6 ms·
Isn't crypto a direct threat to their power? If finance can't be tracked it can't be taxed. If it's mainstream more and more people could potentially switch t
by nickthemagicman 5y ago
Isn't crypto a direct threat to their power?
If finance can't be tracked it can't be taxed.
If it's mainstream more and more people could potentially switch to crypto, which would reduce their tax collections.
Just theorizing. I have no idea if this would happen.
- whateveracct 5y agoBTC can be tracked better than cash
- nprz 5y agoSo why are ransomware hackers never prosecuted?
- khuey 5y agoBecause they live and operate in jurisdictions without extradition treaties.
- nprz 5y agoSo they might as well just ask for their ransom via a wire transfer or paypal? Since their identity will be known anyway.
- tylersmith 5y agoIf ransomware used PayPal accounts or bank numbers those payments would quickly start being censored to cut off their payment rails. The value of crypto is all rooted in censorship resistance, not anonymity.
- nprz 5y agoWouldn't it have to be an agency in their own jurisdiction that would prevent the hacker from accessing banking services? They would make an effort to shut down the hackers bank account but not prosecute them?
- khuey 5y agoThe pressure point in the traditional financial system is not the Russian authorities cutting off the Russian hacker from a Russian bank, it's SWIFT cutting off the Russian bank from the global financial system.
- amalcon 5y agoBecause they typically operate out of jurisdictions that don't feel like prosecuting them.
- CamelCaseName 5y agoIf there's one thing I've learned, it's that illegality is irrelevant. Only what laws are enforced, and how quickly they are enforced, matters.
- gzer0 5y agoUsually it involves conversion of illegally gained assets into untraceable cryptocurrencies such as XMR (Monero) and then subsequent funneling and conversion of those assets back into USD via offshore exchanges. IRS is offering $625,000 USD to anyone that can crack the Monero algorithm [1]. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2020/09/14/irs-will-pay-up-to-625000-if-you-can-crack-monero-other-privacy-coins/?sh=5155f02785cc https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2020/09/14/irs...
- fabianhjr 5y ago> conversion of those assets back into USD via offshore exchanges. They would probably not exchange into USD, there are plenty of other currencies and they would probably favor a local currency.
- tablespoon 5y ago> So why are ransomware hackers never prosecuted? Because they're typically based in Russia, and Russia has a policy that it will not prosecute its citizens for computer crimes unless they perpetrated them against Russians or Russian organizations. My understanding is most ransomware has code to detect Russian computers (e.g. by checking localization settings), and will refuse to run if it finds itself on one for that reason. https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/05/try-this-one-weird-trick-russian-hackers-hate/ https://krebsonsecurity.com/2021/05/try-this-one-weird-trick...
- nprz 5y agoSo why not just send the payment to a Russian bank?
- tablespoon 5y ago> So why not just send the payment to a Russian bank? I don't know, I'm not a Russian in the ransomware business. But I speculate that doing it that way might be so blatant and inconvenient to the Russian government that it might get the policy that protects them changed. Also, I'd imagine any bank that accepts such payments would quickly get itself blacklisted. This stuff isn't actually binary, so it's not smart to take it to the limit.
- zaphar 5y agoBecause Russian banks need to be capable of transacting with American banks and directly receiving money that is Ransom Payment related is a bad business decision.
- nprz 5y agoSo you're saying sending money to a bitcoin address would help obscure the identity of the receiver?
- zaphar 5y agoNo I'm saying a Russian bank probably doesn't look past the deposit. But if the deposit comes from America then an American bank will ask for it back when the US govt tells it to and then the bank will do so because it's good business. So I would imagine most ransomware gangs just keep the money in bitcoin and only pull out what they need to when they need to.
- meowface 5y agoBecause trackable doesn't mean "always trackable to a real human identity who's the original source". Bitcoin transactions are trivial for anyone to track, since everything is recorded on the public blockchain, but you can't necessarily follow the trail to the true culprit even if you're law enforcement. Especially if there are non-cooperative entities in the chain who are completely outside of your jurisdiction. Though, the true answer to your actual question is what the other commenter said: it's mainly due to the Russian government turning a blind eye to it as long as they don't target Russian/ex-USSR citizens. So even if you do know a ransomware operator's full name and home address and everything else you can possibly know about them, you can't do anything about it besides hope they leave the country and try to catch them then.
- drcode 5y agoSure, if you don't use mixers
- ghostbrainalpha 5y agoSide question: How difficult is it to use a mixer? If you have the tech skills to mine bitcoin is it trivial to find and use a mixer, or is it something requiring more specific expertise?
- drcode 5y agoNot too difficult, though I've never done it so can't say for sure.
- tracedddd 5y agoIt’s relatively trivial to use a mixer, just like sending any other transaction. The mixer deals with all the complexity. However almost all mixers have been eventually compromised. It’s likely chainalysis and others can easily demix the transactions, so they really shouldn’t be entirely trusted.
- rblatz 5y agoYes, laundering money does tend to obscure the source of money.
- drcode 5y agoMoney laundering is when you make it look like illicit money derived from a legitimate income stream, paying the taxes that result from such income.
- dragontamer 5y agoI'm pretty sure mixers are currently illegal and will be treated as such once the debate starts. Money laundering (aka, pooling cash together to make it harder to track) is defacto illegal by itself, even if you use the money for legitimate purposes.
- piker 5y agoGood luck moving more than a few $100ks in cash.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- JohnJamesRambo 5y agoIf they wanted to squash it they should have done it much earlier (if it was possible at all and wouldn't have just caused Streisand Effect). Now you have congressmen with laser eyes on 100k bitcoin twitter profile pics, the head of SEC taught classes about blockchain at MIT; it is way too late. The smart thing is to embrace it, the complete opposite of the Chinese government course of action. You set back the entire nation by not embracing innovation.
- de_keyboard 5y agoI don't think crypto can be blocked at this point - there will always be a communication channel for sharing blocks. Hell, it could be done via SMS messages if necessary. They can significantly hurt the price but limiting reputable shops from accepting it though.
- fabianhjr 5y ago> Isn't crypto a direct threat to their power? It isn't since it doesn't change property relations. It is more of a "different asset" they could own and speculate with. > If finance can't be tracked it can't be taxed. Crypto-tokens are very traceable and most can be deanonymized by forensic accountants. > If it's mainstream more and more people could potentially switch to crypto, which would reduce their tax collections. It wouldn't and most people aren't savy enough in cybersecurity to avoid having their tokens stolen. (And most protocols don't have a chargeback or recovery mechanism)
- spicymaki 5y ago> Isn't crypto a direct threat to their power? It is not a threat to their power, imagine the corrupting power of being able to produce wealth anonymously without being traced or taxed and having that sanctioned by the government.
- jandrese 5y agoNo more than Pork Futures are a threat to their power. This is plain old fashioned finance guys paying off senators to make tax loopholes for them.
- JumpCrisscross 5y ago> Isn't crypto a direct threat to their power? I don't know where this meme came from. If the U.S. government declared Bitcoin legal tender tomorrow, it would be monumental. But practically speaking, not that much would change. The Fed would buy Bitcoin the way e.g. the Swiss National Bank buys dollars and euros. And the Treasury would issue Bitcoin bonds or something, I don't know. Cryptocurrencies currently make it easier to evade taxes, which benefits the rich, and easier to make money in a host of new financial activities, which benefits those near those activities, i.e. people with money and banks and first movers in the technology.
- tmn 5y agoMost people thought the internet was a threat to the establishment. In all likelihood bitcoin was developed by the NSA.