6 ms·

> Hi can you let me how I can immigrate out of my country with $10e6 without thieves at the airport taking my wealth? If we can figure this out, man bitcoin is

> Hi can you let me how I can immigrate out of my country with $10e6 without thieves at the airport taking my wealth? If we can figure this out, man bitcoin is totally KIA. You're supposing that the vast majority of people using bitcoin are using it to exfiltrate money out of countries. That niche application is very far from the reality of what most bitcoin advocates are doing. But yes, digital exfiltration may be easier than physical smuggling. That's supposing a lot about what forms of control are implemented in that country at at it's borders.

topmonk 8y ago
> But yes, digital exfiltration may be easier than physical smuggling. That's supposing a lot about what forms of control are implemented in that country at at it's borders. Given that some forms of cryptocurrency can be stored using only a memorized passphrase and nothing else, (ie. a brain wallet), it's pretty much guaranteed that getting cryptocurrency put of the country would be easier.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  You're supposing the government doesn't know you bought those bitcoins (or at the least doesn't know that you are somehow hiding a lot of money without knowing the details) and isn't willing to beat it out of you. Most cryptoanarchists are deluded nerds who would fold in less than 5 minutes of waterboarding. Do you think these thugs who are willing to look up your ass for a few pieces of gold aren't willing to violate you in other ways? Of course you don't believe that, you've merely failed to seriously consider that possibility. The only reason smuggling BTC sometimes works right now is because they're not looking for it.
  - topmonk 8y ago
    Tell me how anything you just said shows how it could be easier to smuggle physical currency out of the country than digital currency, which was the point that I was refuting.
    - darkpuma 8y ago
      > it could be easier to smuggle physical currency out of the country than digital currency, which was the point that I was refuting. Then you were refuting a position I never espoused. My point wasn't that gold is easier to exfiltrate, but rather that BTC isn't necessarily easier to get out. If the border agents of the tyrannical government you're fleeing know you to have wealth, and are informed about bitcoin, they have many options available to them to prevent you from leaving with your wealth, including simply forbidding you from leaving at all. At that point, you'll have to smuggle your body out, so smuggling a few pieces of gold along with your body isn't a huge inconvenience. If on the other hand the border agents don't know that you're trying to smuggle wealth out of the country, then it shouldn't be to hard to get through the border no matter what method you choose. The one scenario in which BTC seems clearly superior is when the border guards are simultaneously alert but ignorant. Looking very carefully for money, but totally oblivious to the possibility of BTC. This might work during the present, but don't count on this remaining true forever. If enough people start using BTC for this, tyrannical governments will wisen up pretty quick.
      - topmonk 8y ago
        Here are a couple of other scenarios where having BTC works as an advantage: 1. The government doesn't know you have any money, but you are targeted in a random search. 2. The government does know you have money but doesn't know how much. Simply give them X out of Y cryptocurrency keys. They won't know you have any more. I don't know how much exposure you have to tyrannical regimes, but they aren't as efficient as you seem to think, in that they don't really have much grasp on how much money people own, nor are able to find out instantly. They also do care about how they are perceived and aren't going to grab some tourist and with no proof whatsoever, torture him to death because he might possibly have some cryptocurrency.
DINKDINK 8y ago
>You're supposing It's a single example of the value of decentralized property rights. Say I'm an alcohol maker in Sharia-law country, I want to be able to make wine but prevent the state from expropriating my wealth because they ban alcohol. Say I live in a country which mandates that all business ventures with returns less than 2% a year will have their profits stolen (read: inflation) I can use bitcoin to escape that oppression.
- camgunz 8y ago
  > Say I live in a country which mandates that all business ventures with returns less than 2% a year will have their profits stolen (read: inflation) I can use bitcoin to escape that oppression. The moment Bitcoin becomes a viable way to subvert the state, they'll just change the laws. And if people actually start using it to smuggle money internationally the feds will get involved. The entire idea that Bitcoin can subvert the state is absurd. And if you don't believe me, look at the evidence. ICOs got regulated. Silk roads got shut down. And furthermore, while it's convenient to use oppressive regimes as examples for this Bitcoin "feature", it's way, way more likely the 1% (you know, the people who actually have money) will use it to hide their wealth from wealth redistribution policies demanded by liberal democracies.
  - DINKDINK 8y ago
    >The moment [cryptography] becomes a viable way to subvert the state, they'll just change the laws. Does that sentence make much sense? Government decrees don't eradicate goods, they create make black markets. >if people actually start using it to smuggle money If? People already use bitcoin to evade capital controls in China, Venezuela etc >the 1% will use it to hide their wealth from wealth redistribution policies demanded by liberal democracies. You're confusing equity (something you own) and equality (rights that you have). Bitcoin promotes equality (each client has the same rights). Arbitrarily making certain people unequal (different people have different rights, some have their wealth stolen, some don't) always leads to more inequity. Voting about who to steal from doesn't legitimize theft. If people who generated wealth through voluntary exchange want to protect their property rights from theft, I won't deny them that. Agents who use the state to expropriate wealth through artificial privilege (the real enemy here) want to perpetuate the existing system, not encourage a neutral rights network such as bitcoin.

topmonk 8y ago

> But yes, digital exfiltration may be easier than physical smuggling. That's supposing a lot about what forms of control are implemented in that country at at it's borders. Given that some forms of cryptocurrency can be stored using only a memorized passphrase and nothing else, (ie. a brain wallet), it's pretty much guaranteed that getting cryptocurrency put of the country would be easier.

darkpuma 8y ago
You're supposing the government doesn't know you bought those bitcoins (or at the least doesn't know that you are somehow hiding a lot of money without knowing the details) and isn't willing to beat it out of you. Most cryptoanarchists are deluded nerds who would fold in less than 5 minutes of waterboarding. Do you think these thugs who are willing to look up your ass for a few pieces of gold aren't willing to violate you in other ways? Of course you don't believe that, you've merely failed to seriously consider that possibility. The only reason smuggling BTC sometimes works right now is because they're not looking for it.
- topmonk 8y ago
  Tell me how anything you just said shows how it could be easier to smuggle physical currency out of the country than digital currency, which was the point that I was refuting.
  - darkpuma 8y ago
    > it could be easier to smuggle physical currency out of the country than digital currency, which was the point that I was refuting. Then you were refuting a position I never espoused. My point wasn't that gold is easier to exfiltrate, but rather that BTC isn't necessarily easier to get out. If the border agents of the tyrannical government you're fleeing know you to have wealth, and are informed about bitcoin, they have many options available to them to prevent you from leaving with your wealth, including simply forbidding you from leaving at all. At that point, you'll have to smuggle your body out, so smuggling a few pieces of gold along with your body isn't a huge inconvenience. If on the other hand the border agents don't know that you're trying to smuggle wealth out of the country, then it shouldn't be to hard to get through the border no matter what method you choose. The one scenario in which BTC seems clearly superior is when the border guards are simultaneously alert but ignorant. Looking very carefully for money, but totally oblivious to the possibility of BTC. This might work during the present, but don't count on this remaining true forever. If enough people start using BTC for this, tyrannical governments will wisen up pretty quick.
    - topmonk 8y ago
      Here are a couple of other scenarios where having BTC works as an advantage: 1. The government doesn't know you have any money, but you are targeted in a random search. 2. The government does know you have money but doesn't know how much. Simply give them X out of Y cryptocurrency keys. They won't know you have any more. I don't know how much exposure you have to tyrannical regimes, but they aren't as efficient as you seem to think, in that they don't really have much grasp on how much money people own, nor are able to find out instantly. They also do care about how they are perceived and aren't going to grab some tourist and with no proof whatsoever, torture him to death because he might possibly have some cryptocurrency.

DINKDINK 8y ago

>You're supposing It's a single example of the value of decentralized property rights. Say I'm an alcohol maker in Sharia-law country, I want to be able to make wine but prevent the state from expropriating my wealth because they ban alcohol. Say I live in a country which mandates that all business ventures with returns less than 2% a year will have their profits stolen (read: inflation) I can use bitcoin to escape that oppression.

camgunz 8y ago
> Say I live in a country which mandates that all business ventures with returns less than 2% a year will have their profits stolen (read: inflation) I can use bitcoin to escape that oppression. The moment Bitcoin becomes a viable way to subvert the state, they'll just change the laws. And if people actually start using it to smuggle money internationally the feds will get involved. The entire idea that Bitcoin can subvert the state is absurd. And if you don't believe me, look at the evidence. ICOs got regulated. Silk roads got shut down. And furthermore, while it's convenient to use oppressive regimes as examples for this Bitcoin "feature", it's way, way more likely the 1% (you know, the people who actually have money) will use it to hide their wealth from wealth redistribution policies demanded by liberal democracies.
- DINKDINK 8y ago
  >The moment [cryptography] becomes a viable way to subvert the state, they'll just change the laws. Does that sentence make much sense? Government decrees don't eradicate goods, they create make black markets. >if people actually start using it to smuggle money If? People already use bitcoin to evade capital controls in China, Venezuela etc >the 1% will use it to hide their wealth from wealth redistribution policies demanded by liberal democracies. You're confusing equity (something you own) and equality (rights that you have). Bitcoin promotes equality (each client has the same rights). Arbitrarily making certain people unequal (different people have different rights, some have their wealth stolen, some don't) always leads to more inequity. Voting about who to steal from doesn't legitimize theft. If people who generated wealth through voluntary exchange want to protect their property rights from theft, I won't deny them that. Agents who use the state to expropriate wealth through artificial privilege (the real enemy here) want to perpetuate the existing system, not encourage a neutral rights network such as bitcoin.