12 ms·

If the international law enforcement community is really trying to go after "all cryptographers" why do you think we haven't seen more arrests? Why do you think

• tgflynn 4y ago
  It could be the first of many. Up until yesterday we lived in a world (by which I mean the Western World) where no one had ever been arrested just for writing open source code. It appears that this is no longer the case. This is how the Overton window gets moved, one step at a time, not in huge leaps. And clearly there are powerful forces interested in moving it in a direction that would likely be detrimental to many of us here.
  • chii 4y ago
    > where no one had ever been arrested just for writing open source code. But was he arrested for _just_ the code he wrote? Or more, and the code was just an ancillary property of the person being arrested?
  • clucas 4y ago
    How do you know that this guy was arrested "just for writing open source code?" The whole point of my comment was that he was probably arrested for more than that... Or at least, we should wait to see what the evidence against the guy is. If you go around saying "the sky is falling! they're coming for the developers!" then it turns out the guy was actually doing bad stuff to help launder money, you're going to make it that much harder to get people's attention when there is an actual abuse of police power.
    • tgflynn 4y ago
      > How do you know that this guy was arrested "just for writing open source code?" I don't know that, but that currently appears to be the case and I have yet to see any evidence to the contrary. EDIT: The title of the page is "Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash". So they are certainly making it appear that they consider having developed Tornado Cash to itself be worthy of arrest.
      • InitialLastName 4y ago
        The article doesn't actually say he was arrested for being the developer of Tornado Cash. It might be trying to imply that (or offer an explanation of what the connection is between the arrest and the investigation into Tornado Cash). All the article asserts is that he is suspected to be the developer of Tornado Cash, and that he was arrested "[under suspicion] of involvement in concealing criminal financial flows and facilitating money laundering" via Tornado Cash. That could (and likely does) mean that he was involved in far more than just development.
• dcolkitt 4y ago
  > If the international law enforcement community is really trying to go after "all cryptographers" why do you think we haven't seen more arrests? Why do you think they only arrested this guy? Because the standard playbook for "cracking down" is to first win cases against the least sympathetic, most prosecutable targets. Once that's under your belt, you gradually expand outwards to increasingly ordinary people. It's why slippery slope is such a big deal in civil liberties and constitutional law. When drug prohibition started, they started by arresting kingpin gangstas not students with dime bags. As abortion laws restart, states won't begin by arresting anyone who's ever donated to Planned Parenthood. But if left unchecked, some will eventually get there.
  • chitowneats 4y ago
    "Some will ... arrest anyone who's ever donated to Planned Parenthood" This is a hysterical prediction.
    • f38zf5vdt 4y ago
      Various states already prohibit using public money to fund abortions, a prohibition on private funds for an act they consider extremely illegal and equivalent to murder is not a stretch. "12 states prohibit state family planning funds from going to any entity that provides abortions." https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-family-planning-funding-restrictions https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy/explore/state-family...
      • chitowneats 4y ago
        And you believe it will be legal for them to arrest you for donations you made before those laws were in place? That's assuming you're correct they would try to ban private funds. A big assumption.
        • f38zf5vdt 4y ago
          IANAL. No, ex post facto laws aren't legal. If the state law says so, yes, you could get an out-of-state charge for providing financial aid to an abortion operation after contributing to an organization that funds them. With Roe v Wade gone, I am not sure there is a federal precedent for how to handle crimes relating to committing a murder in one state that is not considered a murder in another state.
• formerly_proven 4y ago
  > It would be like... if two dozen people were picketing outside of a big corporation, and the police came and arrested one dude. You would be the guy saying "they're coming for the protesters!" and I'm the guy saying "Well, if they're really after protesters why didn't they arrest all of them? And isn't that the guy they were investigating for a bank robbery?" Weird take because taking one or a few persons out of a large crowd is a standard LE tactic for attacking protests and similar stuff.
  • clucas 4y ago
    OK, fine, change the example to... imagine there are a hundred restaurants in town, and the police come and arrest one restaurant owner. OP is the guy saying "they're coming for the restaurant owners!" and I'm the guy saying "Well..." etc. My point is, there are a lot of people on HN who seem to think any arrest or prosecution of anyone who is involved in crypto is due to a shadowy push by the establishment to maintain control of the money supply and thus our lives. I'm trying to point out (1) there are simpler explanations, and (2) if you keep trying to defend everyone involved in crypto without knowing the facts, you're going to get burned and normies are going to be a lot more skeptical about crypto in the future. Just... be careful, guys.
• bufferoverflow 4y ago
  That's a straw man argument. They don't have to arrest all to scare most into doing what they want them to do.
• kazinator 4y ago
  > Why do you think they only arrested this guy? Because he was working on something specialized, where he was in effect a supplier to a single customer. Thus, he's turned into a ready scapegoat. You can't easily scapegoat someone if their pieces of code (or ideas) are also used, say, in every browser for securing connections, or whatever. If you're closer than arm's length from some people who are engaging in criminal activity, an in particular doing exclusive work for them, you are prosecutable.
• photochemsyn 4y ago
  The 'compare and contrast' case is that of not a single HSBC employee or executive being arrested for helping the Sinaloa drug cartel launder over $2 billion in profits. > "Across the world, HSBC likes to sell itself as ‘the world’s local bank,’ the friendly face of corporate and personal finance. And yet, a decade ago, the same bank was hit with a record U.S. fine of $1.9 billion for facilitating money laundering for ‘drug kingpins and rogue nations.’" https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61349754-too-big-to-jail https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/61349754-too-big-to-jail
• gfodor 4y ago
  > think a simpler explanation is that they have good reasons to believe that this guy was doing more than just the stuff you're trying to defend This isn't a simpler explanation than the even simpler one that goverments have decided that cracking down on crypto is a good idea for a wide variety of reasons, and are executing on this decision. The way governments do this kind of thing is by starting to prosecute people who they think they have the best chance of willing a case against. This doesn't mean the case, ultimately, has merit, just that they've decided it's the most likely success.
• Kiro 4y ago
  No hacker should support this. Period. Don't let your hate for crypto blind you.
• game-of-throws 4y ago
  If that were true, it would be so easy for them to swing public opinion in their favor by saying so. Headline: Arrest of developer with suspected ties to North Korean money laundering Body: He has also previously contributed to Tornado Cash. But all we know is what they decided to tell us... he's a developer of privacy tech. If the facts change, I'll change my mind.
  • Someone 4y ago
    Did you read the article? It starts: “On Wednesday 10 August, the FIOD arrested a 29-year-old man in Amsterdam. He is suspected of involvement in concealing criminal financial flows and facilitating money laundering through the mixing of cryptocurrencies through the decentralised Ethereum mixing service Tornado Cash” So the suspicion is that he didn’t only develop the tool, but was involved in its illegal use, too.
  • afavour 4y ago
    Usually when there’s an ongoing investigation the default is for police to not release too much information to avoid jeopardising the investigation, then release all the info when the investigation is complete. It’s frustrating and often a principle that’s applied too broadly, but I do understand the reasoning behind it.
    • game-of-throws 4y ago
      I agree they usually withhold details of the case. But I don't think they would flat-out lie about the charges being brought.
      • dragonwriter 4y ago
        > I agree they usually withhold details of the case. But I don't think they would flat-out lie about the charges being brought. “With suspected ties to X“ isn't necessarily an element of the charges being brought. And the police can and do lie (or state “suspicion” on a very flimsy basis) when making public announcements related to arrests, and headlines often credulously repeat police spin rather than being grounded in facts. While this tends to get the most attention (and still then not enough for the press to change) around police spin and media coverage related to police shootings, it is true far beyond that.
• junofan 4y ago
  One fact is that it’s Dutch law enforcement, not international law enforcement. A second fact is that Dutch law enforcement have stated “multiple arrests are not ruled out,” so we’re not talking about “just one guy” anymore. Finally, I’m not optimizing for credibility when stating my opinion, nor am I defending a single person. I do not think arresting developers is an effective solution for preventing money laundering. It matters not to me who the “bad people” may be.
  • BTCOG 4y ago
    Sorry, but this is nonsense. This was strictly done because of US pressure and sanction. Netherlands would have done nothing and likely the US did the logging and tracing of this individual.
    • petre 4y ago
      We'll see if he gets extradited to the US.
  • plgonzalezrx8 4y ago
    > we’re not talking about “just one guy” anymore. Bad people can also work in groups. > I do not think arresting developers is an effective solution for preventing money laundering. You're essentially reducing his role to "Just a developer" while ignoring that he might be a lot more than just a developer and might be involved with actual money laundering at many different stages of the process other than "Just writing a little bit of code". Im not defending one side or the other, just pointing out that by ignoring everything else and calling him "Just a developer" you're not being objective.