Texas Sheriffs Crack Bitcoin ATM with Power Tools to Retrieve $32,000(decrypt.co)
decrypt.co
Texas Sheriffs Crack Bitcoin ATM with Power Tools to Retrieve $32,000
https://decrypt.co/326308/texas-sheriffs-crack-bitcoin-atm-with-power-tools-to-retrieve-32000
71 comments
I believe the police are only doing this because they are going to keep most of the cash themselves after doing zero effort in finding out who's cash they "saved". And I think believing anything else without proof is exceedingly naive of how US cops and courts operate.
Exactly, it'll be another civil asset forfeiture scam where police just keep the money.
To be clear: Bitcoin ATMs know damn well what they're doing. These devices at best performatively disguised money laundering tools. They exist by and for fraud. Virtually no legitimate transactions happen at them.
Whether that constitutes proof beyond a reasonable doubt is arguable, so I wouldn't be surprised if they claw this cash back. But the core truth isn't really in question.
Whether that constitutes proof beyond a reasonable doubt is arguable, so I wouldn't be surprised if they claw this cash back. But the core truth isn't really in question.
Sounds like cops should just arrest anyone who uses one then?
I would be more than happy to see gift cards disappear.
Limited strings-attached IOU that’s worse in every way than the cash paid for them.
Limited strings-attached IOU that’s worse in every way than the cash paid for them.
The users in the linked article were victims, not criminals. Cops should absolutely surveil these things though, and IMHO seizing the cash in there, via warrant, as part of the process of investigating a crime is a not unreasonable step.
Um, unless you have some really strong evidence to the contrary, I'm going to continue believing that the biggest use of Bitcoin ATMs is to buy cryptocurrency that's then used to buy drugs. That may not be legitimate, but it is neither money laundering nor fraud. Words have meanings.
I don't think that's correct at all. AML statutes are extremely broadly constructed precisely to avoid this kind of "akshually" defense. Exchanging currency for the purpose of evading detection of an illegal transaction is 100% laundering under the standard interpretation of those laws.
Statutes often redefine words in common use. Those definitions aren't interesting when you're outside of a courtroom.
Your point is that I'm right as a matter of criminal law but that you're not wrong because you have another definition for "money laundering" in your head? Well, OK. Agree to disagree, I guess.
The only context where the definition can irrevocably alter the trajectory of your life is in that courtroom. I'd argue that is the more important and interesting one that counts.
What do you put in a bitcoin atm? Cash right? So you could say the only reason to have cash around is if you're committing crimes. Otherwise you can just use you bank card.
That's not at all what parent comment said or implied. When A is only used for X and B is needed for A, then it does not follow that B is only used for X.
What about gift card shops?
There's a legal principle known as "attractive nuisance"[1] that might be relevant here. The idea is that if you create conditions, which are likely to lead to harm, and you _knew or should have known better_ (so you can't claim ignorance), then you're legally liable. This seems similar.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attractive_nuisance_doctrine
By that logic the US government would be liable for crimes committed using USD.
Are you saying the gas station owner has some liability?
Are you saying the gas station owner has some liability?
The US has sovereign immunity.
Ok, list some legitimate uses of bitcoin that actually exist in the wild outside of speculation and doing something once for the novelty of it that would require a bitcoin ATM in a gas station in Texas. There's four stories: speculation, money laundering, black market drugs, and "one time in 2012 I bought a pizza and that money would have bought me a mansion today".
>Are you saying the gas station owner has some liability?
Sometimes, yes, helping create a situation makes you partially liable even if the individual pieces of what you're doing are legal.
>Are you saying the gas station owner has some liability?
Sometimes, yes, helping create a situation makes you partially liable even if the individual pieces of what you're doing are legal.
Having full ownership over your money in digital form has quite a lot of disadvantages, so many disadvantages that it makes it a bad idea to do it in general. However, there are a few advantages under certain circumstances. You can easily wire money-equivalent into a country where banks are closed. It also forces countries to be a bit more cautious with acute money regulations in times of crisis (because Bitcoin is a tool to circumvent those).
I do however agree with your post on general. Bitcoin (and all other crypto currencies) is used for money laundering, speculation, doing things that would be illegal with properly regulated assets and for buying illegal things like drugs.
It's been around for quite some time, if there were more use cases we would already know by now. There has also been no substantial development since Etherium "let's make it turing complete because what could go wrong lol" and the world pretty much agreed that it's a bad idea to couple money transfer logic to publicly available code while a bug can make you lose all your money connected to that logic.
It's not like it wouldn't be possible in general. But nobody cares and obviously nobody sees how serious development would lead to anything useful (very few counter-examples like the people that created Monero).
I do however agree with your post on general. Bitcoin (and all other crypto currencies) is used for money laundering, speculation, doing things that would be illegal with properly regulated assets and for buying illegal things like drugs.
It's been around for quite some time, if there were more use cases we would already know by now. There has also been no substantial development since Etherium "let's make it turing complete because what could go wrong lol" and the world pretty much agreed that it's a bad idea to couple money transfer logic to publicly available code while a bug can make you lose all your money connected to that logic.
It's not like it wouldn't be possible in general. But nobody cares and obviously nobody sees how serious development would lead to anything useful (very few counter-examples like the people that created Monero).
Blockchain tech _is_ useful though, but mostly not to consumers unless they're trying to circumvent the law.
Private blockchains between semi-trusted entities that need to keep accounts between them are great. It really is just a shared ledger, a shared database with the mechanics for keeping accounts in a way that's mathematically trusted so no one party has to own the ledger. This is good for banks settling accounts between each other which they very have to do nightly for a variety of reasons.
Private blockchains between semi-trusted entities that need to keep accounts between them are great. It really is just a shared ledger, a shared database with the mechanics for keeping accounts in a way that's mathematically trusted so no one party has to own the ledger. This is good for banks settling accounts between each other which they very have to do nightly for a variety of reasons.
Sending my kids a Christmas gift.
What prevents police from going after regular bank atms? It’s not like banks are not used for fraud as well.
What prevent people claiming fraud again and again?
This is why we need courts, not police with power tools.
Have a feeling this is just rage bait
What prevent people claiming fraud again and again?
This is why we need courts, not police with power tools.
Have a feeling this is just rage bait
In the UK the government has somewhat gone after banks at a that level - money transfers. When someone falls for a scam and transfers money to a scammer, the government often makes the call that the bank is at fault for that. This is the absolute laziest thing the government could do, because it allocates all responsibility to the last line of defence rather than being an intelligent response to the problem.
This has led to the situation that doing a wire transfer regularly leads to intervention by the bank’s anti fraud team. This attitude has created a huge cost and risk overhead for all the banks, it forces inconvenience on consumers, and it hurts productivity of the economy.
A better way to combat fraud would be to drive improvements to the telephone network. Regulate to make the networks enforce accuracy of the phone numbers they are displaying, give the feature to reliably blacklist phone numbers, make the phone providers monitor for patterns of behaviour that look like scammer or mass marketing activity. There is no good reason that the phone companies should not have been expected to reach these standards decades ago. These fixes would assist with other law enforcement matters, such as tracing prank emergency services calls. But it requires meaningful work from policy makers, and it is not glamorous, so that never gets done.
This has led to the situation that doing a wire transfer regularly leads to intervention by the bank’s anti fraud team. This attitude has created a huge cost and risk overhead for all the banks, it forces inconvenience on consumers, and it hurts productivity of the economy.
A better way to combat fraud would be to drive improvements to the telephone network. Regulate to make the networks enforce accuracy of the phone numbers they are displaying, give the feature to reliably blacklist phone numbers, make the phone providers monitor for patterns of behaviour that look like scammer or mass marketing activity. There is no good reason that the phone companies should not have been expected to reach these standards decades ago. These fixes would assist with other law enforcement matters, such as tracing prank emergency services calls. But it requires meaningful work from policy makers, and it is not glamorous, so that never gets done.
There is another easy fix: Allow banks to educate customers, to maybe delay a transaction a bit, but don't allow them to halt or deny a transaction.
[deleted]
That’s precisely what this was. A local small town police doing a show of force to get some petty cash. If they were serious about it they would have enlisted the FBI and found out who the machine owner is; and/or watch until someone comes to retrieve the cash.
They had a warrant. Ie, the court told them they can do it.
Are they going to rob the Western Union next?
These “ATM”'s exist to facilitate scamming people; the most charitable I'm willing to be towards the provider is that they know they're engaging in providing a very high-risk service and need to be prepared to eat the costs of fraud if they can't reverse transactions, just like any other provider of high-risk financial services.
The last time I checked western union is highly regulated and actively cooperates with law enforcement to deter this kind of crime.
And this kind of crime is 99% of the businesses for these ATMs.
And this kind of crime is 99% of the businesses for these ATMs.
What kind of crime?? It's very possible the customer loses the keys to their coin, then blames the ATM.
The crime that was perpetrated on the family that ATM owner knowingly or unknowingly facilitated.
Your inability to reverse transactions implies you're taking on a very high risk and should be vetting your customers very carefully. “But defi!” is not an excuse when you know that these ATM's are used for this purpose.
Your inability to reverse transactions implies you're taking on a very high risk and should be vetting your customers very carefully. “But defi!” is not an excuse when you know that these ATM's are used for this purpose.
After reading the article, I have no idea what the crime/fraud is. This is a terrible submission.
https://www.12newsnow.com/article/news/crime/jasper-county-d...
Looks like scam callers allegedly direct people to use the machines to facilitate transactions that cannot be reversed.
Looks like scam callers allegedly direct people to use the machines to facilitate transactions that cannot be reversed.
Okay, but the ATM is not complicit in the crime. To blame the ATM would be like blaming the bank for allowing the sale of a car that facilitated a heist.
The correct analogy is if a bank is used to facilitate wire fraud, and they absolutely do have to reverse fraudulent payments, even if they're just a middle-man that unknowingly facilitated the fraud, even if they did their due diligence.
“But crypto!” is irrelevant; don't engage in providing high-risk services without looking into what the risks actually are and who is legally responsible for absorbing them.
“But crypto!” is irrelevant; don't engage in providing high-risk services without looking into what the risks actually are and who is legally responsible for absorbing them.
Gift cards are much more commonly used for scams, because your grandma knows how to buy gift cards. The difference is that gift cards are very profitable to big chain stores, whereas cryptocurrency presents a threat to the status quo. Police in the USA also get to keep any unaccounted for cash or crypto they find in a search, so there's an added incentive to target the ATM.
Does western union reverse transactions? To my knowledge, they do not. Yes they co-operate with police, but so do licensed bitcoin ATM operators.
Also "defi" is just ponzi schemes. The only real use for crypto has been using it as money. People buy recreational drugs, yes. They also buy medicine, data privacy services, or donate to political causes that their government makes it risky to associate with. Depending on the coin it has the valued properties of being permissionless (can't be debanked), stable (USD-tether compared to local tin-pot currency), anonymous (monero). You may be lucky enough to have access to lots of stable currency which you can keep in a reliable bank account in a country that lets you buy everything you need, but don't make the mistake of believing that's the case for everybody.
It makes a lot of sense to seek ways to stop the scams. Distrust is expensive in a society. Targeting the money changers is certainly an idea, we'll see if it works. I predict nothing will change until the people who are running the fraud operations actually go to prison.
Does western union reverse transactions? To my knowledge, they do not. Yes they co-operate with police, but so do licensed bitcoin ATM operators.
Also "defi" is just ponzi schemes. The only real use for crypto has been using it as money. People buy recreational drugs, yes. They also buy medicine, data privacy services, or donate to political causes that their government makes it risky to associate with. Depending on the coin it has the valued properties of being permissionless (can't be debanked), stable (USD-tether compared to local tin-pot currency), anonymous (monero). You may be lucky enough to have access to lots of stable currency which you can keep in a reliable bank account in a country that lets you buy everything you need, but don't make the mistake of believing that's the case for everybody.
It makes a lot of sense to seek ways to stop the scams. Distrust is expensive in a society. Targeting the money changers is certainly an idea, we'll see if it works. I predict nothing will change until the people who are running the fraud operations actually go to prison.
And regarding “Does western union reverse transactions?”:
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/western-union-refund...
“What is this case about? For years, many people who lost money to scams sent their payment through a Western Union wire transfer. Scammers contacted people and promised prizes, loans, jobs, discounted products or other financial rewards in exchange for money upfront. They also pretended to be family members in need of cash, or law enforcement officers demanding payment. The scammers told people to send money through Western Union. No one received the cash, prizes or services they were promised.
Because of joint investigations by the FTC, the Justice Department, and the U. S. Postal Inspection Service, Western Union agreed to pay $586 million and admitted to aiding and abetting wire fraud. The Justice Department is now using that money to provide refunds to people who were tricked into using Western Union to pay scammers.”
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/01/...
“In its agreement with the Justice Department, Western Union admits to criminal violations including willfully failing to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and aiding and abetting wire fraud.”
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/refunds/western-union-refund...
“What is this case about? For years, many people who lost money to scams sent their payment through a Western Union wire transfer. Scammers contacted people and promised prizes, loans, jobs, discounted products or other financial rewards in exchange for money upfront. They also pretended to be family members in need of cash, or law enforcement officers demanding payment. The scammers told people to send money through Western Union. No one received the cash, prizes or services they were promised.
Because of joint investigations by the FTC, the Justice Department, and the U. S. Postal Inspection Service, Western Union agreed to pay $586 million and admitted to aiding and abetting wire fraud. The Justice Department is now using that money to provide refunds to people who were tricked into using Western Union to pay scammers.”
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/01/...
“In its agreement with the Justice Department, Western Union admits to criminal violations including willfully failing to maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and aiding and abetting wire fraud.”
Fair enough, you got me there.
Bitcoin ATMs are supposed to be more of a currency exchange business, but I can see how a lot of people would treat them as a money transmitter business.
Bitcoin and similar were created in part as a workaround for these regulations, it appealed to people who wanted control of their own money. People who wanted an end to chargeback fraud, and credit card fraud. I wonder which sort of system has the lowest total fraud costs, including costs of preventative and compliance measures. Do you think we have enough data to make that sort of estimation?
It's ultimately a have your cake or eat it scenario. Regulated bitcoin will look a lot like the system that unregulated bitcoin was meant to be an alternative to.
Bitcoin ATMs are supposed to be more of a currency exchange business, but I can see how a lot of people would treat them as a money transmitter business.
Bitcoin and similar were created in part as a workaround for these regulations, it appealed to people who wanted control of their own money. People who wanted an end to chargeback fraud, and credit card fraud. I wonder which sort of system has the lowest total fraud costs, including costs of preventative and compliance measures. Do you think we have enough data to make that sort of estimation?
It's ultimately a have your cake or eat it scenario. Regulated bitcoin will look a lot like the system that unregulated bitcoin was meant to be an alternative to.
And stores limit the amount of giftcards that they will sell to a customer in a day, for exactly this reason.
And Walmart does the same thing, and faces gov regulation and fines:
https://www.propublica.org/article/walmart-financial-service...
The rule is applied fairly evenly imo
https://www.propublica.org/article/walmart-financial-service...
The rule is applied fairly evenly imo
Based on your argument, crypto exchanges would similarly be engaging in crime, but in reality they aren't. In the same way, there is no evidence of any crime here except for the robbery performed by Texas.
I didn't say they were engaging in crime, I said they are facilitating it, and crypto exchanges absolutely are.
[deleted]
I guess the author of that article has never used an orbital grinder since they identified it as a circular saw. The author and the editor both whiffed on that.
The story about the family losing their money to a bitcoin scammer just reinforces the perception that bitcoin is tool of and for criminals, scammers, and general low-lifes to use to launder money in the hopes that they won't be caught. People around there can't afford to get scammed as the area is very low income. $25000 was probably that family's life savings and is not far from the median annual income for the county. Bitcoin scammers should focus on scamming high net worth zip codes and leave poor people alone. They might be seen as modern Robin Hoods instead of just a bunch of robber hoods.
No matter how high the "value" of bit-coin or other shit-coins rises they will always carry the permanent stink of fraud and theft, money laundering. Other legitimate forms of payment may share some of that stink but with crypto it is a design feature.
The story about the family losing their money to a bitcoin scammer just reinforces the perception that bitcoin is tool of and for criminals, scammers, and general low-lifes to use to launder money in the hopes that they won't be caught. People around there can't afford to get scammed as the area is very low income. $25000 was probably that family's life savings and is not far from the median annual income for the county. Bitcoin scammers should focus on scamming high net worth zip codes and leave poor people alone. They might be seen as modern Robin Hoods instead of just a bunch of robber hoods.
No matter how high the "value" of bit-coin or other shit-coins rises they will always carry the permanent stink of fraud and theft, money laundering. Other legitimate forms of payment may share some of that stink but with crypto it is a design feature.
> The story about the family losing their money to a bitcoin scammer just reinforces the perception that bitcoin is tool of and for criminals, scammers, and general low-lifes to use to launder money in the hopes that they won't be caught.
Doesn't this need more reinforcing?
Doesn't this need more reinforcing?
Calling all crypto-bros. Unfavorable commentary needs to be countered, again.
LOL
Every new scam reported just reinforces the perception that bitcoin and other shitcoins are the preferred exchange media of scammers and other criminals everywhere. It turns out that proposing a payment methodology that allows one to operate outside all the usual controls imposed by traditional regulated monetary systems causes those who desire to escape criminal accountability and need to operate in the shadows to adopt it as the default mechanism for managing asset flow into and within their criminal enterprises.
Does that help you?
LOL
Every new scam reported just reinforces the perception that bitcoin and other shitcoins are the preferred exchange media of scammers and other criminals everywhere. It turns out that proposing a payment methodology that allows one to operate outside all the usual controls imposed by traditional regulated monetary systems causes those who desire to escape criminal accountability and need to operate in the shadows to adopt it as the default mechanism for managing asset flow into and within their criminal enterprises.
Does that help you?
I think you misunderstood my post - probably my fault. I am certainly not in favour of cryptocrap and was trying to suggest that the OP stressed he was neither.
>I think you misunderstood my post
With the extra context I agree that I did misunderstand your post. Thanks for clarifying that. It's been a long, hot, humid day here and I spent too much time in the sun to be trying to write anything coherent at this time of the day. I think I need to rest and rehydrate some of my brain cells so that they might be more useful to me in the morning. Too many misfires tonight. LOL
With the extra context I agree that I did misunderstand your post. Thanks for clarifying that. It's been a long, hot, humid day here and I spent too much time in the sun to be trying to write anything coherent at this time of the day. I think I need to rest and rehydrate some of my brain cells so that they might be more useful to me in the morning. Too many misfires tonight. LOL
What is an orbital grinder? I've been metalworking for 20 years and never encountered one.
Orbital sanders are a thing of course, but the whole "orbital" part is about the center of rotation moving around, usually in another circle. That'd just be a recipe for cutting your leg off for a grinder; a bit of an ironic mistake for GP to make while insulting somebody else's knowledge.
>a bit of an ironic mistake for GP to make while insulting somebody else's knowledge
I agree. What the hell was he thinking?
I agree. What the hell was he thinking?
Got me. It's an angle grinder in the photo. There are orbital grinders though that isn't one pictured. To me they look a lot like orbital sanders though since they use sanding pads or disks. Let me have some of whatever that author and editor were smoking when they signed off on that text.
Didn't mean to "get you", I'm always excited to learn about a new tool.
Thanks. I'm also a tool person. Woodworking, metal fab, stone and tile, agricultural (hand or mechanically powered) tools, electrical and plumbing, automotive maintenance, garden and orchard tools, etc. I have a lot of tools and will definitely buy new ones if the functionality and efficiency is better than one I already own two versions of. I resisted the switch from corded to battery tools for a long time but after buying combo sets for my wife and Mom I borrowed theirs often enough that I found I can work within their limitations and break out the corded model if the job requires it. I love to use a well-designed tool.
I really whiffed on the angle grinder ID though which irritates me a bit since I first used one in the late 1970's working on a pipeline maintenance crew and I own at least two of them including one old Skil brand that I bought more than 40 years ago. It was late at night when I posted and my old brain couldn't find the right word after all the sun I had absorbed that afternoon.
Stay hydrated out there so the things you post make sense. LOL.
I really whiffed on the angle grinder ID though which irritates me a bit since I first used one in the late 1970's working on a pipeline maintenance crew and I own at least two of them including one old Skil brand that I bought more than 40 years ago. It was late at night when I posted and my old brain couldn't find the right word after all the sun I had absorbed that afternoon.
Stay hydrated out there so the things you post make sense. LOL.
[deleted]
According to the series Scam Inc by the Economist much of these scammers are literal slaves who are held captive in southeast Asia. It is absolutely shocking and disheartening. They are often held in compounds where the scam organization is one of many tenants and the captives who don't bring in the money might get tortured, sold to other tenants for prostitution or eventually for organ harvesting. It's obviously awful for the captives, but pretty much anyone might be scammed out of a fortune and these organizations are getting more and more sophisticated to the point of setting up fake conference calls, etc.
First episode is available free on YouTube: https://youtu.be/vUg-cLVhv-4?si=xXL3tZNl36pJj5Lk
First episode is available free on YouTube: https://youtu.be/vUg-cLVhv-4?si=xXL3tZNl36pJj5Lk
Dig1t(1)
Infinite money glitch in Jasper County.
From the looks of that photo, looks like the gas station owner is getting a new floor too!
Read the article -- what was the crime? I'm still confused.
Someone scammed some people out of BTC that was bought at an ATM.
Therefore, somehow, the ATM is at fault.
It make no sense, I hope the ATM owners sue and win.
Therefore, somehow, the ATM is at fault.
It make no sense, I hope the ATM owners sue and win.
> locate what appeared to be the victims money
That’s what I say every time I see cash in real life: “hey, that looks just like my $20 bill!”
That’s what I say every time I see cash in real life: “hey, that looks just like my $20 bill!”
Based
Alice78(1)
If the bitcoin ATMs have to bear the cost of restitution for scams, they’ll raise fees to cover it and/or implement measures to make their product less useful for scammers. If that makes their business nonviable, so be it.