> Well, that depends. Is that software breaking local law? Then creating it is obviously immoral. Breaking a law is not obviously immoral. Many people have bro

> Well, that depends. Is that software breaking local law? Then creating it is obviously immoral. Breaking a law is not obviously immoral. Many people have broken traffic laws to save a life by getting them to the hospital, to give an obvious example. (well, less obvious in case they actually hit someone. The morality shouldn't depend on the outcome. Anyway, this is getting a bit too deep) I think both your options, which seem like they're referring to realpolitik and utilitarianism, are way too simplified to even be useful for practical application on this topic. And they are most certainly not an exhaustive list of the options. So no, it's neither A nor B. And as for utilitarianism, the problem with blockchain is exactly it's LARPing strength: "It's math". It's pretending that you have the right, today, to decide morality, and indeed utility, for all of time. And you can't. Adding anonyminity to the mix means that you are even hiding evidence of something going wrong with your predictions. Looking forward to seeing President Eric Trump ordering the treasury to transfer everything into some Monero account? That may impeach him, but the money is gone forever. If it's the same guy looting Fort Knox, then we can send people to get the things back.