3 ms·

Do you know how absurd that would be? Crypto like Bitcoin are just a database in essence. Throwing someone in prison for running a database on their computer wo

Do you know how absurd that would be? Crypto like Bitcoin are just a database in essence. Throwing someone in prison for running a database on their computer would probably spell the end of general purpose computers. You will not be allowed to run databases anymore unless they are approved.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> Do you know how absurd that would be? Bitcoin is just a database in essence It’s really bot unusual for the law to treat things differently based on the purpose for which they are used when they are “just a database, in essence”.
- bouncycastle 5y ago
  I know, in theory you can have a law for everything. For example, in the Soviet Union basic electronics such as radios were restricted and you were not allowed to tune your sets to western stations.
  - chitowneats 5y ago
    You can also have a total free for all. Murder, kidnapping, etc, all legal. See? I can do it too.
    - bouncycastle 5y ago
      I don't think a database or a computer murdered or kidnapped anyone. I mean, a computer which runs the B-tree algorithm and talks with the rest of the internet according to a bunch of loops/if/then/else statements is not exactly an assault rifle. But yes, everything can be banned eventually. We'll just go back to living in the cave.
- chitowneats 5y ago
  I assume you'd have no issue taking down a database full of child pornography? You know there are some who argue that CP is just "bits on disk". What if society determines that cryptocurrency also has negative externalities? You're free to disagree but I just stuck my finger in the air and it's pretty clear which way the wind is blowing.
  - bouncycastle 5y ago
    The only societies who determine that cryptocurrencies have negative externalities are the ones that are controlled by criminals in the highest levels of their government. Just google a map to see where crypto has been banned. (Note that many these may not even appear as criminals and project a legitimate image to their public) Here's a thought experiment: If you're a political party that had taken over the government through criminal means such as election fraud or more coercive methods such as a disinformation/propaganda campaign or a coup, the first thing you will do is to make sure that you have control of the money. Since cryptocurrencies are too transparent and undermine the absolute control of state-issued currency, these will be seen as a threat to the criminal government and will be the first thing to get banned. We can quickly see that the world's worst criminals at the highest levels hate cryptocurrency, and prefer to use the existing paper-based technologies instead, that allow them to be more opaque and retain absolute power.
    - chitowneats 5y ago
      Right. It's the society that is criminal. It's not that actual criminals are using cryptocurrency to circumvent laws. Good luck pushing that line anywhere other than technolibertarian friendly HN or the various ancap subreddits.
      - bouncycastle 5y ago
        I mean, look.. cryptocurrency is a deeply political disruption to nation states that always had absolute controll over their national currencies. If a totalitarian government ever is to maintain power, banning cryptocurrency would be a necessity, and so far there's direct evidence of this as I've pointed out. (Another thought experiment: why crypto is banned in North Korea?)
        chitowneats 5y ago
        It would be a necessity and extremely easy. It's not preventing authoritarian states from doing anything. Men with guns in riot gear just show up and seize all of your hardware, and whatever other property you own that they want. See China's current mining crackdown if you don't believe me. Many authoritarian states are currently tolerating crypto because it's an excellent way to avoid international sanctions and launder hacking ransoms. By pointing out that crypto is banned for regular North Korean citizens, did you not just prove my point that it's a worthless tool for countering authoritarianism?

dragonwriter 5y ago

> Do you know how absurd that would be? Bitcoin is just a database in essence It’s really bot unusual for the law to treat things differently based on the purpose for which they are used when they are “just a database, in essence”.

bouncycastle 5y ago
I know, in theory you can have a law for everything. For example, in the Soviet Union basic electronics such as radios were restricted and you were not allowed to tune your sets to western stations.
- chitowneats 5y ago
  You can also have a total free for all. Murder, kidnapping, etc, all legal. See? I can do it too.
  - bouncycastle 5y ago
    I don't think a database or a computer murdered or kidnapped anyone. I mean, a computer which runs the B-tree algorithm and talks with the rest of the internet according to a bunch of loops/if/then/else statements is not exactly an assault rifle. But yes, everything can be banned eventually. We'll just go back to living in the cave.
chitowneats 5y ago
I assume you'd have no issue taking down a database full of child pornography? You know there are some who argue that CP is just "bits on disk". What if society determines that cryptocurrency also has negative externalities? You're free to disagree but I just stuck my finger in the air and it's pretty clear which way the wind is blowing.
- bouncycastle 5y ago
  The only societies who determine that cryptocurrencies have negative externalities are the ones that are controlled by criminals in the highest levels of their government. Just google a map to see where crypto has been banned. (Note that many these may not even appear as criminals and project a legitimate image to their public) Here's a thought experiment: If you're a political party that had taken over the government through criminal means such as election fraud or more coercive methods such as a disinformation/propaganda campaign or a coup, the first thing you will do is to make sure that you have control of the money. Since cryptocurrencies are too transparent and undermine the absolute control of state-issued currency, these will be seen as a threat to the criminal government and will be the first thing to get banned. We can quickly see that the world's worst criminals at the highest levels hate cryptocurrency, and prefer to use the existing paper-based technologies instead, that allow them to be more opaque and retain absolute power.
  - chitowneats 5y ago
    Right. It's the society that is criminal. It's not that actual criminals are using cryptocurrency to circumvent laws. Good luck pushing that line anywhere other than technolibertarian friendly HN or the various ancap subreddits.
    - bouncycastle 5y ago
      I mean, look.. cryptocurrency is a deeply political disruption to nation states that always had absolute controll over their national currencies. If a totalitarian government ever is to maintain power, banning cryptocurrency would be a necessity, and so far there's direct evidence of this as I've pointed out. (Another thought experiment: why crypto is banned in North Korea?)
      - chitowneats 5y ago
        It would be a necessity and extremely easy. It's not preventing authoritarian states from doing anything. Men with guns in riot gear just show up and seize all of your hardware, and whatever other property you own that they want. See China's current mining crackdown if you don't believe me. Many authoritarian states are currently tolerating crypto because it's an excellent way to avoid international sanctions and launder hacking ransoms. By pointing out that crypto is banned for regular North Korean citizens, did you not just prove my point that it's a worthless tool for countering authoritarianism?