5 ms·

It is interesting that I have strictly no empathy for the people defending "privacy" in crypto. I have it fully for the ability to pay in cash for our every da

by Loic 4y ago

It is interesting that I have strictly no empathy for the people defending "privacy" in crypto. I have it fully for the ability to pay in cash for our every day stuff. Privacy in crypto is basically reallowing tax havens in the "digital" world where we spent years to try to curtain them in the "real" world. A good friend of us happens to be working at a high level at the EU commission. Discussing about Bitcoin/Crypto, his answer was simple: "We will ban all crypto as soon as we consider it to create problems with taxes". Coinbase would win the case, it would be one more step in the direction of a ban in the EU.

LtWorf 4y ago
If a ban in EU would make people in bars stop trying to convince me to buy in their favourite cryptocurrency, I'm all for it!
- highwaylights 4y ago
  A meteor strike directly on top of the bar wouldn’t stop this from happening.
nlitened 4y ago
> “We will ban all crypto as soon as we consider it to create problems with taxes” Surely you were not discussing those things with the Great Dictator of EU, not accountable in their decisions to citizens and courts?
- imtringued 4y ago
  The EU parliament has elections and the politicians you can vote for are your own elected national politicians... The only questionable thing here is that you cannot vote for politicians of other EU nations and that there is literally only one EU wide party called Volt.
  - frozencell 4y ago
    Genuine question. What do you know about the U.S. law and mode of operation?
jim_kreggis 4y ago
Having to use digital currency for everything with no privacy and complete government control is going to be amazing, you're right!
- Loic 4y ago
  If you read my comment, I explicitly said that we should keep cash.
  - jim_kreggis 4y ago
    And what are you going to do if governments get rid of it? You have no recourse, only privacy coins like monero offer some.
    - Loic 4y ago
      Your argument is a logical fallacy. You should not have knife at home, because you could kill somebody with one. <-> We should allow full privacy on crypto, because the government could kill cash.
      - jim_kreggis 4y ago
        My point is that it's pointless to be idealistic about how things should be, what matter is how they are. Why would a government which seeks to track its citizens every move keep cash around, when digital money suits their purposes better, and the vast majority of people pay using their phone or card anyway? When that happens, you have 0 way of transacting with anyone without the government watching over your shoulder.
    - yata69420 4y ago
      Cash is already effectively gone in a lot of situations.
  - hbbio 4y ago
    Already gone: There is a limit of 1000 euros for cash payment. Even an iPhone is out of the range now! https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10999#:~:text=Le%20paiement%20en%20esp%C3%A8ces%20d,un%20v%C3%A9hicule%20%C3%A0%20usage%20priv%C3%A9 https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10999#...). (French government source)
ssklash 4y ago
I think the point of this case is far less about privacy and crypto, but the fact that the US government sanctioned an entire piece of software. People use the software for privacy, and the government sanctioned it because it was being used for illegal things, but the fact that they can unilaterally sanction a piece of software is scary. Imagine if they sanctioned Tor Browser or Signal, both of which are used for privacy and can be used for illegal activity.
- Loic 4y ago
  The government has to balance stuff. Cash can and is used to buy/sell on the black market and also to buy/sell privately without leaving traces. But it is very difficult to move large amounts of money with cash. It means, it provides privacy with an acceptable level of freedom to do illegal stuff. Privacy in crypto enables the same but it also allows bad actors to move extreme large amounts of money. The risks for the government are here so big, they cannot accept it.
  - TimeBearingDown 4y ago
    I largely agree - to this comment, not your parent post - but the technology is here. Governments couldn’t accept citizens with easy access to strong encryption either, but they have had to make do ever since. Not all of the code can be sanctioned. The Monero project continues to mature, can be used as a “mixer” for other coins, and can be bought or sold using networks like Bisq.
- nl 4y ago
  > the fact that the US government sanctioned an entire piece of software. Well they sanctioned the use of that software. I don't really see why this is seen as such a problem. Banks that are used primarily for criminal activity get sanctioned frequently. It's pretty clear judging by the amount of money going though Tornado cash and the amount that was from publicly known hacks known to be flowing through it that the majority of the money was from illegal activity. > Imagine if they sanctioned Tor Browser or Signal, both of which are used for privacy and can be used for illegal activity. But they didn't. But forums that are focused on illegal activities get shutdown all the time.
shoulderfake 4y ago
rabite 4y ago
> reallowing tax havens in the "digital" world where we spent years to try to curtain them in the "real" world. Singapore and Hong Kong have all been tax havens for virtually the entire history of their existence as nations. Nevis has corporate secrecy protected as a right in its Constitution. There has been no attempt to address any of these jurisdictions. Being low empathy for crypto is being low empathy for the middle class, which thanks to RingCT and zk-Snarks has the ability to have the same level of financial privacy as megamillionaires who can afford to spend a thousand dollars or more setting up a trust in Nevis. Ten percent of all the world's wealth is run out of tax havens -- an amount that has gone up, not down, the opposite of curtains. Common people should be allowed the same level of financial privacy as the rich -- that is to say complete and total. It is a basic human right. If governments ban crypto, we should start banning governments.
rvz 4y ago
> A good friend of us happens to be working at a high level at the EU commission. Discussing about Bitcoin/Crypto, his answer was simple: "We will ban all crypto as soon as we consider it to create problems with taxes". 'Banning all crypto' is just as realistic as banning all use of end-to-end-encryption (E2EE) in apps, tools, etc because it allows criminals, terrorists and scammers to hide their communications for doing illegal activities. The fact is, a total 100% ban on either of them is an unrealistic and hopelessly utopian request beyond delusional.
miracle2k 4y ago
"ability to pay in cash for our every day stuff" is curiously weak. "The war on cash" has resulted in a great number of restrictions over the years, precisely because it is such an effective way to avoid taxes. What does your support for "privacy" mean here? Which rules do you support rolling back? Which of the coming further restrictions will you oppose?

by Loic 4y ago

LtWorf 4y ago

If a ban in EU would make people in bars stop trying to convince me to buy in their favourite cryptocurrency, I'm all for it!

highwaylights 4y ago
A meteor strike directly on top of the bar wouldn’t stop this from happening.

nlitened 4y ago

> “We will ban all crypto as soon as we consider it to create problems with taxes” Surely you were not discussing those things with the Great Dictator of EU, not accountable in their decisions to citizens and courts?

imtringued 4y ago
The EU parliament has elections and the politicians you can vote for are your own elected national politicians... The only questionable thing here is that you cannot vote for politicians of other EU nations and that there is literally only one EU wide party called Volt.
- frozencell 4y ago
  Genuine question. What do you know about the U.S. law and mode of operation?

jim_kreggis 4y ago

Having to use digital currency for everything with no privacy and complete government control is going to be amazing, you're right!

Loic 4y ago
If you read my comment, I explicitly said that we should keep cash.
- jim_kreggis 4y ago
  And what are you going to do if governments get rid of it? You have no recourse, only privacy coins like monero offer some.
  - Loic 4y ago
    Your argument is a logical fallacy. You should not have knife at home, because you could kill somebody with one. <-> We should allow full privacy on crypto, because the government could kill cash.
    - jim_kreggis 4y ago
      My point is that it's pointless to be idealistic about how things should be, what matter is how they are. Why would a government which seeks to track its citizens every move keep cash around, when digital money suits their purposes better, and the vast majority of people pay using their phone or card anyway? When that happens, you have 0 way of transacting with anyone without the government watching over your shoulder.
  - yata69420 4y ago
    Cash is already effectively gone in a lot of situations.
- hbbio 4y ago
  Already gone: There is a limit of 1000 euros for cash payment. Even an iPhone is out of the range now! https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10999#:~:text=Le%20paiement%20en%20esp%C3%A8ces%20d,un%20v%C3%A9hicule%20%C3%A0%20usage%20priv%C3%A9 https://www.service-public.fr/particuliers/vosdroits/F10999#...). (French government source)

ssklash 4y ago

I think the point of this case is far less about privacy and crypto, but the fact that the US government sanctioned an entire piece of software. People use the software for privacy, and the government sanctioned it because it was being used for illegal things, but the fact that they can unilaterally sanction a piece of software is scary. Imagine if they sanctioned Tor Browser or Signal, both of which are used for privacy and can be used for illegal activity.

Loic 4y ago
The government has to balance stuff. Cash can and is used to buy/sell on the black market and also to buy/sell privately without leaving traces. But it is very difficult to move large amounts of money with cash. It means, it provides privacy with an acceptable level of freedom to do illegal stuff. Privacy in crypto enables the same but it also allows bad actors to move extreme large amounts of money. The risks for the government are here so big, they cannot accept it.
- TimeBearingDown 4y ago
  I largely agree - to this comment, not your parent post - but the technology is here. Governments couldn’t accept citizens with easy access to strong encryption either, but they have had to make do ever since. Not all of the code can be sanctioned. The Monero project continues to mature, can be used as a “mixer” for other coins, and can be bought or sold using networks like Bisq.
nl 4y ago
> the fact that the US government sanctioned an entire piece of software. Well they sanctioned the use of that software. I don't really see why this is seen as such a problem. Banks that are used primarily for criminal activity get sanctioned frequently. It's pretty clear judging by the amount of money going though Tornado cash and the amount that was from publicly known hacks known to be flowing through it that the majority of the money was from illegal activity. > Imagine if they sanctioned Tor Browser or Signal, both of which are used for privacy and can be used for illegal activity. But they didn't. But forums that are focused on illegal activities get shutdown all the time.

shoulderfake 4y ago

rabite 4y ago

> reallowing tax havens in the "digital" world where we spent years to try to curtain them in the "real" world. Singapore and Hong Kong have all been tax havens for virtually the entire history of their existence as nations. Nevis has corporate secrecy protected as a right in its Constitution. There has been no attempt to address any of these jurisdictions. Being low empathy for crypto is being low empathy for the middle class, which thanks to RingCT and zk-Snarks has the ability to have the same level of financial privacy as megamillionaires who can afford to spend a thousand dollars or more setting up a trust in Nevis. Ten percent of all the world's wealth is run out of tax havens -- an amount that has gone up, not down, the opposite of curtains. Common people should be allowed the same level of financial privacy as the rich -- that is to say complete and total. It is a basic human right. If governments ban crypto, we should start banning governments.

rvz 4y ago

> A good friend of us happens to be working at a high level at the EU commission. Discussing about Bitcoin/Crypto, his answer was simple: "We will ban all crypto as soon as we consider it to create problems with taxes". 'Banning all crypto' is just as realistic as banning all use of end-to-end-encryption (E2EE) in apps, tools, etc because it allows criminals, terrorists and scammers to hide their communications for doing illegal activities. The fact is, a total 100% ban on either of them is an unrealistic and hopelessly utopian request beyond delusional.

miracle2k 4y ago

"ability to pay in cash for our every day stuff" is curiously weak. "The war on cash" has resulted in a great number of restrictions over the years, precisely because it is such an effective way to avoid taxes. What does your support for "privacy" mean here? Which rules do you support rolling back? Which of the coming further restrictions will you oppose?