4 ms·
> (this includes transferring money in ways the local government doesn't approve of which can admittedly be great if the local government is oppressive). That
by newswasboring 5y ago
> (this includes transferring money in ways the local government doesn't approve of which can admittedly be great if the local government is oppressive).
That is a very weird take. It assumes that privacy is somehow always linked to illicite activities. Even if I'm buying candy, the government doesn't have any right to track it. Hiding my life from the government should not be automatically labeled criminal.
- slg 5y agoI think it is more your interpretation of my take is weird because I never said anything approaching what you are suggesting. You want privacy, buy in cash. Most cryptocurrencies don't provide added privacy and they usually end up decreasing privacy since all transactions are on the public ledger. The type of thing I am talking about is people transferring money out of an economy in ways that are forbidden by the government. Governments can want to prevent this for legitimate reasons like trying to stop money laundering and tax evasion. They can also do it for illegitimate reasons like the government trying to retain authoritarian control over its citizens or to prop up a failing currency. Either way it would mean the transfers are illegal, but not all of them are necessarily immoral. That is why I dubbed it "criminal-like behavior".