myPlanetGanja.com

Munchy wrote:your speculation must've been based on something, right?

and I'm sure we would believe it if you said yes... unless we've gotten the wrong impression, and maybe it just means that you're depressed, then I'd want to believe. but otherwise unless maybe you think we're too dumb to notice the obvious clue, perhaps you chose your username in the interest of openness, and then why bother to deny it? so it seemed fair to ask out of curiosity. but I doubt if an admission would really change much here either... aside from leading to the next logical question of your motivation, but even that probably wouldn't be too surprising or worrisome.

Hey mate, have a look at the guy's posting history – I don't think he's LEO. Even if he was, well there's nothing stopping anyone from accessing a public site so we all have to assume that anyone is reading us at any time. Which is why I mostly stayed out of this thread and why I was a bit annoyed at people posting things on here initially that I thought could make the Feds' job a bit easier. Especially when journos/writers started asking questions and some people had no qualms about answering them on a public forum.

It may all be moot now, but in the begining – especially when it appeared PoM was going to fight the charges – the last thing any of us should have been doing is blabbing about what we knew. Of course, none of this is aimed at you. I'm just venting.

sorry I asked. seems there is some inside info about how POM just shaved 10 years off his sentence, but I guess we're supposed to ignore that to be all PC here now. I must've missed the memo when this site changed into a bunch of pussies, afraid to ask the obvious for fear of offending someone. but it seems that you keep trying to argue me down when we're already in agreement.. I tried to make clear enough to begin with what you guys keep telling me now as if I didn't already say basically the same thing: "so it seemed fair to ask out of curiosity. but I doubt if an admission would really change much here either... aside from leading to the next logical question of your motivation, but even that probably wouldn't be too surprising or worrisome."

I'm not sure if that's directed at me, but if it is I think you've taken what I wrote the wrong way. Even after I said my post wasn't directed at you

In simple bullet points:

* I don't think AlwaysBlue is a cop – unless he was a bent cop – because he said he spent time inside

* Whether one member here is a cop or not should make no difference to the way we post – because anyone can read what we write

* I have no idea if PoM shaved 10 years off his sentence or not. He hasn't even been sentenced yet

* What little I know about PoM will never be revealed on an open forum because I'm not in the habit of making life easier for cops, journalists or anyone else who wishes to exploit his situation. Not that it would make much difference now

* Munchy needs to get laid

I did like the idea of her being a democratic fanatic tho.

Well well, looks like PoM getting some housekeeping done before his sentencing hearing in December. Smart move, will probably buy him a few years. Tainted coins would be worthless to anyone except the gvt, looks like those encrypted flash drives actually held something valuable after all

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-54810976" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bitcoin: $1bn address with Silk Road links 'being transferred'

Holy shit! Thats got to be some record! Heh!!!

I was just going to post up another version of the same story. Nearly a billion USD and no real way to ever spend it anonymously. Must be quite frustrating for whoever owns the wallet. Who ever thought that holding illegal profits in Bitcoin made even a little sense? Small timers, OK maybe, but a billion? I guess you could claim you cracked the passcode and just stole the money Either way, unless it is some arm of the USG holding the wallet, the owner is fucked six ways

Prawn Connery wrote:I just hope those bastards are rolling in Bitcoin. A few years in the clink for a multi-million payout isn't a bad little earner.

Silk Road bitcoins worth $1bn change hands after seven years
Funds have lain dormant since darknet site founder Ross Ulbricht was jailed in 2013

The wallet in question contains almost 70,000 bitcoins. Photograph: Dado Ruvić/Reuters
Alex Hern Technology editor
@alexhern
Wed 4 Nov 2020 13.44 GMT
Last modified on Wed 4 Nov 2020 14.10 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ ... even-years" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A billion dollars worth of bitcoins linked to the shuttered darknet market Silk Road has changed hands for the first time in seven years, prompting renewed speculation about the fate of the illicit fortune.

Almost 70,000 bitcoins stored in the account which, like all bitcoin wallets, is visible to the public, had lain untouched since April 2013. The website was shut down by an FBI raid six months after they were deposited, and they have not moved since.

Late on Tuesday night, however, the full amount less a $12 (£9) transaction fee was transferred to a new bitcoin address, records show.

“Through blockchain analysis we can determine that these funds likely originated from the Silk Road,” said Tom Robinson, chief scientist at the cryptocurrency analysts Elliptic. “They left the Silk Road’s wallet back on 6 May 2012 when they were worth around $350,000 and then remained dormant for nearly a year, before being moved … in April 2013.”

From there, the funds have lain dormant. After the marketplace was shut down in late 2013, its founder and boss, 36-year-old San Franciscan Ross Ulbricht, was sentenced to a double life sentence plus 40 years without possibility of parole. The FBI managed to seize 174,000 bitcoins, then worth about $100m, but an estimated 450,000 earned by the marketplace remain unaccounted for.

Robinson says it is unclear who moved the money. “The movement of these bitcoins today, now worth around $955m, may represent Ulbricht or a Silk Road vendor moving their funds,” he said. “However, it seems unlikely that Ulbricht would be able to conduct a bitcoin transaction from prison.”

One possibility is that an individual or group has managed to “crack” the wallet, effectively guessing its password and stealing the funds. A file that some claimed was an encrypted bitcoin wallet containing the keys to the funds has been circulated in cryptocurrency communities for the past year, and – if it is what it was claimed to be – then a combination of brute computing power and good luck could have successfully decrypted the wallet.

Simply guessing the private key of a bitcoin wallet is functionally impossible. Using the world’s fastest supercomputer to try every combination would take as many times more than the age of the universe as there have been seconds since the Big Bang.

But if the actual wallet file leaks, then the task is much simpler because it only involves guessing the password that protects the private key. “It is likely that it was ‘brute-forced’, ie all possible passwords were tried. This is computationally feasible if the password is short enough,” Robinson said. “Note that you can’t do this with any old bitcoin address. What is unusual here is that an encrypted wallet file for this address has apparently become available [if it’s real].

“Either way, the funds are now on the move, and whoever now controls the bitcoins may want to cash them out,” Robinson said. As for whether it was an insider or a hacker, his guess it’s as likely either way. “I’d say I’m 50/50 right now, perhaps leaning towards a Silk Roader. They were clearly biding their time and waiting for a busy news day in order to do this without it getting too much attention.”

FinCEN proposes lower threshold for transaction data-gathering under FATF's 'travel rule' including those made with crypto

Newly proposed rule changes from the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the U.S. Federal Reserve would, if approved, drop the transaction reporting threshold under the international "travel rule," including those made with cryptocurrencies and digital assets.

As noted in the proposed rule change document, the amendments "would reduce this threshold from $3,000 to $250 for funds transfers and transmittals of funds that begin or end outside the United States."

"FinCEN is likewise proposing to reduce from $3,000 to $250 the threshold in the rule requiring financial institutions to transmit to other financial institutions in the payment chain information on funds transfers and transmittals of funds that begin or end outside the United States." FinCEN clarified that the domestic threshold "remains unchanged at $3,000."

As well, the document includes a clarification to the rules to ensure that they are clearly applied to transactions involving cryptocurrencies and digital assets.

The document notes:

"The Agencies are also proposing to clarify the meaning of “money” as used in these same rules to ensure that the rules apply to domestic and cross-border transactions involving convertible virtual currency This document is scheduled to be published in the Federal Register on 10/27/2020 and available online at federalregister.gov/d/2020-23756, and on govinfo.gov (“CVC”), which is a medium of exchange (such as cryptocurrency) that either has an equivalent value as currency, or acts as a substitute for currency, but lacks legal tender status. The Agencies further propose to clarify that these rules apply to domestic and cross-border transactions involving digital assets that have legal tender status."

As previously reported, the "travel rule" applies to financial institutions that must transmit information between one another about those behind financial transactions above a certain size. Last summer, the Financial Action Task Force included in its 2019 guidance that cryptocurrency exchanges must adhere to the travel rule — a development that has kicked off a multi-faceted response to find ways to comply with the rule.

Just this week, a white paper from a group of U.S. crypto businesses proposed a peer-to-peer messaging system through which they could share information about transactors.

Some awesome (clearnet link) PDFs to read: https://www.gdf.io/wp-content/uploads/2 ... ion-V1.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://public-inspection.federalregist ... -23756.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've got a place in the EU, and I have to pay taxes there as a result and moving any significant sums of money between US and EU bank accounts is already under a microscope. You would probably be surprised at all the legal hoops one is required as a US citizen to open a bank account in the EU. I in the end had to hire a local EU lawyer to manage it. I expect, since the bureaucratic barriers are mostly on the US end, that you are looking at similar difficulties moving money from any other country in or out of the US.