5 ms·

> Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Au

> Guardian Australia understands the raids are not related to the claims that Wright may have been involved in the creation of bitcoin, but are related to an Australian Tax Office investigation. Seems like a hell of a coincidence for these two things to happen on the same day...

bro-stick 11y ago
There is a strong incentive for SN to stay anonymous now: extortion, GBH threats, kidnapping, tax evasion, etc. This could be some guy feigning humblebragging to fool prospective customers, or the vaguest individual Wired decided to hoist the label onto because it garners eyeballs in a Daily Mail way that's hard to repute. The raid is explained because many governments want evidence for tax evasion and evading the conventional banking system... control SN = control BTC.
- snewk 11y ago
  Many governments are interested in finding Satoshi. They need a scapegoat to pin this bitcoin thing on. They still believe finding him/her might be effective method of getting rid of bitcoin. It's like trump wanting to go ask bill gates about locking up the internet.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - oh_sigh 11y ago
    Proof for these ludicrous statements please.
    - snewk 11y ago
      i admit i don't have conclusive proof. however, is it really 'ludicrous' to speculate that those in power seek to destroy bitcoin in any way possible? especially when taking into account how vocally anti-establishment the bitcoin community has become.
      - Retra 11y ago
        It's as ludicrous as any other baseless, unfounded conspiracy theory. What you are doing looks an awful lot like rationalization, and despite it's name, it is not very rational at all.
      - krapp 11y ago
        > is it really 'ludicrous' to speculate that those in power seek to destroy bitcoin in any way possible? especially when taking into account how vocally anti-establishment the bitcoin community has become. No one is that afraid of the bitcoin community, or of bitcoin itself. The bitcoin fringe is only novel in their application of the blockchain towards the problem of reducing the risk in organized crime. The world has heard the anarchist, anti-bank rhetoric before, and for that matter, from groups that actually blow up banks and murder people to further their goals. There seems to be no evidence of any government seeking to "destroy bitcoin in any way possible." One would expect there to be fewer bitcoin based companies openly operating if that were the case. Rather, it appears that governments have reacted to bitcoin by defining it in terms of their existing regulatory frameworks, and deciding whether or not, and how, it can legally be used and taxed. So yes, it does seem a bit ludicrous.
  - oh_sigh 11y ago
    Proof for these ludicrous statements please.
- knughit 11y ago
  Your autocorrect is funny today.
- aianus 11y ago
  > control SN = control BTC It's a decentralized, open-source protocol. SN couldn't do anything to it if he wanted to.
  - Fuzzwah 11y ago
    He could sell off his massive holdings of BTC and cause another crash.
    - api 11y ago
      A few hundred mil would cause a dip, perhaps a pullback for a bit, but not doomsday.
      - xorque 11y ago
        and then he would get stolen his fiat immediately
- prawn 11y ago
  Hasn't that incentive always existed?
imron 11y ago
Not really. Let's say he was under investigation by the ATO for a host of different matters and let's say that the ATO suspected/was hoping there was interesting evidence at his house and while they would like to get their hands on it they were waiting until the right opportunity to do so, without hindering/alerting the subject of the investigation. Then these new claims are made in the media and they risk not only Wright himself moving the evidence, but also hordes of potential 'treasure hunters' breaking in and stealing things like hard drives in the hope of finding bitcoin - hard drives that also contain things the ATO might want to look at. And so a pre-emptive raid to take the evidence, before it gets taken by others.

bro-stick 11y ago

There is a strong incentive for SN to stay anonymous now: extortion, GBH threats, kidnapping, tax evasion, etc. This could be some guy feigning humblebragging to fool prospective customers, or the vaguest individual Wired decided to hoist the label onto because it garners eyeballs in a Daily Mail way that's hard to repute. The raid is explained because many governments want evidence for tax evasion and evading the conventional banking system... control SN = control BTC.

snewk 11y ago
Many governments are interested in finding Satoshi. They need a scapegoat to pin this bitcoin thing on. They still believe finding him/her might be effective method of getting rid of bitcoin. It's like trump wanting to go ask bill gates about locking up the internet.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- oh_sigh 11y ago
  Proof for these ludicrous statements please.
  - snewk 11y ago
    i admit i don't have conclusive proof. however, is it really 'ludicrous' to speculate that those in power seek to destroy bitcoin in any way possible? especially when taking into account how vocally anti-establishment the bitcoin community has become.
    - Retra 11y ago
      It's as ludicrous as any other baseless, unfounded conspiracy theory. What you are doing looks an awful lot like rationalization, and despite it's name, it is not very rational at all.
    - krapp 11y ago
      > is it really 'ludicrous' to speculate that those in power seek to destroy bitcoin in any way possible? especially when taking into account how vocally anti-establishment the bitcoin community has become. No one is that afraid of the bitcoin community, or of bitcoin itself. The bitcoin fringe is only novel in their application of the blockchain towards the problem of reducing the risk in organized crime. The world has heard the anarchist, anti-bank rhetoric before, and for that matter, from groups that actually blow up banks and murder people to further their goals. There seems to be no evidence of any government seeking to "destroy bitcoin in any way possible." One would expect there to be fewer bitcoin based companies openly operating if that were the case. Rather, it appears that governments have reacted to bitcoin by defining it in terms of their existing regulatory frameworks, and deciding whether or not, and how, it can legally be used and taxed. So yes, it does seem a bit ludicrous.
- oh_sigh 11y ago
  Proof for these ludicrous statements please.
knughit 11y ago
Your autocorrect is funny today.
aianus 11y ago
> control SN = control BTC It's a decentralized, open-source protocol. SN couldn't do anything to it if he wanted to.
- Fuzzwah 11y ago
  He could sell off his massive holdings of BTC and cause another crash.
  - api 11y ago
    A few hundred mil would cause a dip, perhaps a pullback for a bit, but not doomsday.
    - xorque 11y ago
      and then he would get stolen his fiat immediately
prawn 11y ago
Hasn't that incentive always existed?

imron 11y ago

Not really. Let's say he was under investigation by the ATO for a host of different matters and let's say that the ATO suspected/was hoping there was interesting evidence at his house and while they would like to get their hands on it they were waiting until the right opportunity to do so, without hindering/alerting the subject of the investigation. Then these new claims are made in the media and they risk not only Wright himself moving the evidence, but also hordes of potential 'treasure hunters' breaking in and stealing things like hard drives in the hope of finding bitcoin - hard drives that also contain things the ATO might want to look at. And so a pre-emptive raid to take the evidence, before it gets taken by others.