3 ms·

> A precursor to banning crypto itself... Is it? How would you go about banning crypto completely such that nobody uses it?

analognoise 5y ago
Well all the transactions are public. So I assume you freeze the assets of everyone involved in the exchanges. Then if they operate in a country beyond your reach, you embargo that country or apply other geopolitical pressure - you don't finance local development, or military assistance, or vote against whatever they want in NATO, whatever. Most countries have agreements in place for financial regulation and will gladly hand someone over who breaks a US banking law. Then whenever you trace it to one of your citizens, you throw them in jail. This would destroy the exchanges, and prevent most people from participating in it (even as a curio). It would be ultra easy to destroy crypto. If the US, Europe or China bans it for real, it will be worthless overnight. Nobody cares more about crypto than pissing off any of them. I think all major countries are gearing up for this and it will happen eventually.
- madamelic 5y ago
  So... your dream is a one world government police state dystopia? Interesting.
  - analognoise 5y ago
    Not at all, it's just naive to think the USA, Europe, or China couldn't shut down crypto if they wanted. They have million man armies, jets, tanks, millions of bureaucrats, leading edge development programs, hypersonic missiles, nuclear weapons, atomic energy, etc - but they "couldn't stop crypto!", a ledger where all transactions are...explicitly public? Like come on. They have entire departments devoted tracing transactions for tax avoidance, but they're helpless against...a public list of transactions? No way.
    - madamelic 5y ago
      Ah ok, I misunderstood. You were saying as an example, not as an actual thing you desire them to do. I think the big issue is just the scale of the market. They _could_ do it with enough funding and manpower, but I think it would cause a Streisand effect in that privacy-centric tokens would become more popular. It's better for governments to contain it and not appear to be against it so that development focus doesn't shift to Monero-like tokens.
      - analognoise 5y ago
        They would become more popular - until they went after the exchange. You can design a ideal token - the Platonic model of a crypto. Totally secure, totally anonymous. Assume it perfectly hides all information about all users. And they could easily still destroy it - they'd just attack whoever offered cash for that token, who they would uncover by tracing regular cash (Dollars/Euros/Rinmenbi). There is no technical solution that can avoid actually avoid tracing when you turn the crypto into goods and services - unless both parties are willing to deal in that token exclusively AND not to keep records of any of their dealings. Which makes it only useful for illicit activities anyway - you're not going to get your kitchen remodel done and everyone is going to agree to get paid in your token and not report it to the government while also somehow hiding the fact that you're having people show up to your house to do work. It's just not practical. SOMEONE on the kitchen remodel team is going to go "Nah, I want...dollars?". There's an XKCD about this: https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/ ^ They'd just drug the people involved and hit them with a wrench until they gave them the answers. Developing any of these "cryptos" is a total waste of time, and has been since day one - eventually people will figure this out and the price will plummet. ...in my opinion, obviously. I think what's going to really happen is that the US is going to release a digital currency, and it will gain real adoption, and which one is Grandma going to use? Real US-backed E-bucks or... some trinket coin she doesn't understand that only allows her to buy heroin and contract killers? I mean maybe Grandma likes to party and has made a lifetime of enemies and it's a perfect fit, but I...doubt it?
        RhodoGSA 5y ago
  - MrMan 5y ago
    We definitely need a world government to survive

analognoise 5y ago

Well all the transactions are public. So I assume you freeze the assets of everyone involved in the exchanges. Then if they operate in a country beyond your reach, you embargo that country or apply other geopolitical pressure - you don't finance local development, or military assistance, or vote against whatever they want in NATO, whatever. Most countries have agreements in place for financial regulation and will gladly hand someone over who breaks a US banking law. Then whenever you trace it to one of your citizens, you throw them in jail. This would destroy the exchanges, and prevent most people from participating in it (even as a curio). It would be ultra easy to destroy crypto. If the US, Europe or China bans it for real, it will be worthless overnight. Nobody cares more about crypto than pissing off any of them. I think all major countries are gearing up for this and it will happen eventually.

madamelic 5y ago
So... your dream is a one world government police state dystopia? Interesting.
- analognoise 5y ago
  Not at all, it's just naive to think the USA, Europe, or China couldn't shut down crypto if they wanted. They have million man armies, jets, tanks, millions of bureaucrats, leading edge development programs, hypersonic missiles, nuclear weapons, atomic energy, etc - but they "couldn't stop crypto!", a ledger where all transactions are...explicitly public? Like come on. They have entire departments devoted tracing transactions for tax avoidance, but they're helpless against...a public list of transactions? No way.
  - madamelic 5y ago
    Ah ok, I misunderstood. You were saying as an example, not as an actual thing you desire them to do. I think the big issue is just the scale of the market. They _could_ do it with enough funding and manpower, but I think it would cause a Streisand effect in that privacy-centric tokens would become more popular. It's better for governments to contain it and not appear to be against it so that development focus doesn't shift to Monero-like tokens.
    - analognoise 5y ago
      They would become more popular - until they went after the exchange. You can design a ideal token - the Platonic model of a crypto. Totally secure, totally anonymous. Assume it perfectly hides all information about all users. And they could easily still destroy it - they'd just attack whoever offered cash for that token, who they would uncover by tracing regular cash (Dollars/Euros/Rinmenbi). There is no technical solution that can avoid actually avoid tracing when you turn the crypto into goods and services - unless both parties are willing to deal in that token exclusively AND not to keep records of any of their dealings. Which makes it only useful for illicit activities anyway - you're not going to get your kitchen remodel done and everyone is going to agree to get paid in your token and not report it to the government while also somehow hiding the fact that you're having people show up to your house to do work. It's just not practical. SOMEONE on the kitchen remodel team is going to go "Nah, I want...dollars?". There's an XKCD about this: https://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/ ^ They'd just drug the people involved and hit them with a wrench until they gave them the answers. Developing any of these "cryptos" is a total waste of time, and has been since day one - eventually people will figure this out and the price will plummet. ...in my opinion, obviously. I think what's going to really happen is that the US is going to release a digital currency, and it will gain real adoption, and which one is Grandma going to use? Real US-backed E-bucks or... some trinket coin she doesn't understand that only allows her to buy heroin and contract killers? I mean maybe Grandma likes to party and has made a lifetime of enemies and it's a perfect fit, but I...doubt it?
      - RhodoGSA 5y ago
- MrMan 5y ago
  We definitely need a world government to survive