3 ms·

You've made the "it's just math" argument multiple times in this thread, but it's irrelevant. Bitcoin are securities that have value because people say they do

You've made the "it's just math" argument multiple times in this thread, but it's irrelevant. Bitcoin are securities that have value because people say they do. Saying that BTC is just math is like saying that credit default swaps or frozen orange juice futures are just pieces of paper. The market assigns value to things. What those things physically are is irrelevant; If there is a buyer and there is a seller, the thing is real and has value. There's no question that theft of BTC is theft, the fundamental technology behind it isn't relevant to whether or not it's theft because people treat it as a concrete security that can be bought and sold.

echelon 5y ago
> The market assigns value to things. That's obvious. Does US case law protect it, though? And in what ways? > There's no question that theft of BTC is theft If you publish keys you discover, that's not theft. And that's my point. How does the system deal with that? There's no technical means to roll back or prove original ownership (especially if you find multiple values for the key). The legal framework doesn't have any precedent, and if doesn't seem to me like it would protect you. If I publish, "Hey everybody! I found Satoshi's keys! They're 0FFF...", I didn't do anything wrong.
postalrat 5y ago
"theft of BTC is theft" Exactly was "owned" and taken to be considered theft? A secret?