Is, by chance, it a logical fallacy to say that "Tornado cash is why Satoshi Chose to be anonymous?" Vitalik created Eth and the EVM, and he is not criminally indicted in this case...

I know this is going to sound a little bit like a "politically-correct" nerd statement, but I figure it's worth talking about just for the ever-so-slight amount of "well, that's technically right..." conversation that we can have.

Pretext: I am more of a bitcoin maxy than I am anything else, but I cannot speak for the other moderators here.

I've had convos with other bitcoin maxis who seem to think that Vitalik, by virtue of creating Eth, enabled tons more scams than are possible on Bitcoin. This is, in and of itself, not a crime, I suppose. Otherwise we would have firearms manufacturers imprisoned by virtue of creating something that is dual use?

However, if we look at what was going on with the early days of the silk road, the FBI ordered Mt Gox to start keeping tabs on customers who bought bitcoin to see if it was possible to tie them to illicit purchases on the silk road. If satoshi was not an anonymous dude online, it's at least slightly feasible that he could have been arrested for interest / interrogation for the case before getting let go.

Just my two cents. This is a simple nothingburger metatopic, nothing more and nothing less.