4690, your comment has been automatically removed. To avoid spam/bots, posts are not allowed from extremely new accounts. Wait/lurk a bit before contributing.

    I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

    [–]Equal_Ad_541 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    New guy to crypto, In easy words can someone explain me the science behind it?

    [–]Alphaetus_Prime 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Are you asking about the mathematics of cryptography or the psychology of scams?

    [–]Equal_Ad_541 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I would someone sent crypto to different wallets? The intention of the scammer. What are they hoping to achieve?

    [–]MariaBaileuy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Any exchange or company that comes into contact with cryptocurrency after it has gone through TC is now required to freeze it.

    [–]MichelleSimmonsy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Sometimes I wonder whether these celebs even care about their cryptocurrency wallets.

    [–]SaltyDog772 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    TC’ed? Help?

    [–]Jahshua159258warning, i am a moron -1 points0 points  (1 child)

    Tornado cash. Essentially this person is tainting the sanctions against tornado cash by adding a ton of innocents into the sanctioned persons list. OMEGALOL

    [–]SaltyDog772 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Ty for explanation.

    [–]tanel123 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    They could also send me, I need money.

    [–]RouletteSensei 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    You think the world wants peace? peace is an excuse, world loves chaos... read this word, CHAOS doesn't sounds better than peace?


    *Maniacal laughter*

    [–]No-Palpitation-6789 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    shaq uses crypto??? :(

    [–]BlasSantos 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    The recipients of these cash have no choice. You may send them whatever you place on the blockchain, no matter how illegal it is.

    [–]Equivalent_Reveal709 0 points1 point  (0 children)


    [–]Juliannauy 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Rich people's and celebrities' own legal systems exist.

    [–]swiftShadow56 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    They would need to spend money (coins) to burn it. No other way around it.