I kind of wonder if HN will block me for posting the same comment, but it's so frequently relevant.

> By definition, bitcoin transactions are not traceable, right?

Michael Morell, a former acting director of the CIA, has some things to say about the use of BTC in crime:

> Based on our research and discussions with industry experts, I have confidence in two conclusions: • The broad generalizations about the use of Bitcoin in illicit finance are significantly overstated. • The blockchain ledger on which Bitcoin transactions are recorded is an underutilized forensic tool that can be used more widely by law enforcement and the intelligence community to identify and disrupt illicit activities. Put simply, blockchain analysis is a highly effective crime fighting and intelligence gathering tool.

Source: https://casebitcoin.com/story/former-cia-director-finds-bitc...

Literally no. Base layer bitcoin transactions (all the large value ones) happen on the public blockchain.

It's pseudonymous, but if you can attach an identity to one transaction, you have a good chance of tracing everything else they've done.

And even if you don't know who everyone is today, you might be able to deanonymize it at some point in the future, because all the data is public.

Bitcoin transactions are far more traceable and easy to scan than it is to track payments in the offshore world, which involves many jurisdictions, subpoenas, judges, delays, getting stonewalled, etc. Night and day difference in ability to track.

Indeed, once you figure out someone's wallet address it becomes trivial to trace their transactions back to the beginning of Bitcoin.

If they use the same address forever yes.

The opposite. It's a public ledger and all transactions can be viewed.

Ross Ulbricht will be happy to learn this.