5 ms·

It's more akin to saying people shouldn't be able to provide banking services if they don't have sufficient KYC practices.

8note 4y ago
Is that a controversial statement? That tends to be a law on the books
- dpkirchner 4y ago
  It's weird that they're calling the feds lazy at the same time as they argue against the feds having data they need to enforce laws. It's also weird that the Treasury Department has such influence over crypto when it is supposed to be decentralized. The anger is clearly misplaced.
  - sam0x17 4y ago
    It is lazy. It is lazy to just stop people on the street who look "sketchy" instead of actually investigating crimes. That is the moral equivalent of our current financial system. We used to have the right to look sketchy but we pissed that away years ago.
TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago
What part of "trustless peer-to-peer electronic CASH", in Satoshi's Bitcoin whitepaper, did you not understand? There is no banking going on.
- dpkirchner 4y ago
  I'll make no apologies for imperfect analogies.
- amalcon 4y ago
  Wait, what? The inventor of Bitcoin said that it was cash? Well, that settles it then: nobody is allowed to disagree with an inventor about what their invention is or does. Sarcasm aside, I think Bitcoin functionally bears much more resemblance to a distributed bank than to distributed cash. It's not perfect resemblance, and there are people who disagree with me. Just saying that it's cash isn't sufficient evidence to convince me, even if the speaker happens to be the inventor.
  - mr_spothawk 4y ago
    > I think Bitcoin functionally bears much more resemblance to a distributed bank than to distributed cash. This is likely because you don't understand what a bank is, or that you don't understand what bitcoin is, or a combination. If you're interested in bank-like things that use bitcoin, you could learn more about fedimint. If you're interested in what bitcoin is, you could just read the white paper[0]. 0 - https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper
    - amalcon 4y ago
      Interesting how you think I don't know what a bank is, or what Bitcoin is. I know what Bitcoin is; I have read both the whitepaper and (more importantly) most of the code (at the time). I do concede that I have an incomplete understanding of what a bank is, since banks do a lot of different things. Adjusting the money supply and intermediating/securing transactions are both among the things that banks do. Those are the only things Bitcoin does, which is why I think Bitcoin more resembles a bank. Bitcoin can't facilitate offline transactions, which is the main thing cash does that banks don't. I've tried to look into Fedimint, just because I thought it would help me understand your misconceptions about banks. I will admit to not fully understanding what they are up to, but assuming my scam radar had a false positive it seems to be a privacy-oriented sidechain service. That... doesn't seem particularly relevant here?
      - mr_spothawk 4y ago
        Banks store money, right? Does bitcoin store money? Banks have accounts, right? Does bitcoin have accounts?
        amalcon 4y ago
        > Banks store money, right? Does bitcoin store money? You mean physically? Plenty of banks (especially online banks and investment banks) don't physically store any more cash than something like a jewelry store. Physical storage is hardly a core characteristic of banking; I've never been to a branch of any of my current banks. If you don't mean physically, I can't see how this is different than "have accounts"... > Banks have accounts, right? Does bitcoin have accounts? An account is just a ledger of credits and debits coupled with some form of access control. How is a bitcoin address meaningfully different from an account? Keep in mind that not all accounts are interest bearing, and it's very possible (even common) for one individual to have multiple accounts.
sam0x17 4y ago
Right. Fuck KYC. Just let people use money and actually solve crimes instead of just blocking transactions and infringing on people's privacy like crazy. Digital cash is still a pipe-dream because of this censorship/no-privacy/gov owns your money you don't mentality.

8note 4y ago

Is that a controversial statement? That tends to be a law on the books

dpkirchner 4y ago
It's weird that they're calling the feds lazy at the same time as they argue against the feds having data they need to enforce laws. It's also weird that the Treasury Department has such influence over crypto when it is supposed to be decentralized. The anger is clearly misplaced.
- sam0x17 4y ago
  It is lazy. It is lazy to just stop people on the street who look "sketchy" instead of actually investigating crimes. That is the moral equivalent of our current financial system. We used to have the right to look sketchy but we pissed that away years ago.

TEP_Kim_Il_Sung 4y ago

What part of "trustless peer-to-peer electronic CASH", in Satoshi's Bitcoin whitepaper, did you not understand? There is no banking going on.

dpkirchner 4y ago
I'll make no apologies for imperfect analogies.
amalcon 4y ago
Wait, what? The inventor of Bitcoin said that it was cash? Well, that settles it then: nobody is allowed to disagree with an inventor about what their invention is or does. Sarcasm aside, I think Bitcoin functionally bears much more resemblance to a distributed bank than to distributed cash. It's not perfect resemblance, and there are people who disagree with me. Just saying that it's cash isn't sufficient evidence to convince me, even if the speaker happens to be the inventor.
- mr_spothawk 4y ago
  > I think Bitcoin functionally bears much more resemblance to a distributed bank than to distributed cash. This is likely because you don't understand what a bank is, or that you don't understand what bitcoin is, or a combination. If you're interested in bank-like things that use bitcoin, you could learn more about fedimint. If you're interested in what bitcoin is, you could just read the white paper[0]. 0 - https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper https://bitcoin.org/en/bitcoin-paper
  - amalcon 4y ago
    Interesting how you think I don't know what a bank is, or what Bitcoin is. I know what Bitcoin is; I have read both the whitepaper and (more importantly) most of the code (at the time). I do concede that I have an incomplete understanding of what a bank is, since banks do a lot of different things. Adjusting the money supply and intermediating/securing transactions are both among the things that banks do. Those are the only things Bitcoin does, which is why I think Bitcoin more resembles a bank. Bitcoin can't facilitate offline transactions, which is the main thing cash does that banks don't. I've tried to look into Fedimint, just because I thought it would help me understand your misconceptions about banks. I will admit to not fully understanding what they are up to, but assuming my scam radar had a false positive it seems to be a privacy-oriented sidechain service. That... doesn't seem particularly relevant here?
    - mr_spothawk 4y ago
      Banks store money, right? Does bitcoin store money? Banks have accounts, right? Does bitcoin have accounts?
      - amalcon 4y ago
        > Banks store money, right? Does bitcoin store money? You mean physically? Plenty of banks (especially online banks and investment banks) don't physically store any more cash than something like a jewelry store. Physical storage is hardly a core characteristic of banking; I've never been to a branch of any of my current banks. If you don't mean physically, I can't see how this is different than "have accounts"... > Banks have accounts, right? Does bitcoin have accounts? An account is just a ledger of credits and debits coupled with some form of access control. How is a bitcoin address meaningfully different from an account? Keep in mind that not all accounts are interest bearing, and it's very possible (even common) for one individual to have multiple accounts.

sam0x17 4y ago

Right. Fuck KYC. Just let people use money and actually solve crimes instead of just blocking transactions and infringing on people's privacy like crazy. Digital cash is still a pipe-dream because of this censorship/no-privacy/gov owns your money you don't mentality.