3 ms·

I can’t even.. First, whatever you’re wiring - isn’t cash pretty much by definition. Second - why is your default example of paying for illegal product/servic

I can’t even.. First, whatever you’re wiring - isn’t cash pretty much by definition. Second - why is your default example of paying for illegal product/service is about somebody in a different country on an international sanctions list? How about buying drugs on the street? Doesn’t involve planes and duffel bags of money. Does involve cash.

arcticbull 7y ago
Scope and breadth of effect, mostly. The AML/KYC/OFAC processes are designed to both enforce international sanctions [1, 2] and also to operate at a more local level [3]. Cryptocurrencies like Monero and Zcash specifically make traceability difficult or impossible. This situation is strictly worse along all axes. Just because it's currently possible to do something illegal (and we're working hard to crack down on that) doesn't mean our new goal should be to enable that faster, cheaper and easier (and not bother with enforcement at all) -- it's regressive. [1] https://cointelegraph.com/news/iran-recognizes-bitcoin-and-crypto-as-an-official-industry-says-mp https://cointelegraph.com/news/iran-recognizes-bitcoin-and-c... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/north-korea-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-blockchain-un-report-a8819446.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ne... [3] https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/05/03/wall-street-market-silkkietie-valhalla-dark-web-drug-monero-bitcoin-cryptocurrency/ https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/05/03/wall-street-marke...
- keymone 7y ago
  The question was if it’s possible to pay with cash for illegal products/services. You keep dodging and dancing around easy and obvious answer - of course yes! Now the question becomes - why is it so hard for you to admit that cash is being used for illegal purposes?
  - arcticbull 7y ago
    No, I didn't dodge your question, I answered it -- on both a local and global scale. Yes, it is. Of course it is. I didn't think I had to because to say no would be insane and that it went without saying. I don't believe anyone has ever made that argument. However, cash is difficult to transact in material quantities due to it's physical volume, the fact you have to defend it, and the fact that few legitimate businesses accept meaningful quantities. If you want to make a larger purchase you have to deposit it into a bank account somewhere and launder it which is when AML/KYC/OFAC come into play. It's irrelevant to this conversation that cash is being used for illegal purposes, because we're making active attempts to stop that from happening. You're proposing we switch to a technology stack that makes it harder to enforce the law, intentionally, along every axis. That makes this regressive. If that's your argument, own it, but let's not mince words.
    - keymone 7y ago
      cash fuels orders of magnitude more illegal activities. It’s hypocritical to go after crypto to solve illegal activities problem when you havent solves them for cash or at least brought down to crypto levels. And lastly - “let’s ban bitcoin because bad people do bad things” is the same argument as “let’s ban encryption because bad people communicate bad things”. If you’re for government control of every aspect of your life, if you’re for asking permission to transact or communicate - we just have completely different world views. Unfortunately there is no middle ground - either you have security or you are backdoored. Either you have financial freedom or you don’t. Governments should target bad people not genuinely useful tools used by bad people. I don’t care that it’s hard - that’s what I pay taxes for, not to yield control over my life even further.
      - arcticbull 7y ago
        > cash fuels orders of magnitude more illegal activities. It’s hypocritical to go after crypto to solve illegal activities problem when you havent solves them for cash or at least brought down to crypto levels. No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying we shouldn’t advocate a worse solution than what we have today, along every axis. If crypto replaced cash illegal activities would be easier and limited to 7tx/sec (haha, jokes, ish) To be clear I’m also not proposing banning bitcoin, I’m just proposing not giving it a platform like I would with offensive speech. You’re free to say anything and use bitcoin all you want but that doesn’t mean you’re entitled to a platform to do so. > If you’re for government control of every aspect of your life, if you’re for asking permission to transact or communicate - we just have completely different world views. Bitcoin hash power is 80% in the control of 3 mining pools in the PRC who could with the stroke of a pen censor everything. Due to efficiency of scale proof of work always centralizes along the cheapest resources. Going all in on PoW coins is outsourcing control of your sovereign currency to a totalitarian ethnostate but with extra steps. Why not transact in Renminbi and save some electricity? I’ll stick to sovereign management thanks. > Governments should target bad people not genuinely useful tools used by bad people. I don’t care that it’s hard - that’s what I pay taxes for, not to yield control over my life even further. Now this is a truly novel argument: make the job of the government harder so you get value for your tax dollars. Even to the detriment of your self and the broader society.

arcticbull 7y ago

Scope and breadth of effect, mostly. The AML/KYC/OFAC processes are designed to both enforce international sanctions [1, 2] and also to operate at a more local level [3]. Cryptocurrencies like Monero and Zcash specifically make traceability difficult or impossible. This situation is strictly worse along all axes. Just because it's currently possible to do something illegal (and we're working hard to crack down on that) doesn't mean our new goal should be to enable that faster, cheaper and easier (and not bother with enforcement at all) -- it's regressive. [1] https://cointelegraph.com/news/iran-recognizes-bitcoin-and-crypto-as-an-official-industry-says-mp https://cointelegraph.com/news/iran-recognizes-bitcoin-and-c... [2] https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/north-korea-bitcoin-cryptocurrency-blockchain-un-report-a8819446.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/ne... [3] https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/05/03/wall-street-market-silkkietie-valhalla-dark-web-drug-monero-bitcoin-cryptocurrency/ https://thenextweb.com/hardfork/2019/05/03/wall-street-marke...

keymone 7y ago
The question was if it’s possible to pay with cash for illegal products/services. You keep dodging and dancing around easy and obvious answer - of course yes! Now the question becomes - why is it so hard for you to admit that cash is being used for illegal purposes?
- arcticbull 7y ago
  No, I didn't dodge your question, I answered it -- on both a local and global scale. Yes, it is. Of course it is. I didn't think I had to because to say no would be insane and that it went without saying. I don't believe anyone has ever made that argument. However, cash is difficult to transact in material quantities due to it's physical volume, the fact you have to defend it, and the fact that few legitimate businesses accept meaningful quantities. If you want to make a larger purchase you have to deposit it into a bank account somewhere and launder it which is when AML/KYC/OFAC come into play. It's irrelevant to this conversation that cash is being used for illegal purposes, because we're making active attempts to stop that from happening. You're proposing we switch to a technology stack that makes it harder to enforce the law, intentionally, along every axis. That makes this regressive. If that's your argument, own it, but let's not mince words.
  - keymone 7y ago
    cash fuels orders of magnitude more illegal activities. It’s hypocritical to go after crypto to solve illegal activities problem when you havent solves them for cash or at least brought down to crypto levels. And lastly - “let’s ban bitcoin because bad people do bad things” is the same argument as “let’s ban encryption because bad people communicate bad things”. If you’re for government control of every aspect of your life, if you’re for asking permission to transact or communicate - we just have completely different world views. Unfortunately there is no middle ground - either you have security or you are backdoored. Either you have financial freedom or you don’t. Governments should target bad people not genuinely useful tools used by bad people. I don’t care that it’s hard - that’s what I pay taxes for, not to yield control over my life even further.
    - arcticbull 7y ago
      > cash fuels orders of magnitude more illegal activities. It’s hypocritical to go after crypto to solve illegal activities problem when you havent solves them for cash or at least brought down to crypto levels. No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying we shouldn’t advocate a worse solution than what we have today, along every axis. If crypto replaced cash illegal activities would be easier and limited to 7tx/sec (haha, jokes, ish) To be clear I’m also not proposing banning bitcoin, I’m just proposing not giving it a platform like I would with offensive speech. You’re free to say anything and use bitcoin all you want but that doesn’t mean you’re entitled to a platform to do so. > If you’re for government control of every aspect of your life, if you’re for asking permission to transact or communicate - we just have completely different world views. Bitcoin hash power is 80% in the control of 3 mining pools in the PRC who could with the stroke of a pen censor everything. Due to efficiency of scale proof of work always centralizes along the cheapest resources. Going all in on PoW coins is outsourcing control of your sovereign currency to a totalitarian ethnostate but with extra steps. Why not transact in Renminbi and save some electricity? I’ll stick to sovereign management thanks. > Governments should target bad people not genuinely useful tools used by bad people. I don’t care that it’s hard - that’s what I pay taxes for, not to yield control over my life even further. Now this is a truly novel argument: make the job of the government harder so you get value for your tax dollars. Even to the detriment of your self and the broader society.