6 ms·

I am glad there is crypto because cash is dying and complete government control over all your assets is becoming a real possibility. Cashless is convenient but

I am glad there is crypto because cash is dying and complete government control over all your assets is becoming a real possibility. Cashless is convenient but also very dangerous for a free society. Fiat is great, if cash exists.

mavhc 7y ago
Government can just declare your cash worthless, or devalue it though. The trick is that government is actually people, so make sure it's the right people
- logicchains 7y ago
  >so make sure it's the right people I'm sure Putin would like to see you try. Sometimes a political solution is not possible (e.g. Russia, China), so a technological solution is the only option.
- foshbosh7779 7y ago
  > Government can just declare your cash worthless, or devalue it though. That's the entire point of crypto, the government has nothing to do with it. Bitcoin was being used for years before any laws came out.
  - criley2 7y ago
    Mostly by criminals in money laundering and attempting to use the internet as a black market. Oh and investors buying to hold and watch it drop lol. I can't help but wonder whether or not people realize that everything from fascist dictators to literal jihadist terrorists desperately want government-less crypto currency to finally unlock their finances from western sanction, so they can super-charge their activity (be it oppressing their people, committing terror attacks, invading their neighbors, etc). There's a very real political cost to uncontrollable finance systems, and that cost is bourne in violence and suffering. That's before we begin to discuss unregulated black markets that thrive on unregulated currencies. How many kids are being hospitalized or dying because of black market vaping products they bought online?
    - celticninja 7y ago
      Currently anyone including "fascist dictators to literal jihadist terrorists” as well as others of their ilk, like the Mexican Cartels, drug dealers, money launderers (and any other criminal bogeymen you want to bring up) are all happy to transact in USD. How many kids are being hospitalised because of black market vaping products bought online with VISA/MASTERCARD/PAYPAL? Every issue you have with bitcoin exists with other currencies and mediums if exchange. Bitcoin is a drip in the ocean in comparison. If these are genuine concerns of your you should focus on another method of preventing them.
      - criley2 7y ago
        >How many kids are being hospitalised because of black market vaping products bought online with VISA/MASTERCARD/PAYPAL? A lot less than you think. These networks, UNLIKE BITCOIN, are regulated, must follow the law, and actively combat fraud and crime on their networks. They keep records and turn records over to law enforcement and many criminals have been caught because they used these networks. >are all happy to transact in USD. Where we have laws and regulations, flagging, bank reporting, and entire law enforcement divisions dedicated to tracking financial crime, combating it, and bringing lawsuit against those who do it. Almost every major criminal who chose to use USD got caught because of that choice. Unlike Bitcoin, which is unregulated, unmonitored, with no ability to flag suspicious transactions, and no ability to ban bad actors. >Every issue you have with bitcoin exists with other currencies and mediums if exchange. This is extremely false. Major networks all obey law and regulation, assist law enforcement actively, track and report suspicious uses, and are vital in combating sex trafficking, drug trafficking and terrorism. I'm frankly shocked at the illogical nature of your reply, to false equivocate between a fully deregulated currency that has no law enforcement whatsoever, with one of the most regulated and monitored currencies in the world -- it's breathtaking. To prove how illogical and ridiculous you are being, I will ask you one question: If you want to buy $15,000 worth of heroin from a dark net drug distributor, would you do it in bitcoin, or a USD wire transfer? Your answer to this question should help you realize the ridiculously fallacious nature of your reply to me. >If these are genuine concerns of your you should focus on another method of preventing them. We successfully combat these things in USD, Visa, etc. We cannot combat them BY DESIGN in bitcoin. For you to suggest that we abandon the only mediums where we can track and stop criminals and switch to a medium where criminals are largely untrackable and operate freely without fear, it's beyond illogical, it's downright insane. "Someone got murdered once, that proves the police are 100% ineffective and we should switch to a society without police!"
have_faith 7y ago
> government control over all your assets is becoming a real possibility Isn't this already the case? it's just in day to day life they don't exert that control over you, but they can. Which of your assets are currently out of reach by your government?
- _Understated_ 7y ago
  There are checks and balances with the gov though. A sitting member of parliament can't decide to freeze all my assets: A judge must do that after due process. FB (and by extension any private entity) can ban my account for nothing if they like.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    > FB (and by extension any private entity) can ban my account for nothing if they like. And Google actually does that. I'm not bringing up Google to shift the example from Facebook, but only to remind everyone that there already is at least one company controlling important aspects of lives of many people, that's known for shutting down people's account seemingly without reason (maybe there are good reasons, but they don't communicate them well) and without recourse (except posting on HN and hoping some googler will spot it). So what you describe isn't a hypothetical problem.
- maxerickson 7y ago
  Smallish cash transactions aren't actively subjected to scrutiny. For instance, if someone buys drugs with cash, there's no automatically generated electronic record of that transfer. That's different than if you Venmo your dealer or whatever.
  - PeterisP 7y ago
    Sure, but they absolutely can simply come to your home, seize your cash, all stuff you've bought with it, seize the home itself and you as well. A sovereign government has full control of the life, liberty and assets of everyone in their territory, subject to all kinds of due process on how they're going to exercise that control or not. The main restraints on gov't power are the ethical and legal choices we the people make to say what the government should be allowed to do, not a physical impossibility to do them. It's not really relevant to debabate whether gov't is capable to seize your virtual assets if it's capable to come and shoot you in the head; it doesn't do that because it's not supposed to do that, not because it's incapable.
Swenrekcah 7y ago
In the 'free-market' capitalist democracy most of the western world lives in, you can have some (varying degree of) influence on what the government does but not a whole lot on what private companies do. If you are afraid of the government you should be terrified of Google/Facebook/etc. I put 'free' in quotes because complete freedom for one person is slavery for another, so it is never completely clear to me what people actually want when they talk about free society or free markets.
- jkepler 7y ago
  > I put 'free' in quotes because complete freedom for one person is slavery for another, so it is never completely clear to me what people actually want when they talk about free society or free markets. My understanding is that free markets must be non-coersive and non-violent, where all participants exercise freedom in how they act or not within the marketplace. Otherwise, if we allow any form of coersion (including any price controls) we have at least some slavery, not a free markets.
  - Swenrekcah 7y ago
    I can agree with that definition. But then again in order to ensure that you would need regulations and enforcement, so then some others might say it's not a free market. When I read my previous comment again I see it can come off as a bit preachy, I'm actually all for regulated free markets and regulated capitalism. But I also hate regulations that are only for the benefit of entrenched players, like for example when you need a license to call yourself a hairdresser or something. I do support the need for a license to call yourself a doctor or structural engineer, so it's a tricky path.
    - jkepler 7y ago
      I agree that in the real world, while it's vital to promote freedom, I can't agree fully with anarchist friends. Looking at history, we will always need some form of government or regulation, because human brokenness runs deep. Yet, where we can decentralized power, I think we should (and suspect you'd agree), as this minimized the damage abuse of authority (or regulatory capture) can cause. In the hands of humans, liberty and justice are always proximate, not ultimate (though I think they can be real).

mavhc 7y ago

Government can just declare your cash worthless, or devalue it though. The trick is that government is actually people, so make sure it's the right people

logicchains 7y ago
>so make sure it's the right people I'm sure Putin would like to see you try. Sometimes a political solution is not possible (e.g. Russia, China), so a technological solution is the only option.
foshbosh7779 7y ago
> Government can just declare your cash worthless, or devalue it though. That's the entire point of crypto, the government has nothing to do with it. Bitcoin was being used for years before any laws came out.
- criley2 7y ago
  Mostly by criminals in money laundering and attempting to use the internet as a black market. Oh and investors buying to hold and watch it drop lol. I can't help but wonder whether or not people realize that everything from fascist dictators to literal jihadist terrorists desperately want government-less crypto currency to finally unlock their finances from western sanction, so they can super-charge their activity (be it oppressing their people, committing terror attacks, invading their neighbors, etc). There's a very real political cost to uncontrollable finance systems, and that cost is bourne in violence and suffering. That's before we begin to discuss unregulated black markets that thrive on unregulated currencies. How many kids are being hospitalized or dying because of black market vaping products they bought online?
  - celticninja 7y ago
    Currently anyone including "fascist dictators to literal jihadist terrorists” as well as others of their ilk, like the Mexican Cartels, drug dealers, money launderers (and any other criminal bogeymen you want to bring up) are all happy to transact in USD. How many kids are being hospitalised because of black market vaping products bought online with VISA/MASTERCARD/PAYPAL? Every issue you have with bitcoin exists with other currencies and mediums if exchange. Bitcoin is a drip in the ocean in comparison. If these are genuine concerns of your you should focus on another method of preventing them.
    - criley2 7y ago
      >How many kids are being hospitalised because of black market vaping products bought online with VISA/MASTERCARD/PAYPAL? A lot less than you think. These networks, UNLIKE BITCOIN, are regulated, must follow the law, and actively combat fraud and crime on their networks. They keep records and turn records over to law enforcement and many criminals have been caught because they used these networks. >are all happy to transact in USD. Where we have laws and regulations, flagging, bank reporting, and entire law enforcement divisions dedicated to tracking financial crime, combating it, and bringing lawsuit against those who do it. Almost every major criminal who chose to use USD got caught because of that choice. Unlike Bitcoin, which is unregulated, unmonitored, with no ability to flag suspicious transactions, and no ability to ban bad actors. >Every issue you have with bitcoin exists with other currencies and mediums if exchange. This is extremely false. Major networks all obey law and regulation, assist law enforcement actively, track and report suspicious uses, and are vital in combating sex trafficking, drug trafficking and terrorism. I'm frankly shocked at the illogical nature of your reply, to false equivocate between a fully deregulated currency that has no law enforcement whatsoever, with one of the most regulated and monitored currencies in the world -- it's breathtaking. To prove how illogical and ridiculous you are being, I will ask you one question: If you want to buy $15,000 worth of heroin from a dark net drug distributor, would you do it in bitcoin, or a USD wire transfer? Your answer to this question should help you realize the ridiculously fallacious nature of your reply to me. >If these are genuine concerns of your you should focus on another method of preventing them. We successfully combat these things in USD, Visa, etc. We cannot combat them BY DESIGN in bitcoin. For you to suggest that we abandon the only mediums where we can track and stop criminals and switch to a medium where criminals are largely untrackable and operate freely without fear, it's beyond illogical, it's downright insane. "Someone got murdered once, that proves the police are 100% ineffective and we should switch to a society without police!"

have_faith 7y ago

> government control over all your assets is becoming a real possibility Isn't this already the case? it's just in day to day life they don't exert that control over you, but they can. Which of your assets are currently out of reach by your government?

_Understated_ 7y ago
There are checks and balances with the gov though. A sitting member of parliament can't decide to freeze all my assets: A judge must do that after due process. FB (and by extension any private entity) can ban my account for nothing if they like.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago
  > FB (and by extension any private entity) can ban my account for nothing if they like. And Google actually does that. I'm not bringing up Google to shift the example from Facebook, but only to remind everyone that there already is at least one company controlling important aspects of lives of many people, that's known for shutting down people's account seemingly without reason (maybe there are good reasons, but they don't communicate them well) and without recourse (except posting on HN and hoping some googler will spot it). So what you describe isn't a hypothetical problem.
maxerickson 7y ago
Smallish cash transactions aren't actively subjected to scrutiny. For instance, if someone buys drugs with cash, there's no automatically generated electronic record of that transfer. That's different than if you Venmo your dealer or whatever.
- PeterisP 7y ago
  Sure, but they absolutely can simply come to your home, seize your cash, all stuff you've bought with it, seize the home itself and you as well. A sovereign government has full control of the life, liberty and assets of everyone in their territory, subject to all kinds of due process on how they're going to exercise that control or not. The main restraints on gov't power are the ethical and legal choices we the people make to say what the government should be allowed to do, not a physical impossibility to do them. It's not really relevant to debabate whether gov't is capable to seize your virtual assets if it's capable to come and shoot you in the head; it doesn't do that because it's not supposed to do that, not because it's incapable.

Swenrekcah 7y ago

In the 'free-market' capitalist democracy most of the western world lives in, you can have some (varying degree of) influence on what the government does but not a whole lot on what private companies do. If you are afraid of the government you should be terrified of Google/Facebook/etc. I put 'free' in quotes because complete freedom for one person is slavery for another, so it is never completely clear to me what people actually want when they talk about free society or free markets.

jkepler 7y ago
> I put 'free' in quotes because complete freedom for one person is slavery for another, so it is never completely clear to me what people actually want when they talk about free society or free markets. My understanding is that free markets must be non-coersive and non-violent, where all participants exercise freedom in how they act or not within the marketplace. Otherwise, if we allow any form of coersion (including any price controls) we have at least some slavery, not a free markets.
- Swenrekcah 7y ago
  I can agree with that definition. But then again in order to ensure that you would need regulations and enforcement, so then some others might say it's not a free market. When I read my previous comment again I see it can come off as a bit preachy, I'm actually all for regulated free markets and regulated capitalism. But I also hate regulations that are only for the benefit of entrenched players, like for example when you need a license to call yourself a hairdresser or something. I do support the need for a license to call yourself a doctor or structural engineer, so it's a tricky path.
  - jkepler 7y ago
    I agree that in the real world, while it's vital to promote freedom, I can't agree fully with anarchist friends. Looking at history, we will always need some form of government or regulation, because human brokenness runs deep. Yet, where we can decentralized power, I think we should (and suspect you'd agree), as this minimized the damage abuse of authority (or regulatory capture) can cause. In the hands of humans, liberty and justice are always proximate, not ultimate (though I think they can be real).