6 ms·
>Someone will sue Mark Karpelès until he doesn't have a billion dollars' worth of bitcoins any more. The bankruptcy estate might only owe the customers $500 per
by avs733 9y ago
>Someone will sue Mark Karpelès until he doesn't have a billion dollars' worth of bitcoins any more. The bankruptcy estate might only owe the customers $500 per bitcoin, but they -- and regulators, etc. -- might have a case that Karpelèsowes them the remainder, due to negligence or unjust enrichment or general come-on-man
I...and perhaps I'm being to glib...find it highly amusing that the same people making the argument of rejecting states and fiat currency and regulation and structure are frustrated that their attempts to use those structures requires them to adopt all the parts of it, not just the parts they need to recoup their losses from a con man.
- giobox 9y ago> find it highly amusing that the same people making the argument of rejecting states and fiat currency and regulation and structure are frustrated that their attempts to use those structures requires them to adopt all the parts of it... This holds true for so many Bitcoin related disputes. I also find it highly amusing when bitcoin using champions of rejecting regulation and structure mysteriously seem to need a great deal of it when heaven forbid things don't go as they hoped.
- pmorici 9y agoThere is a pretty big difference in my mind between the kind of over regulation people dislike and simple enforcement of basic fraud and theft laws.
- DannyBee 9y agoCould you explain, in detail, that difference?
- Analemma_ 9y agoWhether or not they profit him, obviously.
- hitekker 9y agoYep. When I need the law on my side, it's "simple enforcement". When the law is on the other side, it's overregulation!
- CryptoPunk 9y agoThe former reflects classical liberalism, which is the belief that the government should get involved when fraud or aggression has occurred, and deter crime through deterrence. The current regulatory system reflects the belief that government ought to preempt crime by creating centralized gatekeepers that impose blanket bans on entire categories of voluntary exchange (e.g. securities issuance), that are only lifted on a case-by-case basis if one is approved/registered by/with that gatekeeper.
- fastball 9y agoProbably things like bailouts, the Fed insuring things it has no business insuring, etc. Basically he seems to be espousing libertarian economics - prevent people from actively harming me, but don't try to otherwise actively participate in the financial system.
- giobox 9y agoFor sure that argument can probably be made, but that's not really the point I think myself or the parent comment is making. If you follow the kind of "code is law" style rhetoric of some crytpo-currency evangelists, we can supposedly build a system that doesn't require "laws" or regulations as we know them today at all. Reality it seems often disagrees, especially when disputes inevitably arise. I'm simplifying greatly, but there's some truth to this idea in practice I think.
- CryptoPunk 9y agoI know. The bizarre conflation between advocating for a free market and advocating anarchy is surprisingly common any time the topic of cryptocurrency comes up.
- avs733 9y agoAnarchist Profits And Socialized Losses
- cjbenedikt 9y agoNot entirely new. 2008? Profits to the banks losses (bail-oiuts) to the tax payer
- avs733 9y agoI was trying to play off the phrase 'privatize profits and socialize losses' from that time period.
- unknown_apostle 9y agoExplain to me how getting back some 5% of what you're owed, when they recovered 80% of it, is "socialized losses"? Also explain to me how this is similar to 2008.
- avs733 9y agowell for starters it was a joke not a serious argument.
- unknown_apostle 9y agoYes because bitcoin is all about not having courts. /sarc
- ryanSrich 9y agoThis is true for most crypto communities, but Bitcoin in general has a staggering number of individuals looking to get rich quick. They don't care about the philosophy or idea. They just want money.
- skrebbel 9y agoI recognize I'm misunderstanding you on purpose, but there are many crypto communities that contain virtually zero people looking to get rich quick.
- aqme28 9y agoI do not believe that for a second.
- lazyasciiart 9y agoI believe it totally - it follows from 'there are many crypto communities with virtually zero people'.
- skrebbel 9y agoI wasn't clear enough. For decades "crypto" has meant "cryptography".
- kjs3 9y agoName one, and back that with objective evidence.
- TimPC 9y agoThat legal principle of "come-on-man" is extremely useful. If only it existed.
- avs733 9y agoI demand your courts help me but not using the currency your courts operate in is like Calvin Ball for cryptocapitalists.
- nradov 9y agoWell it kind of does exist in the sense that common law courts will revert to basic principles of equity and fairness when there's nothing applicable in law or precedent.
- deadmetheny 9y agoThis is exactly why I love Bitcoin threads like this so much, they always contain a bunch of idiots who inevitably lose their Dunning-Krugerrands to scammers and insolvent exchanges, of which all the regulations with fiat they claim to hate so much are there to prevent in the first place.
- darkmighty 9y agoTo be fair, the hardcore crypto-anarchists and such would never keep their money on exchanges. Ideally they'd keep money on cold wallets, physically secure. But also they don't care about usability, which sucks in that case. Being your own bank sucks, pretty much.
- ggm 9y agoBitcoin: Dunning-Krugerrands is going on a tee shirt. That phrase is my million-dollar riff. thank you sir (or madam, or space donkey. we're not choosy in cyber space)
- CyberDildonics 9y agoI'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there are plenty of people who don't want more of their currency printed but still think theft is wrong.
- unknown_apostle 9y agoSo this bunch of idiots can't access the legal system or expect justice, unless they fully accept the inevitability of currency debasement or the revolving-door system between banks and government? That's exactly why I love bitcoin threads like this. Because of the sour grapes who stood by the sidelines over the past 8 years. Btw, applying "plain" justice or bankruptcy to insolvent financial institutions was exactly what they didn't do in 2008. Listen to the recordings of Irish bankers how they would approach regulators. "If they say, if they saw the enormity of it up front, they might decide, they might decide they have a choice." Instead of putting skin in the game of people like this, they socialized the losses, suspended mark-to-market and papered it over with ridiculous amounts of legislation that was written with the help of the same people who were bailed out. Almost nobody went to jail. That's probably why we have blockchain to begin with and why 10 years later we'll have to go through something similar or worse. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jun/24/anglo-irish-bankers-taped-recordings https://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/jun/24/anglo-irish...
- unknown_apostle 9y agoSo legal system and monetary system are a package deal now? We can't sue a criminal unless we cease the search for alternatives to currency debasement, bailouts and finance cartels?