4 ms·

What makes you so sure that Chinese oligarchs want traceable money?

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
maerF0x0 5y ago
What makes you think the Chinese oligarchs wont be given an anonymous enough backdoor? -- Typically when I've seen authoritarian things it's authoritarian across most, but nice little exceptions for the "special" people.
- onion2k 5y ago
  What makes you think the Chinese oligarchs wont be given an anonymous enough backdoor? There's no such thing as a backdoor for some limited group of people. If there's a backdoor then it's for anyone who can discover it and chooses to use it. This is the flaw in the thinking of every single politician who ever talks about encryption and crypto. You can't compromise the security in something and expect it to remain a secret. Things are either secure by design, or they're not secure.
  - tyre 5y ago
    In this case the government could mandate that every address be KYCed. Then they give out some addresses with either fake KYC stubs or don’t KYC them at all. This wouldn’t be done at the protocol level, in the same way one can get around TLS via MITM without sabotaging the encryption algorithms.
  - rtkwe 5y ago
    That's only true in digital systems. In bureaucracies it's easy to do, you just have someone approve exceptions based on unspecified rules and label non-compliant accounts as compliant or ignore their non-compliance. There's a recurrent meme in the tech world to try to treat the law and governments like rigid rule bound computers but they're not, it's a system composed of people and people bend rules every day.
- 9oliYQjP 5y ago
  I used to think like this. But the older I get the more cynical I become. In massively corrupt environments, everybody needs to appear to be playing the game by the rules when it comes to primary objectives like the distribution of wealth and the financial operations surrounding it. Nobody trusts anyone else and everyone is an adversary of everyone else, even within the leadership ranks. I strongly suspect there would not be any widely known backdoor for oligarchs. A select few oligarchs might have the luck of being tasked with creating such a system, in which case they will build the backdoor for themselves. Still... I think the speculative scenario is unlikely. I myself am speculating massively here. But what I think is far more likely to happen with respect to crypto is that an international agreement akin to the Bretton Woods System is negotiated that mandates central banks hold a store of value such as Bitcoin. This will provide some foundation of measure for all currencies to be valued against. But the current financial system layer on top will remain intact. Note, I'm an early Bitcoin hodler and have remained strongly suspicious of Putin's interest in Ethereum with agreements between the foundation and VEB like this one (https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/08/31/misunderstanding-vitalik-buterin-to-create-new-entity-for-russian-bank-deal/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/08/31/misunderstanding...), its handling of the DAO event, and Eth2.0's coincidental timing (its delays too) with the Ukraine invasion. My somewhat speculative paranoia follows, but I strongly suspect Ethereum will NOT play a part in this new system because of the above issues. I think Putin calculated that Ethereum might be a viable alternative to a widespread financial system replacement that could have provided a means of bypassing any sanctions, which is why he went ahead with the Ukraine invasion. In the end, if this Bretton Woods 2.0 system comes into effect, bitcoin will have failed to become the libertarian financial tool many people hoped it would. But its utility as a store of value can't be ignored and so it will have been co-opted/integrated into the existing financial system. It'll be another example of techno-utopianism naiveté like the 90s style vision of the web.
  - germinalphrase 5y ago
    Why do you assume Bitcoin will be the coin of choice rather than a “DigitalDollar” of their own creation? (Or are you just using it as a stand in for conversation?)
Aperocky 5y ago
Chinese oligarchs (Jack Ma?) might not want traceable money, but it's kind of obvious that's not up to them.
- onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
  Does China even have Oligarchs? The Russian Oligarchs are named because (see Red Notice) - they weren't entrepreneurs. During Privitization, they colluded to buy companies for literally 100ths of a penny on the dollar. Chinese Oligarchs would be people that benefitted massively via corruption from privatizing state-owned companies.
  - hkmaxpro 5y ago
    > Does China even have Oligarchs? Yes, a lot: https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/asia-buzz/article/2140667/its-now-open-season-big-crocs-why-xi-targets-chinas-particular https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/asia-buzz/article/2140667/its...
  - ejanus 5y ago
    This is baseless. Owning a company and running it successfully for more than 2 decades show they are entrepreneurs. And why is everybody suddenly picking out on Oligarchs? When Putin dismantled one of them, the same West backed that Oligarch. Why is West suddenly labelling their wealth ill-gotten when they were well known quantities with massive assets across Europe for more than 2 decades and nobody raised eyebrow?
    - onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
      https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Oligarc https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Oligarc Seems they've been popular since the early 2000s - as far back as Google trends goes.
- beaunative 5y ago
  Jack Ma is very much a entrepreneur for what he's achieved. Oligarch carries to much negative connotation and should be referred to someone or a family who controls a crucial industry because of sheer monopoly.
throwaway4good 5y ago
SWIFT is traceable, that is why the US can unbank individuals abroad.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

What makes you think the Chinese oligarchs wont be given an anonymous enough backdoor? -- Typically when I've seen authoritarian things it's authoritarian across most, but nice little exceptions for the "special" people.

onion2k 5y ago
What makes you think the Chinese oligarchs wont be given an anonymous enough backdoor? There's no such thing as a backdoor for some limited group of people. If there's a backdoor then it's for anyone who can discover it and chooses to use it. This is the flaw in the thinking of every single politician who ever talks about encryption and crypto. You can't compromise the security in something and expect it to remain a secret. Things are either secure by design, or they're not secure.
- tyre 5y ago
  In this case the government could mandate that every address be KYCed. Then they give out some addresses with either fake KYC stubs or don’t KYC them at all. This wouldn’t be done at the protocol level, in the same way one can get around TLS via MITM without sabotaging the encryption algorithms.
- rtkwe 5y ago
  That's only true in digital systems. In bureaucracies it's easy to do, you just have someone approve exceptions based on unspecified rules and label non-compliant accounts as compliant or ignore their non-compliance. There's a recurrent meme in the tech world to try to treat the law and governments like rigid rule bound computers but they're not, it's a system composed of people and people bend rules every day.
9oliYQjP 5y ago
I used to think like this. But the older I get the more cynical I become. In massively corrupt environments, everybody needs to appear to be playing the game by the rules when it comes to primary objectives like the distribution of wealth and the financial operations surrounding it. Nobody trusts anyone else and everyone is an adversary of everyone else, even within the leadership ranks. I strongly suspect there would not be any widely known backdoor for oligarchs. A select few oligarchs might have the luck of being tasked with creating such a system, in which case they will build the backdoor for themselves. Still... I think the speculative scenario is unlikely. I myself am speculating massively here. But what I think is far more likely to happen with respect to crypto is that an international agreement akin to the Bretton Woods System is negotiated that mandates central banks hold a store of value such as Bitcoin. This will provide some foundation of measure for all currencies to be valued against. But the current financial system layer on top will remain intact. Note, I'm an early Bitcoin hodler and have remained strongly suspicious of Putin's interest in Ethereum with agreements between the foundation and VEB like this one (https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/08/31/misunderstanding-vitalik-buterin-to-create-new-entity-for-russian-bank-deal/ https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2017/08/31/misunderstanding...), its handling of the DAO event, and Eth2.0's coincidental timing (its delays too) with the Ukraine invasion. My somewhat speculative paranoia follows, but I strongly suspect Ethereum will NOT play a part in this new system because of the above issues. I think Putin calculated that Ethereum might be a viable alternative to a widespread financial system replacement that could have provided a means of bypassing any sanctions, which is why he went ahead with the Ukraine invasion. In the end, if this Bretton Woods 2.0 system comes into effect, bitcoin will have failed to become the libertarian financial tool many people hoped it would. But its utility as a store of value can't be ignored and so it will have been co-opted/integrated into the existing financial system. It'll be another example of techno-utopianism naiveté like the 90s style vision of the web.
- germinalphrase 5y ago
  Why do you assume Bitcoin will be the coin of choice rather than a “DigitalDollar” of their own creation? (Or are you just using it as a stand in for conversation?)

Aperocky 5y ago

Chinese oligarchs (Jack Ma?) might not want traceable money, but it's kind of obvious that's not up to them.

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
Does China even have Oligarchs? The Russian Oligarchs are named because (see Red Notice) - they weren't entrepreneurs. During Privitization, they colluded to buy companies for literally 100ths of a penny on the dollar. Chinese Oligarchs would be people that benefitted massively via corruption from privatizing state-owned companies.
- hkmaxpro 5y ago
  > Does China even have Oligarchs? Yes, a lot: https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/asia-buzz/article/2140667/its-now-open-season-big-crocs-why-xi-targets-chinas-particular https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/asia-buzz/article/2140667/its...
- ejanus 5y ago
  This is baseless. Owning a company and running it successfully for more than 2 decades show they are entrepreneurs. And why is everybody suddenly picking out on Oligarchs? When Putin dismantled one of them, the same West backed that Oligarch. Why is West suddenly labelling their wealth ill-gotten when they were well known quantities with massive assets across Europe for more than 2 decades and nobody raised eyebrow?
  - onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
    https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Oligarc https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Oligarc Seems they've been popular since the early 2000s - as far back as Google trends goes.
beaunative 5y ago
Jack Ma is very much a entrepreneur for what he's achieved. Oligarch carries to much negative connotation and should be referred to someone or a family who controls a crucial industry because of sheer monopoly.

throwaway4good 5y ago

SWIFT is traceable, that is why the US can unbank individuals abroad.