I've never heard this before, why will any crypto exchange not allow deposits from casinos? I am a gambler too but not so serious about gambling, I have never come across such claims before.

If this is true then it's a valid point to use a mixer, I have always gone against the use of mixers because I don't see any legal reason to use mixers, to me mixers are very fit for criminals but this is your point thus make some sense.

So back to your point, do you have any reasons why the exchange platform doesn't want to get involved with any casino deposits? There must be a very good reason for this, because it looks like they see casinos as money launderers that can get their business into problems someday or they already learned a lesson, can you say more about this? I will wait for a reply.

We both agree on that part, but I don't think that's the big problem.  Rather, the big problem comes from the notion that some coins are "tainted", which I observe that you're buying.


It frustrates me when people who misunderstand satoshi, cite him to support their argument.  "Publicly announced" doesn't imply that all transactions are public, and no privacy is allowed.  It simply means that transactions must be broadcasted on a network of computers, and then each one can try to add it to the ledger by doing the Proof-of-Work.  Read again what you've quoted, and particularly the text before the bolded part. 


Sorry Andreas, but that's just untrue nonsense.  If you want to solve the problem, stop exchanging with people who view you as a criminal.  The suggestion of repeatedly transferring coins to yourself is one of the most misguided ideas I've come across.

I give you one example.

I have a computer laying around unused since probably 2005 or older.  It has hardware decent enough to run a simplistic Free Linux distro.  It runs only over Ethernet and I will never use that port.  I install the Linux Operating System offline and a verified version of Electrum.  I create a Wallet over there.

You send me 0.005 Bitcoin to my offline Wallet.  I mix 0.001 and send it to another Bitcoin Talk user, let us call him Joe, also from my offline computer by broadcasting it through an amnesic session of Tails on a secure computer.

Tell me how you are going to trace and link the 0.001 I sent Joe to the 0.005 you sent me.

Chain Analysis is real as in the idea of it is real.  But the accuracy of the analysis shows how B S it truly is.

Why do many users mistakenly get flagged for sending 'Tainted Bitcoin' when they claim they never even used Mixers or Privacy Enhancing stuff.  Or, why is there always an argument for why Mixers need to be removed but Authorities never show real numbers and proof of how many of the Mixer Transactions involve illegal activity.

The Blockchain is fully Transparent.  But this also means the history of the Bitcoin you receive is, while fully Transparent, also very misleading in a Blockchain Analysis.  My Bitcoin has probably seen THOUSANDS of Addresses before it arrived into mine.  I have a habit of jumping my Coins from Address to Address at different times and random interval of days.  How do you differentiate my last 5 jumps to the last 5 historical moves of a random UTXO?

How in the World did you think of this.  While Bitcoin is here to be Trustless, it still involves Trust to a particular extent.

For example.  When I sell something for Bitcoin on the Forum, the first party will still rely on the Trust that the other party will send what was negotiated.  You can arrange a Middleman.  But you will have to trust that they will do the job correctly and accordingly.  When you buy something from a Shop, you will still have to trust that the Shop will not scam you.  Both cases are still risky and there have been enough negative events such as Scams before, even if the victim used only Bitcoin and no Mixer.

You can simply not move in this world if you trust NOBODY.  There is still a need for Trust to some extent.

Even the very loyal and careless customer of a Centralized Exchange will have to Trust the Exchange for not scamming them out.  Say you deposit a thousand Dollars to Binance and you do have a Know Your Customer enabled account with all forms and every single Privacy invasive form filled and sent.  Who guarantees Binance will not seize your Coins?  For all you know, your Coins may have been part of the largest drug deal in the world in the very recent history before your ownership.

Thinking it may not happen?  FreeWallet guarantees every thing will work AMAZINGLY if you have a 'Wallet' on their App.  And if there is any suspicion about your Coins, all you have is send them proof of Ownership and they will solve the problem for you.  Great!

Spoiler.  They will NEVER return the Coins back to you because no matter how much information you send, they will continue to ask for more.  What can you do about it?

Of course.  Mixers are not perfect.  But it is a big headache to me to think that people run away so fast from a Mixer while happily sending Mug Shot style pictures to Centralized Exchanges to verify their Accounts and give them all their personally identifiable information AND pictures of personal documents.  Yet many of these Exchanges do not even have a public physical address and are often not even secure at all.

Hell.  We should start calling them Mixers 'Exchanges' too.  Maybe there would be less people running away from them.

I wonder if you would have the same opinion if you would be the victim of a false positive.

Also.  I am using Cash only.  Should I be thoroughly checked for 'certain activities' by the Authorities?  Because the reasons someone might want to use Cash is disassociating from certain activities!

With what happened and what got revealed these past few months regarding mixers, I don't feel as confident about them anymore.

Sure, in the past there might've been some real use for these folks, they could've really masked someone's identity and stuff which would've saved people who are trying to keep their identities a little more secured within the industry, but as of now only scammers and hackers are really into them. The regular joe wouldn't find any use for it cause we use cryptocurrencies like we use money nowadays. We don't care if it's dumped in a hunk of shit and washed away with soap and water, if it still says $100 bucks on it we'll be happy to keep it in our pockets and use it for purchases.

Bitcoins and crypto are pretty much the same thing nowadays, we don't care where it came from, long as it's the right amount we're good with it. Some exchanges aren't even that much investigative of where the crypto came from anymore, long as it's crypto and you deposited it, meaning it didn't come from any suspicious or third-party accounts, you're okay in their book.

So while I'm sad that bitcointalk's slowly turning into a casino advertisement center, I can't change the fact that mixers getting banned in here is just that important.

I remember there were friends whose local exchange accounts were also blocked because of funds deposited from gambling platforms. If I'm not mistaken, there were already a number of discussions about this as well involving big names like Coinbase. Gambling is oftentimes associated with shady money. This is probably the reason why some exchanges don't want to accept gambling money.

However, to address this by using a mixer is like jumping from the frying pan into the fire. If gambling money is treated with suspicion or perhaps even labeled as tainted by certain exchanges, how much more those funds coming from mixers? Gambling is probably more acceptable than mixing. After all, gambling sites are licensed and regulated, compliant with KYC and AML policies, and so on. Mixers aren't.

good post

I think coinjoin is preferable to old-school "mixers" (is anyone still using those??), but I wonder to what extent anonymity can be compromised due to use of centralized servers for coordinating coinjoin mixes. Can these servers connect original coinjoin inputs to the mixed coins you get back? Or is there something in the code that makes that impossible? Whirlpool and WabiSabi protocols are both centralized, but JoinMarket is P2P with no central server. The thing about JoinMarket is it's relatively difficult to use and as a result it has very low liquidity.

Blind signatures enable the ability to coinjoin without the coordinator learning the links between inputs and outputs, which is why mixers have no reason to exist in the Bitcoin ecosystem:


I opened a discussion thread about tactics for breaking coinjoin privacy: https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/5482818.0