Mixers help protect financial privacy which matters to a lot of people. Thing is, some use them for illegal stuff and that's a problem. The industry should focus on building privacy tools that stay legal but still shield users. Better exchange security could also stop hacks before they even start.

Yes, it is the best technology to keep it a secret. But the bad thing is that a lot of criminals use it and that makes Mixer get a bad look.


The development conditions are good but it is contrary to the security system. Therefore, I see that the Mixer campaign was stopped on this forum. I think this is normal, when something is banned and it causes harm then we have to remove it. In contrast to exchanges, they must obey the government. They create privacy, but as long as it does not harm the government, it does not matter. But if the exchange is invited to cooperate on a certain issue, then they must also be cooperative. Because they are in a government and they have to obey the rules, otherwise they will get new problems from the government.

The industry is usually the one who loves data to work with.
So they wouldn't encrypt mine and yours option to be more private 

Mixers are mostly viewed negatively and that's because they are basically used to conceal the origin and destination of Bitcoin transactions. Though some users depend on them for privacy, they've been linked with illegal activities such as money laundering, tax evasion and financial facilitation of illegal enterprises. Mixers are regarded as a means through which many people evade prosecution from their financial crimes so I don't think they'll ever be seen as reputable body.

That financial privacy which mixer protect is the reason why they have labeled it with a lot of bad names, same tools which ordinarily and common person use for just increasing their privacy and breaking the connection between inputs it’s same tools which bad actors also use to hide behind the shell and make things much more difficult and complicated for them to be trace after their evil deeds.

I will say this.  Mixers were not mainly used for crime.  THEY, as in the governments, made mixers become the platforms mainly used by criminals mixed with honest people who simply want more privacy.

Back in the day when mixers were used by everybody with no fear of FBI takedowns and takeovers, normies were using them too.  In fact, I really believe they were the MAIN users of these platforms.  Of course criminals were present too, you are most likely walking around at least one criminal every time you go shopping.  It does not mean shopping must be banned.

But by scaring everybody away, in my opinion they made a grave mistake.  It is as if they did ban shopping only because criminals are shoppers too.  That is at least how I see it.

A ban was expected.  If you know a thing or two about governments, you know they would hate it if more people became mixer users.  They were losing control.  Mixer transactions were hard or impossible to trace.  They did not like mixers, so they tried to kill them.  Now about the article you linked, I hate when journalists use key words like 'could' only to make the title or article more impressionable to the readers.  They could be on the way to a mixer.  Or they could be on the way to a private wallet.  They could be waiting for the right time to move from Bitcoin to Monero.  They could do anything, who cares about speculation in this situation?  It is nonsense.

There is a conflict of interest between the government and these platforms because of the illegal activities. The government thinks that these mixers will help scammers, and so they wanted their operation to stop.

Of course, crypto users never think mixers are bad, but the government doesn't look that way because they also have some reasons. And these mixers had nothing to do but follow the government because it was difficult when you were against them. So yeah, the story of mixers is close to ending, but illegal activities remain and are even growing fast.

They would be perceived negatively mostly by the parties that are interested in their downfall due to them being a problem "mixing" things up, so I agree 

Privacy is a privilege.

Depends on the scale of the hack, though.

If it's big enough, then the big entity in question would be very eager to reassure everything is top-notch regarding security, whereas if the noise is not too big, then there is nothing to worry for them in the long run (and lots of worries for people involved).

I used to think hackers only used mixers to hide stolen cash but they've got other tricks like P2P trades or swapping across blockchains. Mixers are part of it, sure, but pointing at them alone misses the bigger mess. I'd say better tracking tools and beefing up exchange security could hit the problem harder.