> presumably because the proceeds of that theft were laundered

this phrase highlights some really common but unnecessary misunderstandings

1) the proceeds swapped to Monero. there is nothing "presumably" about that because we can see they were swapped to Monero. It isn't a correlation, the instant exchanges show and retain records that they were swapped to Monero.

2) they are unlinking the origin and destination of illicitly obtained funds, so that is laundering BUT

3) its equally as likely that Monero is the destination. there is no further swapping out to hide. no further laundering to complete. Monero can be used to purchase goods, services, and invest with as well. I think this is as misunderstood as people actually wanting to hold bitcoin was 10 years ago.

4) Monero is an old coin, from one of the first crypto cycles, one thing that's held people back from using it and other mixers is the liquidity. If a large hack of funds used any one of them, then most of the funds coming out would be probabilistically part of the hack and illicit. But if MANY of the hacks used it and other licit sources, this would improve the liquidity for everyone and other hacks. Liquidity begets liquidity. It was only a matter of time before someone started it.