this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
48 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37750 readers
240 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
Los@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
remington@beehaw.org
48
Scammers exploit bitcoin ATMs. Will new California laws help crack down on fraud? (www.latimes.com)
submitted 1 year ago by Moonrise2473@feddit.it to c/technology@beehaw.org
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

New California law limits cash to crypto at ATM machines at $1000 per day per person and also the fees that can be imposed by the machines.

The industry says this will hurt the business, hinting that they're profiting from the lack of KYC policies

I don't see any legitimate use from those machines. Who would have a legit need to exchange $15k from cash to crypto at 33% fees????

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] t3rmit3@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You are hinging the claim of non-anonymity on a previous transaction on the wallet having linked a real-world person to the wallet, but that is not a given. Additionally, you could simply use a new wallet for each transaction to avoid (or at least massively minimize) this.

I don't like cryptocurrency, but your claim is kinda like saying that TLS between you and your bank is not secure because I shoulder-surfed you. That's not a failure of TLS (or in this case, their anonymization system), it's a failure of your own privacy practices.