[HN Gopher] Binance fired employees who found $1.7B in crypto wa...
___________________________________________________________________
Binance fired employees who found $1.7B in crypto was sent to Iran
Author : boplicity
Score : 296 points
Date : 2026-02-23 19:23 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nytimes.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nytimes.com)
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| https://archive.today/t2pG6
| boplicity wrote:
| Please understand that circumventing copyright makes it more
| difficult for journalists to make a living.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| I'm a subscriber, but not everyone is.
| boplicity wrote:
| And by making it easy for them to circumvent copyright,
| they have even less incentive to support the journalists
| who did the reporting.
| freitasm wrote:
| Subscribers can share the link as a gift, so readers can
| see the original, not the proxied version.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| I cannot trust that a gift link does not tie to my IRL
| identity I subscribe under. I can trust that archive
| links do not. The NY Times gets my money either way. It's
| an opsec concern. Trust no one.
|
| If someone wants to post gift links in every thread, just
| let me know who to pay to enable that, I am happy to.
| afavour wrote:
| I don't know why this is downvoted, it's the truth. NYT
| actually has a "gift article" functionality that makes it
| easy to share articles with non-subscribers.
| this-is-why wrote:
| You are 100% correct. I find the attitude that everything
| should be free a bit tedious. But then again, why does the
| truth have to be paywalled while lies are free. I believe it
| is a detriment to society that we cannot publicly find
| reporting. Yes I know now come the cynics who will argue
| bias. But that's just a failure of reading comprehension, not
| fair reporting doctrine.
|
| So yes. I'm with you 100%.
| unyttigfjelltol wrote:
| Is there a micropayment option or something? I wish I could
| friction-free, buy access to these sites _al al carte_
| without dealing with them directly or setting up a recurring
| subscription directly with them.
| chihuahua wrote:
| Best we can do is a monthly subscription, with every dark
| pattern known to man to prevent cancellation.
| blell wrote:
| They should learn to code.
| ericmay wrote:
| Copyright isn't being circumvented - the content of the
| website is made available for the public and the website just
| grabs what is publicly available.
| boplicity wrote:
| Redistributing copyrighted content is the literal
| definition of copyright infringement. Using it for your own
| purposes, without distribution, is another story.
|
| This link was posted with intent to facilitate the
| distribution of copyrighted material. The person who posted
| it justified posting the link by saying some people don't
| have a subscription.
|
| I understand that some people think copyright shouldn't
| exist, but it clearly is being circumvented here.
| amelius wrote:
| I'll start caring about copyright when the government
| starts caring about my personal information that is being
| traded around the internet (with the help of journalism).
| Information is money, and we're all being stolen from.
| lioeters wrote:
| Stop using archive.today, they've been found to inject
| malicious code. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47092006
| kristianp wrote:
| Do you mean this? https://gyrovague.com/2026/02/01/archive-
| today-is-directing-... the malicious code wasn't injected, it
| was served with their captcha.
|
| They shouldn't have used users to ddos someone's blog, but
| this seems like a one off attack against a perceived threat
| to the service's privacy. I don't condone that ddos attack,
| but it's been a very useful service over the years.
| c420 wrote:
| Here's a more functional alternative:
| https://pressreleased.alwaysdata.net/
| stevofolife wrote:
| The article title doesn't say "Fired". The HN title is kind of
| misleading.
| aswegs8 wrote:
| >Within weeks, Binance fired or suspended at least four
| employees involved in the investigation, according to the
| documents and three people with knowledge of the situation. The
| company cited issues such as "violations of company protocol"
| related to the handling of client data.
| resoluteteeth wrote:
| It not the original title but I'm not sure it's "misleading"
|
| > Within weeks, Binance fired or suspended at least four
| employees involved in the investigation, according to the
| documents and three people with knowledge of the situation. The
| company cited issues such as "violations of company protocol"
| related to the handling of client data.
| ocdtrekkie wrote:
| Wild that Binance's primary concern was that the privacy of
| the people committing crimes with their service was being
| violated.
|
| Hear no evil, and let the money roll in.
| liamconnell wrote:
| I think NYT uses multiple titles for some articles. I had copy
| pasted it
| kg wrote:
| You can see https://bsky.app/profile/nytdiff.bsky.social for
| some examples of how the NYT frequently revises titles and
| abstracts after publication. Most of them seem harmless at
| least.
| knallfrosch wrote:
| They A/B test titles. You can see it in the URL, where the
| recessive title often lives on. They may also use different
| titles for print/digital.
| selridge wrote:
| This is correct. They will A/B test titles AND update the
| title w/o warning over time, often 3-6 times per article post
| publication.
|
| They used to change the URL a bunch of times after
| publication! Seems crazy because it is but they did. Caused a
| whole problem on Wikipedia because "title + day + work + url"
| suddenly wasn't stable.
| paxys wrote:
| Isn't this like the #1 use case for crypto?
|
| Everyone wants an untrackable unblockable currency that is out of
| government control until the day it is used for things they don't
| like, then suddenly "government please control this!"
| garrettgarcia wrote:
| It's clearly not untrackable. It's never been untrackable.
| That's how they know it went to Iran.
| paxys wrote:
| Only because in this case they used a centralized exchange.
| The amount of actual circulation to countries like Iran and
| North Korea is likely many orders of magnitude higher that
| what is knowable.
| idontwantthis wrote:
| Every single transaction is public information. If you
| carry a wallet into Iran, and it's coins are used through
| 20 different transactions to purchase weapons, all of those
| can be traced back to their origin.
| arcanemachiner wrote:
| Well, that depends on which cryptocurrency is used,
| doesn't it?
| cammikebrown wrote:
| Not if they used Monero
| paxys wrote:
| That's like saying every currency note is traceable
| because it has a serial number. If someone hands you a
| dollar today can you trace it starting from where it was
| printed to everything it was used for until it eventually
| got into your hands?
|
| Yeah you can look up bitcoin wallet IDs on the ledger,
| but you can also generate an unlimited number of wallets,
| and pass coins in any combination through any number of
| mixers and tumblers, and exchange it between multiple
| currencies (some of them truly untrackable). If people or
| organizations want to stay anonymous in the crypto
| ecosystem they can very easily do so.
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| Except none of that happened. It didn't stay anonymous,
| it just went to Iran.
| paxys wrote:
| Did not happen != cannot happen
| kelseyfrog wrote:
| A lot of things _can_ happen, but what _did_ happen is
| the coins went to Iran.
| MarsIronPI wrote:
| The difference is that with cash we don't write the
| serial number of every bill for every transaction in an
| easily-accessible central ledger. There's no such thing
| as an off-the-books Bitcoin transaction, by nature.
| ozgrakkurt wrote:
| I don't understand the point of this. It is no different
| than traditional finance.
|
| People do and did transfer drug money before and they will
| keep transferring drug money. I don't see what blockchain
| has to do with that.
|
| On the other hand, I use blockchain personally for
| completely legal purposes and find it very useful.
|
| Easy to do international transfers, easy to buy different
| currencies even if local government is trying to make it
| hard. Also I have more trust in it compared to countries
| that I live in or travel to.
|
| Another big aspect of it is no hidden costs and borderline
| scamming behavior I get from credit card companies or banks
| when doing international spending or transfers. This is not
| even about the insane prices, the feeling of getting
| scammed is even worse.
|
| Also it is literally governments reason of existence to
| preserve order and catch criminals. Banning everything used
| by criminals is insanely stupid.
|
| Same idea with cryptography, same with internet, same with
| cash.
| torginus wrote:
| I know some pretty sharp folks who fork for various police
| departments chasing illicit crypto related activity. The
| amount of stuff they can track including timing of
| transactions, entry and exit points, etc, and so over a
| long period of time means that most of the traditional
| anyonmization methods like tumblers simply do not work.
| Eventually someone, somewhere makes a mistake and the
| transactions and wallets can be traced.
|
| If you have dirty money to hide, it's much better to hide
| it in a bank in Panama, or fill a sports bag with gold bars
| and fly it out on your private jet than use crypto.
|
| Anything you can do from your bedroom, police can track
| from theirs.
| 0x3f wrote:
| By definition the police only ever detect and catch those
| they are capable of detecting and catching. It's entirely
| in their interest to let people believe their
| capabilities are much greater than they really are. That
| goes double for the companies that sell this technology
| to the police.
| MarsIronPI wrote:
| Including sending and receiving Monero? (This is a
| serious question; I don't have a perspective on this
| yet.)
| MASNeo wrote:
| I am working to track and trace and time transactions and
| while this is possible when and if you know the identity
| of at least one participant it's quite another thing when
| no identity is known at all. Criminals know that so it's
| notoriously hard to pull off. Thanks to Daleware secrecy
| and lax Super PAC rules to disclose sources of funds it's
| not going to get easier.
|
| So either your friends are genius saucers or they have
| effective government intelligence that would be highly
| appreciated. I'd be interested.
|
| You are spot on regarding the bedroom though. Exporting
| physical USD is far more lucrative, by the shipload,
| often by Chinese Money Laundering Organisations, for
| free.
| lucketone wrote:
| There is a third option, that those being tracked make
| mistakes
| torginus wrote:
| Sorry, I'm a bit fuzzy on the details, but I know that he
| usually goes after big fish - people who deal in bulk or
| are somehow involved in manufacturing, not dudes who
| order pills in the mail. These people are usually being
| investigated/surveilled otherwise, and he does work with
| the police, so you could say he has 'government
| intelligence'.
| dylan604 wrote:
| > Anything you can do from your bedroom, police can track
| from theirs.
|
| This is why I have tape covering my webcam and music
| blaring. Oh, wait, that's not what you meant.
| basilikum wrote:
| Bitcoin is traceable by design. That's how a public ledger
| works. It is merely pseudonymous. But it leaves complete
| public money trail. If your Bitcoin ever associate with
| your real identity, which they tend to do when you actually
| use them, your anonymity is gone.
|
| There is a reason why Monero exists.
| torginus wrote:
| Can't anyone basically sanction entire wallets, and mark them,
| and make some legislation that any transaction involving coins
| originating from those wallets be rejected by all payment
| processors and exchanges in regulated markets?
|
| I mean, they obviously can, but probably they have elected not
| to do so. But if crypto becomes a tool in the hands of enemy
| nation states, such regulation can't be soo far off.
|
| Though that would create a secondary market for these 'tainted'
| coins, and would probably have far-reaching consequences into
| the crypto ecosystem.
| wat10000 wrote:
| You can't track individual coins, so you'd have to "taint"
| entire wallets. Using a mixer would taint the mixer and every
| wallet it sent to. I'd think this would end up tainting
| almost everything before too long.
|
| Bitcoin also doesn't require the receiver to authorize a
| transaction, so if you had control of a tainted wallet, you
| could taint other wallets at will, wielding it like a weapon.
|
| Doesn't seem feasible. Not that this always stops
| legislators.
| StopDisinfo910 wrote:
| > Using a mixer would taint the mixer and every wallet it
| sent to. I'd think this would end up tainting almost
| everything before too long.
|
| Is that actually an issue? I am looking for it but I can't
| see a downside.
| 0x3f wrote:
| It was at least in theory an issue when they tried to
| sanction mixers. In fact people would purposely send
| tainted crypto to well known wallet addresses of
| celebrities etc. making them technically run afoul of
| OFAC
| wat10000 wrote:
| Depends on your goal. If you want to keep the system
| going while blocking "dirty" money, it's not going to
| work. If you want to use that as a stealth method of
| banning the whole system, then full steam ahead.
| StopDisinfo910 wrote:
| Would banning the whole system have any downside? It's
| still unclear to me what crypto is supposed to be useful
| for.
| wmf wrote:
| OFAC already sanctions crypto wallets.
| https://ofac.treasury.gov/faqs/594
| wat10000 wrote:
| It seems to me that the people who want the unblockable
| currency out of government control are not the same people who
| want to block money transfers to countries like Iran.
| EA-3167 wrote:
| I'd argue the #1 use case is ransomware and scamming, but this
| has to be a close second. Honestly the journey from "The
| blockchain is the future, everyone must see that" to where we
| are now really feels like the one we're taking with 'AI'.
|
| In the end it will still exist, but the use case is going to be
| so much less inspiring than people want to believe, outside of
| medical and fundamental research at least.
| chihuahua wrote:
| I thought the #1 use case for crypto was ransomware, followed
| by shitcoin rug-pulls, and the ability to commit theft without
| recourse.
|
| Sending money to Iran is just a minor edge case.
| hilliardfarmer wrote:
| What a deeply troubling and cynical comment.
|
| As far as I know, nowhere in the Bitcoin white paper or the
| original code base. Does it say anything about what you seem
| to think it's use cases are.
|
| Bitcoin has one main use, digital cash, that can be sent
| instantly and for free or a very low fee.
|
| Edit: I would agree though, that anything other than that is
| probably a scam.
| natpalmer1776 wrote:
| Men of principles often mistake the experience and
| observations of others for cynicism when it does not align
| with said principles.
|
| This applies to a great deal, not just bitcoin.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Relevant citations:
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_
| wha...
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_mind
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bounded_rationality
|
| "We must take the world as it is and not as we would like
| it to be." - Maurice Allais
| lambda wrote:
| What? "Instantly and for a very low fee"?
|
| Fees have historically gone up above $100 per transaction.
| They've since added hacks on top of the original Bitcoin
| protocol to get the price back down again, but the original
| design was not good for low fees.
|
| And transactions can take 30 minutes or more to settle,
| that's hardly instant. If you accept a transaction
| instantly, it's relatively easy for someone to scam you by
| double spending.
|
| So, no, Bitcoin doesn't make a great digital cash. Maybe a
| better wire transfer. But the biggest benefit of it is to
| be unblockable and unrefundable, which makes it great for
| scames and illegal activity, plus the speculative nature of
| the pricing, which is great for gambling on.
| SOLAR_FIELDS wrote:
| Pointing at the BTC transaction fee and saying it is
| super expensive is like pointing at a problematic car
| model and saying all cars are bad.
|
| There are any number of other popular coins out there
| that have the same or better liquidity as BTC that charge
| tiny fractions of the fees. And also settle in seconds.
|
| You're saying Bitcoin like BTC, but the parent commenter
| was probably referring to the giant ecosystem of coins,
| that happens to include BTC, but also many other much
| faster and cheaper options, that are used to globally
| remit payments every day.
|
| What it's replacing, by the way, Western Union, Wise and
| the like, is also pretty unblockable and unrefundable.
| lambda wrote:
| What? I was replying to someone who explicitly referenced
| the Bitcoin whitepaper, they were clearly talking about
| BTC. And the protocol from the whitepaper was actually
| pretty bad, from a cost and transaction time point of
| view. It's gotten a bit better with some hacks layered on
| top of it.
|
| And yeah, the thing is, payment systems that work
| approximately as well as BTC exist without being
| cryptocurrency and using up so much electricity on
| mining. The main difference is that they don't operate in
| some areas where BTC still can (like evading sanctions,
| like this), and the speculative nature of BTC (which is
| actually a net negative on using it as a cash).
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| >And transactions can take 30 minutes or more to settle
| >Fees have historically gone up above $100 per
| transaction
|
| So it's cheaper to use Paypal ?
| lambda wrote:
| They've since added some hacks to enable it to handle
| more transactions and bring the price down. Effectively,
| the network had hit its limit on the number of
| transactions it could fit in a block, so you had to pay
| high fees to get accepted in a block, the miners simply
| couldn't accept all transactions; but they've added ways
| of fitting more transactions into a block that have
| helped drive prices back down again.
|
| So now it's back to being cheaper than Paypal, but yeah,
| there was a time when there were $100+ transaction fees.
| And it may hit that again if transaction numbers go up
| enough to fill up blocks with the new implementation.
| tromp wrote:
| High tx fees are an essential goal in Bitcoin's design:
| in the long term, when the block subsidy becomes
| insignificant, Bitcoin's security will rely almost
| entirely on tx fees.
| kevinak wrote:
| Bitcoin via the Lightning Network is near cost-free and
| instant. And it's not a hack, it's just a network of
| payment channels.
| wpietri wrote:
| It seems entirely accurate to me, at least in a POSIWID
| sense.
|
| The original theory of Bitcoin was, as described in the
| paper, decentralized digital cash. But in practice it was
| never optimized for what normal people use cash for. As
| system like that would be something like M-PESA.
|
| Even at the time, cash was declining in usage. In the 18
| years since, it has declined a lot more. And for good
| reason, because what most people want for most things isn't
| digital cash, but digital money. E.g., debit cards and
| Venmo.
|
| So pretty naturally Bitcoin has value only for a few niche
| use cases that are not well served by more effective
| systems. Various sorts of crime, mostly. Digital cash,
| sure, but the kind that's transferred in unmarked envelopes
| slid quietly across the table. The kind that is delivered
| in a briefcase.
|
| As a side note, it also failed in its goal of being
| decentralized. The mining power is very concentrated. Much
| more so than the banking industry, for example. And most
| users keep their Bitcoin on deposit in centralized
| services. So it's again basically banking but worse.
| carshodev wrote:
| Although it was originally intended to be cash it
| actually now is used as a "store of wealth" It allows
| people to build up wealth and be able to preserve it from
| government intervention and inflation. If you have stocks
| the ownerhsip and registration is controlled by a
| government and can be taken at any time from you.
|
| Look at china where if you have a large company and take
| a stand against the government all your equity will be
| wiped out and you will be either imprisoned or banished
| to another country.
|
| Cash in a government bank account is the same way, you
| can wake up one day and all your assets will be seized,
| your credit cards will stop working.
|
| Bitcoin works because you can technically have your
| wealth memorized. You can memorize a string of charcters
| that allow you to bring money with you no matter where
| you go. NO government or other human can steal it from
| you (except through torture) but you can also easily not
| memorize it and instead distribute the keys throughout
| the world in opposing countries meaning even if you are
| attacked by one country you still have some wealth kept
| in another.
|
| A store of wealth is what bitcion allows. True freedom
| from governments stealing your money because you have
| ideas which they do not agree with.
|
| This in my mind is the main usage of bitcoin.
|
| Other coins like stablecoins, or the btc lightning
| network have high value because they make transactions
| much cheaper as traditional banking systems are complex,
| error prone, and costly.
| maest wrote:
| POSIWID = the Purpose Of the System Is What It Does.
| datatrashfire wrote:
| the problem is as a means of cash it's inferior to existing
| systems in pretty much every dimension. more expensive,
| slower, more risk, higher volatility. the cash story for
| crypto is not good.
| carshodev wrote:
| This is incorrect, bitcoin is slower and more expensive,
| but bitcoin should not be used as cash, coins like
| stablecoins which direclty track US dollars or altcoins
| with lower fees should be used, the lightning network
| also is useful for transactions.
|
| Bitcoin CAN be used as a store of wealth and the slowness
| actually makes it better as the slowness is part of the
| same process that makes it safer, harder to
| hack/takeover, and gives it value.
|
| You should not look at all crypto as one thing.
| idop wrote:
| My brain hurts[1].
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MrVj8B41t0U
| rwmj wrote:
| That's a rather narrow view of crypto's uses. What about
| subverting democracy by bribing the President?
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| For me it was buying a computer from newegg but I confess
| I'm not playing in the same league.
| quinnjh wrote:
| What was the benefit to you over using USD? (actually
| wondering)
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| 1. Get rid of the few mBTC I had left after I realized
| how bad I'm at crypto trading
|
| 2. Fully live the concept of buying something physical
| from a virtual money I got by mining some now defunct
| coins.
| carshodev wrote:
| Has the lack of crypto ever stopped this from happening?
| Look up cases of gold bars being found in senators houses,
| those are actually MUCH less tracable.
|
| Shitcoins and Shitstocks(some SPACs) do allow of a legal
| way to "give" others money through the transfer of value in
| a way that is technically legal. This again is not crypto
| specific though.
| numbers_guy wrote:
| Back in 2011 I remember a lot of people talking about how the
| Chinese oligarchs were using it to evade currency controls
| and funnel their wealth out of China.
| carshodev wrote:
| Yes but we should be reminded that this also allows people
| to be protected from government overreach.
|
| If you say something the Chinese government does not agree
| with they can choose to take all your money and control of
| your company instantly. Not just oligarchs although those
| are the bigger targets due to the high value.
|
| Even a small business owner could THEORETICALLY have their
| assets and equity seized for saying something which goes
| against the current ruling party, and this is not specific
| to China it could happen in any modern country.
|
| Crypto allow someone to distribute their wealth in a way
| where they can be free to speak their mind and still
| protected even if the country which their business is based
| out of decides to take action against them.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| Isn't it just a subset of #3?
| boplicity wrote:
| Money laundering has always been a core feature of
| cryptocurrency, not an edge case.
| joe_the_user wrote:
| Not that snark isn't warranted in this situation but you have
| to consider that the ability to turn energy into globally
| accepted (but notably not-actually-untraceable) cash-
| equivalent is a key piece of the corrupt bitcoin puzzle. It
| offer opportunities to everyone from third world oligarchs
| and pariahs to those who happen to be able to tap an
| electrical grid. Technically, this is indeed "theft without
| recourse" but you're reply seems to imply corruption isn't
| included.
|
| Moreover, the chances are the reason Binance nixed the
| investigation of bitcoin going to Iran is because so much of
| the bitcoin economy is driven by entities like Iran (google
| AI say they have 4.5% of global mining plus random search
| link [1]).
|
| Edit: Iran also want bitcoin sent to because bitcoin isn't
| actually untraceable so getting clean money for dirty
| matters.
|
| [1] https://www.chainalysis.com/blog/iranian-crypto-activity-
| geo...
| amelius wrote:
| You forgot gambling on crypto exchanges.
| fredgrott wrote:
| you mean its not used for the Paul brothers latest meme coin
| rug pulls?
| ericbuildsio wrote:
| Could someone explain to me where the myth of "crypto =
| untrackable" comes from, and why it's still being perpetuated?
|
| Storing a record of every single transaction on a publicly
| accessible blockchain sounds trackable by design
| subscribed wrote:
| In the case of bitcoin, surely.
|
| Some other coins not so much trackable, and that's the reason
| some countries don't like them:
| https://finance.yahoo.com/news/binance-delist-monero-
| zcash-4...
| ericbuildsio wrote:
| Fascinating, I didn't know that Zcash / Monero worked that
| way. Thanks!
| nytesky wrote:
| I think it's part of the Origin Story.
|
| Bitcoin was created by Satoshi Nakamoto almost 20 years ago.
| There are a number of wallets that people believe belong to
| Satoshi (have they proven they belong to SN?)
|
| Yet the identification of Satoshi has eluded a global hunt to
| identify him. Maybe law enforcement has not been involved,
| but the mystery definitely suggests that BitCoin can help
| mask identity.
| 47282847 wrote:
| The wallets attributed to Satoshi have not seen any coin
| movement so it only shows that one can publish code
| pseudonymously, not that one can use BTC anonymously.
| _alternator_ wrote:
| The truth is there are some currencies that are by design
| untrackable--monero and zcash, for example, which use privacy
| preserving techniques to avoid tracking. (IMO zcash is a
| better implementation than monero, but shrug.)
|
| Bitcoin and ethereum and most other crypto currencies are
| absolutely traceable in the sense that anyone can see who you
| send your money to. And all of the implementations have the
| core challenge of getting back to fiat--at some point, you
| withdraw cash or otherwise pay a real person to do something
| for you. There's no way around that.
| XorNot wrote:
| It's the overconfidence of 90s kids who knew how to program
| the VCR and use the modem.
| basilikum wrote:
| Bitcoin ist pseudonymous. If you never attach your real
| identity to your Bitcoin you remain pseudonymous. Now that's
| a very big if and why states heavily try to enforce KYC for
| exchanges.
|
| The reality is a lot more messy. Different chains have
| different properties. Things like CoinJoins for Bitcoin or
| TornadoCash for Ethereum exist which aim to break the money
| trail. Mixers are a thing which are a trusted entity doing
| the same on a "trust me bro" basis.
|
| Monero seeks to be untracable by design using zero knowledge
| proofs and ring signatures over multiple possible sources for
| every transaction.
|
| Even with standard Bitcoin it's more complicated. One time
| change addresses make tracking harder. Say I send you 1 BTC
| in a transaction. Now you want to spend 0.5 of these Bitcoin.
| However with Bitcoin you can only ever use an incoming
| transaction in full. Every transaction has a number of inputs
| (a previous incoming transaction) that it spends and a number
| of outputs. An output can only be unspent or spent. The
| amount of the outputs must match the amount of inputs. So
| what you do is you use that input of 1 BTC and create two
| output of 0.5 BTC each. One is to the recipient address and
| one is to an address of your own (the change address). If you
| create a new change address for every transaction nobody but
| the recipient can know which output belongs to the recipient
| and which is your change address.
|
| In reality that is a weak defense and there are many usage
| patterns (e.g. one output being a round number and the other
| one not) that can give away which one the change address is.
| wnevets wrote:
| > Isn't this like the #1 use case for crypto?
|
| What is even the point of crypto if you can't commit crimes
| with it?
| moralestapia wrote:
| What's funny is that Bitcoin/Ethereum are now the most tracked
| ledgers on the planet. If I wanted to do some shady value
| exchange it would be my last choice.
| dpedu wrote:
| Not just the #1 use case, the only use case. Real money is
| better in every scenario other than crime.
| bigstrat2003 wrote:
| The #1 use case for crypto is that it's anonymous like cash.
| And yes, this enables people to use it for crime... _just like
| they use cash_. The unavoidable cost of freedom has always been
| that some people will misuse it. Personally, I would rather
| have freedom even if it gets misused than not have freedom even
| if it means crime is over.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _The #1 use case for crypto is that it 's anonymous like
| cash. And yes, this enables people to use it for crime..._
| just like they use cash.
|
| Not _quite_ like cash: collecting and transferring US$1.7B in
| cash--actual physical paper--is probably more logistically
| challenging than BTC.
|
| I understand the argument for freedom, but depending on the
| scale/dosage many things that could be fine in small
| quantities aren't as good in large ones.
| hn_acc1 wrote:
| I'll bet $100 that the percentage of crypto used for crime is
| higher than the percentage of cash used for crime.
| fluoridation wrote:
| Mmh... What do you mean by percentage? Over the amount
| transacted per day, or over the total supply?
| jacobjjacob wrote:
| It's 100% trackable. It's anonymous but there are many
| datapoints that could be used to deanonymize if the transaction
| parties are not extremely careful
| carshodev wrote:
| Exchanges are not anonymous at all though. They are directly
| linked to your identity as required by US law, but physical
| btc can be traded anonymously as its technically just a
| string of letters and numbers. You could transact with it
| through just telling someone this string if you trust them
| enough.
| expedition32 wrote:
| Money laundering is only good when our people are doing it.
| cs702 wrote:
| It's also the #1 use case for $100 US dollar bills. Most US
| $100 bills, in fact, are not even in the US.[a][b]
|
| US $100 bills are the currency of choice for small-time crooks
| and evildoers around the world.
|
| They are also the currency of choice for big-time crooks and
| evildoers. Briefcases of US $100 bills have long been used for
| illicit payments, as depicted in numerous books and movies.
|
| Just because crooks and evildoers use US $100 bills doesn't
| mean they are not useful and valuable to honest people too.
|
| What Binance did was wrong, no doubt, but Binance [?] crypto.
|
| --
|
| [a] https://www.stlouisfed.org/on-the-
| economy/2022/oct/innocent-...
|
| [b]
| https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/04/12/177051690/most...
| dylan604 wrote:
| > Just because criminals and evildoers use US $100 bills
| doesn't mean they are not useful and valuable to honest
| people too.
|
| Like all of the ATMs near a dispensary that was always out of
| cash because 20 individual $20 bills runs out a lot faster
| than 4 $100 bills. Until dispensaries became legal, it was
| rare for me to see an ATM with anything other than $20s. Now,
| I see $20, $50, $100 dispensing machines regularly.
| crazygringo wrote:
| There's a major distinction, however, in that it's a _heck_
| of a lot harder to safely and reliably lug briefcases or
| suitcases full of $100 bills from Chicago to Tehran, than it
| is to click and transfer some Bitcoin. Which is the whole
| point.
| cs702 wrote:
| Yeah, crypto is a safer, more reliable alternative for many
| use cases, including those that are fundamentally honest.
| For instance, if you're an honest person trapped as a
| citizen in a despotic authoritarian state that doesn't
| respect your property rights, crypto may be the safest,
| most reliable alternative for storing your hard-earned
| savings.
| carshodev wrote:
| Unblockable yes, untrackable no. Also portable is the main
| ability of crypto.
|
| The reason that this could be found out is because every
| transaction is recorded so it can be linked back through the
| chain once it hits another exchange that is KYC'd.
|
| If I have a gold watch and I wear it through the airport go to
| turkey melt it down and give it to an iranian, then buy a fake
| watch and return home noone will every know that this
| transaction took place.
|
| This would be 100% impossible to track in any reasonable
| manner. If I went to an exchange transfered bitcoin to a person
| then they spent this bitcoin in a way that linked it to their
| identity this would provide a full audit trail that would link
| me to that person. Also this audit trail could NEVER be removed
| or altered.
|
| There are ways to use bitcoin in an untracable manner just like
| gold, you can have a cold wallet and transfer the keys to
| someone else. The cold wallet password could be only memorized
| and thus have no physical trace and no transaction record could
| take place whatsoever, but this is the OPPOSITE of what an
| exchange does.
|
| Also cash and bank systems are not as resistant, they can fail,
| be hacked, be altered, people can use shell companies and fake
| identities.
|
| Some cryptos like monero try and hide the transaction path but
| even this crypto has some vulnerabilities making linking it to
| people possible in some cases.
| bko wrote:
| > Everyone wants an untrackable unblockable currency
|
| What are you talking about? Crypto is defined by its
| trackability (immutable, permission-less, verifiable ledger of
| every transaction in history). Please refrain from commenting
| on things you're unfamiliar with.
| LunaSea wrote:
| Remember that the CEO of Binance was pardoned by Trump after
| pleading guilty to financial fraud.
| ourmandave wrote:
| I wonder if the pardon bribe is less if your crime is something
| near and dear to the Orange King's heart.
| paxys wrote:
| It's more than just that.
|
| > President Trump granted a pardon to Binance's founder,
| Changpeng Zhao, who had spent four months in federal prison in
| 2024 for his role in the firm's crimes. The Trump family's
| crypto start-up, World Liberty Financial, has forged close
| business ties with Binance, and Mr. Zhao was a guest this month
| at a conference at Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump's club in Palm Beach,
| Fla.
| lavezzi wrote:
| it's more than just that:
|
| https://www.forbes.com/sites/zacheverson/2026/02/09/trump-
| st...
|
| > Binance holds about 87% of USD1, the stablecoin issued by a
| Trump family crypto venture--a greater concentration than any
| other major stablecoin has at a single exchange, roughly $4.7
| billion of the $5.4 billion total supply.
| guywithahat wrote:
| Sure but wasn't his prosecution generally regarded as
| political? The Biden admin went hard against crypto towards the
| end largely to appease donors, at the disservice to consumers.
| Gary Gensler changed a lot of rules without notice, and
| targeted people who had previously looked towards the SEC for
| guidance and followed the rules. Certainly I remember (at least
| at the time) the arrest of CZ was regarded as political, which
| is presumably why he was later pardoned and not commuted
| g947o wrote:
| Citation needed.
|
| Bear in mind that this guy pleaded guilty in a court case.
| Even if the prosecution is political, the facts don't lie.
| wat10000 wrote:
| When it comes to extremely rich people, "political
| prosecution" generally means that the behavior was
| absolutely criminal, but that it's usually something they
| let rich people get away with.
| guywithahat wrote:
| It can also mean it's political. Famously (whether you
| think he's guilty or not) John Kiriakou pled guilty
| because he knew John Brennan was going to throw the
| entire might of the justice system at him. When he talks
| about the experience, his decisions are made with
| consideration to the fact the president's inner circle
| wanted him in jail and he wasn't fighting a fair battle.
| wat10000 wrote:
| I'm not sure how that's relevant, since John Kiriakou
| does not appear to be particularly wealthy.
| mikestew wrote:
| _Bear in mind that this guy pleaded guilty in a court
| case._
|
| In my mind that doesn't mean shit. Prosecution said, "if
| this goes to trial, we'll try to get life in prison. Or you
| could take our plea deal." That is why 90-some percent of
| prosecutions (EDIT: in the U. S.) go plea deal instead of
| trial.
| EricDeb wrote:
| I would imagine very rich people have extremely good
| lawyers though that can tell them very accurately if they
| will get off if it goes to trial.
| mikkupikku wrote:
| The best lawyers in the world won't be able to give you
| any guarantees about how a jury will feel.
| 47282847 wrote:
| Regarded, by whom? Not by financial experts such as Matt
| Levine. It looks like the prosecution followed the books and
| the law and the long-held SEC position. If you're honestly
| interested, Levines newsletters at the time carry a lot of
| detail, the given reasoning beyond politics, and historical
| comparison to non-crypto decisions.
|
| It's too easy of a spin to later declare events as all
| political; one should be careful to make that claim unless
| accompanied with good arguments.
|
| Regarding plea deal/guilt: there is sufficient material
| publicly available to come to the conclusion that yes Binance
| willingly and knowingly invested effort into circumventing
| the law and SECs policies. Regardless of whether that law was
| set up for "political purposes" or not, it was not some
| honest mistake or differences of interpretation. Don't fall
| into the trap of rewriting history.
| giaour wrote:
| Perhaps CZ's prosecution was generally regarded as political
| among the people you talk to regularly, but the
| contemporaneous media consensus (at least to my recollection)
| was that Binance had openly flouted US law for years and was
| finally being reined in. E.g.,
| https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/22/business/binance-
| crypto-c... was representative.
| michaelteter wrote:
| Iran obviously missed the memo. All they have to do is setup a
| wealth fund and invest heavily in a Trump venture; then they
| can become a most favored nation and forego all this conflict.
| seydor wrote:
| Binance should be considered a US instrument now.
| jstummbillig wrote:
| If one of two options can't be regulated or tracked, that is the
| option that will predominantly be used by actors who have
| outsized interest in being regulation or being tracked.
| BenGosub wrote:
| Is Iran supposed supposed to be banned on Binance?
| arjie wrote:
| It's a US-sanctioned country so allied nations play along with
| the sanctions and Binance is located within that US sphere of
| influence so Iran is supposed to be currently banned, yes.
| carshodev wrote:
| Every US company/citizen is not allowed to do trade with Iran
| due to the ITSR laws except under highly specific situations.
|
| It gets more complex if a company is multinational though.
|
| A citizen can travel to Iran but even if they buy something
| there on holiday if they bring it back to the US they need to
| go through complex customs procedures to make sure its legally
| brought back in.
| embedding-shape wrote:
| > Every US company/citizen [...] if they bring it back to the
| US
|
| Is that relevant here?
|
| > Binance Holdings Ltd., branded Binance, [...] was founded
| in 2017 by Changpeng Zhao. Binance was initially based in
| China, then moved to Japan, subsequently left Japan for
| Malta, and currently has no official company headquarters.
|
| The founder seems to have been born in China and is Canadian.
|
| I still also don't understand if Iran is supposed to be
| banned on Binance or not.
| lacoolj wrote:
| Contrary to a lot of comments here, the only way to use bitcoin
| (or any cryptocurrency) without tracking is to mine it yourself,
| and even then...
|
| Where did you get it? Purchased/transferred? Where did they get
| it? What else did the person with that wallet do?
|
| If the answer is "mined", even then, you have to actually do
| something with it, right? Buy something? Where is that something
| shipped? At worst you'll have to pay customs on it, and have it
| actually get through customs. At best, your address is in a
| database now.
|
| Have it shipped somewhere obscure? Video cameras are everywhere.
| Have it shipped to someone else's house and steal it off their
| porch? Again, cameras everywhere.
|
| Not have a physical item? Just a service? That's pretty much the
| closest you'll get to anonymous money transfer and full usage
| (along with whatever VPN you prefer).
|
| Cool that was a fun mental exercise. Now everyone tell me why I'm
| wrong!
| VirusNewbie wrote:
| I mean, I can meet you in an ally, transfer some satoshis from
| my wallet to yours, you hand me a wad of
| cash/jewels/MtG/collector funkos and you might not even know my
| name.
| beAbU wrote:
| True, but this does not happen for large transactions, due to
| being vulnerable to the $5 wrench attack (1)
|
| For big transactions where something of actual value is
| exchanged, both parties will want an escrow, and this is
| where a public exchange comes in.
|
| 1 - https://xkcd.com/538/
| himata4113 wrote:
| Except that there is a huge trusted network for this. The
| world does not revolve around americas and europe. Not
| everyone has issues cashing out millions of crypto from a
| bank. This has been especially prevelant with countries
| that host a lot of Russian immigrants ever since the SWIFT
| ban, the regulation is extremely lax and there is minimal
| data shared to western institutions.
|
| I have heard from friends who are in these countries
| observing transactions that go into the millions of dollars
| that are being cashed out (not even laundered) like it's
| just another day. Nobody asks questions, nobody cares
| either and if you bring it up you will likely lose your job
| in few months or so.
| nine_k wrote:
| Hmm, doesn't this work equally well with a wad of $10 and $20
| notes? I mean, yes, notes could be clandestinely marked. But
| aren't bitcoins also traceable after the first transaction?
| VirusNewbie wrote:
| yes but harder to move 10M in cash around from country to
| country.
|
| I'm assuming I'm purchasing/selling a _lot_ of MtG /Funko
| here in this example.
| mikkupikku wrote:
| Sounds like a setup to get robbed tbqh.
| joe_the_user wrote:
| Yeah, crypto as normally managed is one of the most traceable
| currencies. The block chain is in fact a complete log of
| transactions. Naturally that means there are no untraceable
| uses despite your sound-of-one-hand-clapping thought
| experiment.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-02-23 23:00 UTC)