5 ms·

The state has the resources to prosecute any crime. The state does not have the resources to prosecute every crime. Even the most totalitarian surveillance stat

The state has the resources to prosecute any crime. The state does not have the resources to prosecute every crime. Even the most totalitarian surveillance states have thriving black markets. Nearly anywhere in the Western world, one can find highly illegal drugs with no more than a few phone calls. Cryptocurrency is far easier to smuggle and conceal than cannabis. If governments have repeatedly proven hilariously incompetent at the War on Drugs, why would we possibly expect any government to be capable of stomping out cryptocurrency by its citizenry?

the_local_host 6y ago
Why is the threshold set at "stomping out cryptocurrency"? The state as the resources to prosecute a lot of crimes. The US has a huge incarceration rate. Even if cryptocurrencies weren't completely stomped out, shouting "Bitcoin lives!" from a prison cell wouldn't be that helpful to the person serving the sentence. The "many-headed hydra" isn't much use to the severed heads. Moreover I don't think the failure of the "War on Drugs" provides a relevant example. The inability of the government to stamp out illegal drugs doesn't indicate that it would be a reasonable risk for many (or most) people to maintain their wealth in cryptocurrencies, if cryptocurrencies were to become illegal.
- RhodoGSA 6y ago
  because unlike cannibis, bitcoin has a limited supply and cannot be created outside of the rules of the system. If the government banned crypto, prosecuted those who it could find and confiscated the crypto it would only succeed in tightening the supply and increasing it's price.
  - mullingitover 6y ago
    > If the government banned crypto, prosecuted those who it could find and confiscated the crypto it would only succeed in tightening the supply and increasing it's price. This assumes that demand is going to remain the same while supply goes down. More likely the demand goes to near-zero when the legitimate investors exit the market.
    - RhodoGSA 6y ago
      Who knows to be honest. There's enough narcos, mafia and other random citizens with enough distain for the law to fight over the remaining (5% Who knows) of remaining bitcoin on the black market after a worldwide ban that maybe it will still have some sort of demand. Also, what classifys a crypto currency? This is one of the biggest problems with a blanket ban. If it is a POA chain run by a centralized entity for use within a video-game, but also has real world value for 'Items' a crypto? What happens if no one uses that currency for items, but instead trades it on an open exchange for USD and other FIAT. Is that banned too? It's too obscure a concept at this point for a real ban to every really work.
      - mullingitover 6y ago
        > There's enough narcos, mafia and other random citizens with enough distain for the law to fight over the remaining (5% Who knows) of remaining bitcoin on the black market after a worldwide ban that maybe it will still have some sort of demand. If 95% of the value is gone, and with it probably 95% of miners, the whole system is vulnerable to attacks and could easily go into a death spiral for the remaining 5% of the value.
- dannyphantom 6y ago
  Your comment made me question why crypto would ever be declared illegal. People can do what they want with their money; whether they should is debatable. This article highlights some interesting things. There is a link in the article to a more thorough article. https://law.stanford.edu/press/is-bitcoin-protected-as-speech-under-the-1st-amendment-experts-answer/ https://law.stanford.edu/press/is-bitcoin-protected-as-speec...
tw04 6y ago
>Nearly anywhere in the Western world, one can find highly illegal drugs with no more than a few phone calls. Nearly anywhere in the world one can go to prison for life for possessing enough of those highly illegal drugs. Why would the average person risk their freedom over cryptocurrency? If you convert the digital asset into a physical asset enough times or for nice enough goods, EVENTUALLY someone is going to ask where the money came from. You're also making a pretty bold assumption that the governments actually want drugs stamped out. I don't think that has EVER been the case, that's just been the story. It's used as a means of suppressing people of color and poor people. When was the last time you heard of a Wall Street banker going to prison for coke?
- eloff 6y ago
  > You're also making a pretty bold assumption that the governments actually want drugs stamped out. I don't think that has EVER been the case, that's just been the story. It's used as a means of suppressing people of color and poor people. When was the last time you heard of a Wall Street banker going to prison for coke? That's really trying to frame the world through a lens of racial or class bias. It's not the reality. You're the one making the unsubstantiated bold claim here.
  - Forbo 6y ago
    >“You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ It is the reality.
  - tw04 6y ago
katbyte 6y ago
I would argue the demand for drugs is greater then crypto by a large margin, as well as they don’t have to go after users, just the exchanges linked into the traditional financial system that make it easy for new users to buy in.
scsilver 6y ago
On the flip side, I think about how much the flexible asset movement of cryptos would prevent genocides and allow people to flee with a huge amount of their assets from criminal regimes.

the_local_host 6y ago

Why is the threshold set at "stomping out cryptocurrency"? The state as the resources to prosecute a lot of crimes. The US has a huge incarceration rate. Even if cryptocurrencies weren't completely stomped out, shouting "Bitcoin lives!" from a prison cell wouldn't be that helpful to the person serving the sentence. The "many-headed hydra" isn't much use to the severed heads. Moreover I don't think the failure of the "War on Drugs" provides a relevant example. The inability of the government to stamp out illegal drugs doesn't indicate that it would be a reasonable risk for many (or most) people to maintain their wealth in cryptocurrencies, if cryptocurrencies were to become illegal.

RhodoGSA 6y ago
because unlike cannibis, bitcoin has a limited supply and cannot be created outside of the rules of the system. If the government banned crypto, prosecuted those who it could find and confiscated the crypto it would only succeed in tightening the supply and increasing it's price.
- mullingitover 6y ago
  > If the government banned crypto, prosecuted those who it could find and confiscated the crypto it would only succeed in tightening the supply and increasing it's price. This assumes that demand is going to remain the same while supply goes down. More likely the demand goes to near-zero when the legitimate investors exit the market.
  - RhodoGSA 6y ago
    Who knows to be honest. There's enough narcos, mafia and other random citizens with enough distain for the law to fight over the remaining (5% Who knows) of remaining bitcoin on the black market after a worldwide ban that maybe it will still have some sort of demand. Also, what classifys a crypto currency? This is one of the biggest problems with a blanket ban. If it is a POA chain run by a centralized entity for use within a video-game, but also has real world value for 'Items' a crypto? What happens if no one uses that currency for items, but instead trades it on an open exchange for USD and other FIAT. Is that banned too? It's too obscure a concept at this point for a real ban to every really work.
    - mullingitover 6y ago
      > There's enough narcos, mafia and other random citizens with enough distain for the law to fight over the remaining (5% Who knows) of remaining bitcoin on the black market after a worldwide ban that maybe it will still have some sort of demand. If 95% of the value is gone, and with it probably 95% of miners, the whole system is vulnerable to attacks and could easily go into a death spiral for the remaining 5% of the value.
dannyphantom 6y ago
Your comment made me question why crypto would ever be declared illegal. People can do what they want with their money; whether they should is debatable. This article highlights some interesting things. There is a link in the article to a more thorough article. https://law.stanford.edu/press/is-bitcoin-protected-as-speech-under-the-1st-amendment-experts-answer/ https://law.stanford.edu/press/is-bitcoin-protected-as-speec...

tw04 6y ago

>Nearly anywhere in the Western world, one can find highly illegal drugs with no more than a few phone calls. Nearly anywhere in the world one can go to prison for life for possessing enough of those highly illegal drugs. Why would the average person risk their freedom over cryptocurrency? If you convert the digital asset into a physical asset enough times or for nice enough goods, EVENTUALLY someone is going to ask where the money came from. You're also making a pretty bold assumption that the governments actually want drugs stamped out. I don't think that has EVER been the case, that's just been the story. It's used as a means of suppressing people of color and poor people. When was the last time you heard of a Wall Street banker going to prison for coke?

eloff 6y ago
> You're also making a pretty bold assumption that the governments actually want drugs stamped out. I don't think that has EVER been the case, that's just been the story. It's used as a means of suppressing people of color and poor people. When was the last time you heard of a Wall Street banker going to prison for coke? That's really trying to frame the world through a lens of racial or class bias. It's not the reality. You're the one making the unsubstantiated bold claim here.
- Forbo 6y ago
  >“You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.” https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ https://harpers.org/archive/2016/04/legalize-it-all/ It is the reality.
- tw04 6y ago

katbyte 6y ago

I would argue the demand for drugs is greater then crypto by a large margin, as well as they don’t have to go after users, just the exchanges linked into the traditional financial system that make it easy for new users to buy in.

scsilver 6y ago

On the flip side, I think about how much the flexible asset movement of cryptos would prevent genocides and allow people to flee with a huge amount of their assets from criminal regimes.