We've achieved 791 comments on this terribly conceived FinCEN guidance. We need your help, Bitcoiners. Let's get to 1k comments by tomorrow. 300 more people need to spend less than 5 minutes completing the steps below: Yan | swan.com @skwp Oct 30 🚨Action Required: FinCEN has a proposed rule that tramples our 1st and 4th amendment liberties, continuing the expansion of unwarranted search and seizure on law abiding Americans. You can comment in less than 5 minutes with 3 easy steps: 1. Source a list of objections. Here's a nice list of bullets: x.com/HodlsSherlock/status/1…. Or look at the bottom of this post for my full text, which was generated from my own bullets using OpenAI. 2. Go to chat.openai.com, paste your bullets, alter them as you wish, add the prompt at the top: "Reformat the following in a voice appropriate for submission as a FINCen proposed rule making comment". 3. Go here to comment: federalregister.gov/document… and paste your letter. Example text generated from my own input of issues: -- snip -- I am writing to express concerns regarding the proposed rule that pertains to the reporting of Bitcoin transactions. I believe it's crucial to reconsider certain aspects of this rule to ensure that it aligns with the principles enshrined in the 4th Amendment. Address Reuse in Bitcoin: Bitcoin, by design, promotes the use of unique addresses for each transaction to maintain user privacy. Repeatedly using the same address exposes one's entire transaction history to any recipient. Such a practice compromises user privacy, a concern that the proposed rule might inadvertently encourage. Mixing and Privacy: Mixing is an essential privacy-enhancing technique in the Bitcoin ecosystem. Without it, users would inadvertently reveal their entire Bitcoin balance every time they transact. It's akin to sharing one's bank balance each time they make a purchase, a scenario that's clearly problematic. The proposed rule might deter users from using mixers, leading to unintentional privacy breaches. The Programmability of Bitcoin: Bitcoin's architecture allows for various transaction structures, such as joint wallets or lightning channels for small-value exchanges. The current draft of the rule may inadvertently categorize these standard practices as reportable events, leading to an overwhelming number of reports that might be challenging to process effectively. Concerns about Terrorism Financing: While the intent behind the rule is understandable, it's essential to note that there's limited evidence to suggest that Bitcoin plays a significant role in financing terrorism. Most illicit financing activities still occur through traditional fiat channels. Implementing rules that might be perceived as infringing on the 4th Amendment could unintentionally diminish FINCEN's standing as an institution grounded in democratic principles. Geographical Implications: It's vital to recognize that while these rules might be applicable within the U.S., a significant portion of cryptocurrency activities occurs outside our borders. Implementing stringent rules might inadvertently push more users to platforms that are less transparent and harder to oversee. I kindly urge the commission to evaluate the potential unintended consequences of the proposed rule, especially concerning the preservation of civil liberties and effective oversight. It's essential to strike a balance between national security and individual rights. Thank you for your time and consideration.