4 ms·

This also illustrates the absurdity of so called "money laundering". Just moving money around between private parties is somehow a serious crime. Hint: It's not

This also illustrates the absurdity of so called "money laundering". Just moving money around between private parties is somehow a serious crime. Hint: It's not. Money laundering is just a cheat code for prosecutors to get easy points when they can't actually find real wrongdoing. The funny part is that Tethers came into being after Bitfinex was hacked, right, as a way to help them out? Sometimes we say after someone or a company makes a mistake they're less likely to do so again. In this case, "oops"?

goialoq 9y ago
moving money around without record-keeping to prove it wasn't criminally obtained is a serious crime.
- mdpopescu 9y ago
  We know. The point was that it's malum prohibitum (a crime because it's forbidden), not malum in se (evil by itself). [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum
  - Nursie 9y ago
    Given the way the financial world occasionally fucks everyone, I think that large scale unauditable transfers of cash around the place may well be bad in and of themselves.
  - zaarn 9y ago
    I don't really see a difference between the two. The first is what everyone can agree on is evil and the later is what we haven't agreed on (or not yet). To quote from the page on malum in se; "The phrase is used to refer to conduct assessed as sinful or inherently wrong by nature, independent of regulations governing the conduct", which I don't think is a thing tbh.
    - jstanley 9y ago
      Murdering your wife is wrong by nature. Moving some money around without telling the government is only illegal because it's illegal. To me, the difference is whether or not there is a victim. No victim, no wrongdoing.
      - zaarn 9y ago
        Murdering my wife is wrong because I believe it to be wrong. And a lot of people agree with that. I see no reason why the universe at large cares though. If you don't tell the government you're moving resulting in taxes not being paid properly then you're damaging the government and by proxy, society. Atleast, that's what I think.
        jstanley 9y ago
        Right, then you're tax avoiding, and should be charged with tax avoidance. In cases where you're not tax avoiding, why does money laundering have to be a separate crime? It comes back to "Money laundering is just a cheat code for prosecutors to get easy points when they can't actually find real wrongdoing."
      - matthewbauer 9y ago
        I think its debatable. If you knowingly helped a murderer dispose of a body, that’s wrong by nature right? Money laundering is the financial equivalent of that.
        jstanley 9y ago
        No, money laundering is the financial equivalent of running a taxi service and not asking any questions about the luggage. It's not necessarily disposing of a body, and punishing people for moving luggage around without asking questions is obviously absurd.
        arcticfox 9y ago
        Terrible analogy. The number of people that would even have any desire to put something illegal in taxi luggage is very low. The number of people wanting to launder money because they did something truly evil is very high. International airlines are a better analogy; should we just let people run weapons, drugs, even children in their luggage, with no mechanism for inspection?
an_account 9y ago
As you said, moving money isn’t money laundering. No prosecuter is getting a conviction from people moving money.
- MichaelGG 9y ago
  Nah they'll just use those laws to steal your money: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5292750.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5292750.stm
kobeya 9y ago
> The funny part is that Tethers came into being after Bitfinex was hacked, right, as a way to help them out? No, Tether is completely unrelated and existed (or was in the process of being stood up) years prior. It just became widely used in 2017 after some exchanges (bitfinex being a big one) switched to it for USD for a variety of reasons.
- ActsJuvenile 9y ago
  iFinex acquired an ICO called "Tether" that no one cared about. I can help you buy 1 year old ICO for peanuts. There is a letter signed by iFinex CEO that he owns both Bitfinex and Tether: http://article78againstnydfs.com/docs/317-cv-01882-BitfinexCase/09-DeclarationJKVanDerVelde/9-main.pdf http://article78againstnydfs.com/docs/317-cv-01882-BitfinexC...

goialoq 9y ago

moving money around without record-keeping to prove it wasn't criminally obtained is a serious crime.

mdpopescu 9y ago
We know. The point was that it's malum prohibitum (a crime because it's forbidden), not malum in se (evil by itself). [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malum_prohibitum
- Nursie 9y ago
  Given the way the financial world occasionally fucks everyone, I think that large scale unauditable transfers of cash around the place may well be bad in and of themselves.
- zaarn 9y ago
  I don't really see a difference between the two. The first is what everyone can agree on is evil and the later is what we haven't agreed on (or not yet). To quote from the page on malum in se; "The phrase is used to refer to conduct assessed as sinful or inherently wrong by nature, independent of regulations governing the conduct", which I don't think is a thing tbh.
  - jstanley 9y ago
    Murdering your wife is wrong by nature. Moving some money around without telling the government is only illegal because it's illegal. To me, the difference is whether or not there is a victim. No victim, no wrongdoing.
    - zaarn 9y ago
      Murdering my wife is wrong because I believe it to be wrong. And a lot of people agree with that. I see no reason why the universe at large cares though. If you don't tell the government you're moving resulting in taxes not being paid properly then you're damaging the government and by proxy, society. Atleast, that's what I think.
      - jstanley 9y ago
        Right, then you're tax avoiding, and should be charged with tax avoidance. In cases where you're not tax avoiding, why does money laundering have to be a separate crime? It comes back to "Money laundering is just a cheat code for prosecutors to get easy points when they can't actually find real wrongdoing."
    - matthewbauer 9y ago
      I think its debatable. If you knowingly helped a murderer dispose of a body, that’s wrong by nature right? Money laundering is the financial equivalent of that.
      - jstanley 9y ago
        No, money laundering is the financial equivalent of running a taxi service and not asking any questions about the luggage. It's not necessarily disposing of a body, and punishing people for moving luggage around without asking questions is obviously absurd.
        arcticfox 9y ago
        Terrible analogy. The number of people that would even have any desire to put something illegal in taxi luggage is very low. The number of people wanting to launder money because they did something truly evil is very high. International airlines are a better analogy; should we just let people run weapons, drugs, even children in their luggage, with no mechanism for inspection?

an_account 9y ago

As you said, moving money isn’t money laundering. No prosecuter is getting a conviction from people moving money.

MichaelGG 9y ago
Nah they'll just use those laws to steal your money: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5292750.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5292750.stm

kobeya 9y ago

> The funny part is that Tethers came into being after Bitfinex was hacked, right, as a way to help them out? No, Tether is completely unrelated and existed (or was in the process of being stood up) years prior. It just became widely used in 2017 after some exchanges (bitfinex being a big one) switched to it for USD for a variety of reasons.

ActsJuvenile 9y ago
iFinex acquired an ICO called "Tether" that no one cared about. I can help you buy 1 year old ICO for peanuts. There is a letter signed by iFinex CEO that he owns both Bitfinex and Tether: http://article78againstnydfs.com/docs/317-cv-01882-BitfinexCase/09-DeclarationJKVanDerVelde/9-main.pdf http://article78againstnydfs.com/docs/317-cv-01882-BitfinexC...