Remix.run Logo
arcticbull 5 days ago

Other way around. Stablecoins are essentially Venmo for crime. They get zero benefit from a blockchain. They are centralized, trusted and permissioned. Circle can freeze the USDC in your self-custody wallet at any time and you’re on your own bud. This whole thing is antithetical to crypto’s core ethos.

You could replicate USDC with a website where you log in with a password and move money between numbered accounts and they don’t run any AML/KYC checks on you. If you did that it would be super illegal. In fact someone did exactly this, it was called Liberty Reserve and everyone went to prison.

But because it’s got the magic of the blockchain laws don’t apply.

djrj477dhsnv 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Good. AML/KYC laws are a huge abuse of state power.

throwaway2037 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Serious question: What is the practical alternative? What do you think will happen if we reduce/remove AML/KYC requirements?

djrj477dhsnv 5 days ago | parent [-]

The alternative is the freedom to make any financial transaction without the government being involved.

If your concern is effective taxation, there are plenty of methods that worked historically while preserving financial privacy like property taxes.

mewpmewp2 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

The biggest reason for KYC and regulations are anti money laundering and corruption.

By making non KYC transactions easier, above becomes much easier and crime, fraud, scams and corruption significantly more profitable.

zx8080 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

Is there any report or research showing that KYC actually helped reducing corruption?

philipallstar 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Making everyone jump through hoops, at great expense, because the proceeds of crime are being laundered seems like the wrong way to approach stopping crime. I'd argue that bitcoin is in some ways more traceable, as all wallets are public.

Saline9515 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Problem with KYC and AML is that if you listen to the regulators, there is no end to it, the requirements only increase. I was once asked to provide 20 years of banking receipts for a small savings account that my grandmother had opened for me when I was 5. In the EU at least, it's common for banks to block transfers between countries, even if the transaction is well-documented. The most infuriating thing is that there's no real proof that AML works. It's just excellent at false positives, ending in account freezes for innocent people.

Stablecoins' success is also a reaction to the ever-increasing friction created by overreaching regulation. If you have a supplier in China, and need to buy some in-demand goods, you can sign the contract and send the money now, whereas with the classic banking system, you'd have to wait for two weeks to clear everything. This alone is brilliant and should be welcomed for its usefulness.

baq 5 days ago | parent [-]

Stablecoins are banks. What you’re describing has been the foundation of the banking system since medieval times.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala

Saline9515 5 days ago | parent [-]

What is interesting with stablecoins is that they are on the blockchain, which acts as a decentralized, uncensorable ledger which doesn't require you to tell a bank clerk what is written inside your wedding ring to be allowed to buy a second hand BMW in Poland.

topranks 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Indeed. Blockchains are for breaking the law.

I think it would be wholly better, in democracies, if we changed laws we didn’t like than tried to create technology to evade them.

Saline9515 4 days ago | parent [-]

The law says that banks need to do AML/KYC, a blockchain is not a bank, it's decentralized. Besides, being able to break a law can be good, when such laws have little to do with crime prevention, and more about feeding an industrial complex that earns from those frictions. And buying a car is not illegal as far as I know.

The main proponent that dictates the regulations, the FATF, is a shady, unregulated body that is used for political and economical repression.

wbnns 3 days ago | parent [-]

> a blockchain is not a bank, it's decentralized

Not all blockchains are decentralized, it depends on the consensus mechanism

baq 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

but if you buy a BMW in Poland on a stablecoin chain, everybody will know.

djrj477dhsnv 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Only if they happen to know the connection between you and the seller's wallet addresses and your respective identities.

Almost all the crypto I have is from p2p or freelancing. Very few could connect my identity and my wallets.

Saline9515 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe, but at least no one will block the payment.

topranks 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Pretty sure they didn’t that’s why we brought in anti money-laundering laws.

mxschumacher 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

it's not about taxes, it's about fighting illegal activity. Terrorist financing, drug dealing, human trafficking etc - do you really think it's a good idea to let those actors exchange payments freely?

losvedir 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

What's next, random searches at road checkpoints? Do you really want to let those actors use roads freely?

topranks 4 days ago | parent [-]

Do you the police should have zero power to set up checkpoints, or search cars even with a warrant?

djrj477dhsnv 4 days ago | parent [-]

Checkpoints, no. Searches with a warrant, yes.

djrj477dhsnv 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Yes, I think everyone should be able to exchange payments freely.

Drugs should be legal, so that's not a problem. Terrorism and human trafficking are more complicated topics, but basically I think they should be attacked more directly, not financially.

arcticbull 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Great opinion.

beeflet 5 days ago | parent [-]

Great rebuttal!

The government has existed for hundreds of years before these sophisticated mechanisms of surveilling the money system and the people were introduced. And it will continue to exist should they be removed.

arcticbull 5 days ago | parent [-]

You know everything was shit hundreds of years ago right, the wildcat banking system collapsed into miserable failure and the bearer instruments were eliminated because of the risk of train robberies.

topranks 4 days ago | parent [-]

Good news! They’re back!

derangedHorse 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Stablecoins are essentially Venmo for crime

What is your source for stablecoins being "for crime"? I've seen many individuals from countries all over the world utilize stablecoins in ways legal for their jurisdiction.

arcticbull 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

> The devastating impact of these scams is evident in the staggering losses reported globally. In 2024 alone, cryptocurrency investment fraud, largely driven by pig butchering schemes, caused over $5.8 billion in reported losses in the U.S. The anonymity and cross-border nature of cryptocurrency transactions have historically made these scams incredibly challenging to investigate and prosecute, allowing criminal syndicates to operate with relative impunity.

https://blockchain.bakermckenzie.com/2025/07/01/the-225-mill...

It’s slower, riskier, with less protection and usually more expensive than a classical financial transaction. So it self selects for criminals.

derangedHorse 5 days ago | parent [-]

I don't think that logic checks out. It being "slower, riskier, with less protection and usually more expensive" are not properties that self selects for criminals.

Stablecoins typically being self-custodial, easier to transfer in large amounts, and internationally accessible seem like it would support criminals, but with stablecoins, funds can be frozen just like bank deposits can.

This is emphasized in the article you linked:

> The investigation began in late 2023 when Tether, the issuer of the USDT stablecoin, proactively froze 39 wallet addresses containing $225 million in stolen USDT after detecting suspicious activity. This immediate action was critical in preventing further dispersion of the illicit funds. Paolo Ardoino, CEO of Tether, was quoted as saying, “Tether’s work with the Department of Justice underscores our commitment to transparency, proactive engagement with law enforcement, and the protection of users across the digital asset ecosystem.”

And the number you quoted is for cryptocurrency at large, not stablecoins. I imagine the number looks a lot different when we filter for that subset of usecases. For the large amounts used in stories like this, banks would be a better indicator for comparison[1][2]. Venmo, Cashapp, and Zelle have had their fair share of scandals as well[3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wachovia#Latin_drug_cartel_mon...

[2] https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/td-bank-appoints-co...

[3] https://www.freep.com/story/money/personal-finance/susan-tom...

topranks 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Tether has been reluctant in many cases to freeze addresses reported to it. At least historically it would not do so if the coins didn’t belong to its direct customers (mostly the large exchanges), rather than individuals who got them from their customers and did crime.

https://archive.ph/6nvkc

The other major issue is it’s easy to get the stablecoins, move them around, cash them out, and by the time Tether freezes them the criminals have already been paid (in dollars, which is what they want really).

arcticbull 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Even criminals don't want the insane volatility of vanilla crypto, and there's an unfounded sentiment that Tether doesn't freeze value in people's wallets (they actually freeze more than anyone else, and good luck resolving it in Salvadoran court if they even have jurisdiction).

Yes classical finance has had scandals because they're obligated to prevent these things, and in general, they have responded to court judgements by upping their internal controls. Crypto is built specifically not to have either internal controls or the ability to institute them in a meaningful way. It's the fundamental premise. One system is designed to stop this activity but fails sometimes, the other is designed to allow this activity by anarchocapitalist libertarian ethos and offers roughly zero recourse for those caught up incorrectly.

This argument is tantamount to "well, a plane crashed, so obviously the FAA doesn't provide any value, and we should just stop regulating aircraft entirely and yolo it." Same with drugs, well, a side-effect happened, let's just scrap the FDA and legalize the grey market Chinese sackloads of $5 peptides. While we're at it, we should let Walgreens sell em, why not.

If you think what the classical institutions are doing is wrong, you shouldn't say well, just let 'em lol, you should be arguing for stricter penalties and more control. If you think it's right, well, I don't know what to say.

Pepperidge Farm remembers when nobody in their right mind would just give all their money to unregulated offshore banks in the Caribbean. Remind me why that was again?

zx8080 5 days ago | parent [-]

The comparison is wrong. FDA is not there to confiscate anyone's money by locking down their accounts. FDA regulation is applied to companies. KYC is the US shit which applies to anyone, anywhere in the world outside the US, having the priority above local laws.

It must end.

doubleorseven 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

stablecoins are not for crime actually, it's like the bank of the criminals. for crime you would want to mix your stablecoins to btc or xmr, probably the latter.