3 ms·

That should be dealt with by the justice system, not some corporations.

throwaway290 4y ago
Payment processors saw the writing on the wall. The reason they did what they did and PH made a 180 and disposed of incriminating content all in one month is because justice system has teeth and they did not want to find themselves liable. And justice system has teeth because PH is a proper company participating in a financial system. Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin
- miracle2k 4y ago
  There is no reason for payment processors to be liable. If you have a problem with Bitcoin, you need to support a general, unrestricted right be all persons and orgs to be served by the financial system, except maybe for a narrow and limited set of injunctions through the courts. No other position is cohesive.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    Sorry, I do not support your right to be serviced by financial system if it supports your wrongdoing. Your freedom stops where mine begins. My position seems pretty cohesive to me. If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. This is a human problem and won't be solved with tech. (And again, it was pretty clear to anyone that there was wrongdoing in this case and PH was going to get sued. I do think it should have been sued anyway, that it was not may have to do with victims not willing to come forward given sensitive nature of the crime, general disinclination of people to deal with dirt, or a good content cleanup job.)
    - miracle2k 4y ago
      > If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. So - if I have to fear being being shutoff from the financial system by private actors who dislike me, despite not having been convicted of a crime, a law to ensure my right to be served.
      - throwaway290 4y ago
        What private individual was blocked by MasterCard? Private actors significant enough don't care about you enough to not deal with you unless dealing you puts them in legal jeopardy. At which point you might want to ask yourself why.
- acdha 4y ago
  > Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin Interesting choice of examples: the FBI found bitcoin to be very helpful in exactly that context since it gave hard evidence linking criminals together. https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-video-crypto-anonymity-myth/ https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-v... This idea that police agencies haven’t figured out how to talk with their colleagues in other countries is oddly anachronistic given that we have examples going back to before the turn of the previous century.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    It is helpful with those who don't use mixers, like the article says. I'm sure criminals not smart enough to use mixers are not the ones making the real money.

Payment processors saw the writing on the wall. The reason they did what they did and PH made a 180 and disposed of incriminating content all in one month is because justice system has teeth and they did not want to find themselves liable. And justice system has teeth because PH is a proper company participating in a financial system. Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin

miracle2k 4y ago
There is no reason for payment processors to be liable. If you have a problem with Bitcoin, you need to support a general, unrestricted right be all persons and orgs to be served by the financial system, except maybe for a narrow and limited set of injunctions through the courts. No other position is cohesive.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  Sorry, I do not support your right to be serviced by financial system if it supports your wrongdoing. Your freedom stops where mine begins. My position seems pretty cohesive to me. If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. This is a human problem and won't be solved with tech. (And again, it was pretty clear to anyone that there was wrongdoing in this case and PH was going to get sued. I do think it should have been sued anyway, that it was not may have to do with victims not willing to come forward given sensitive nature of the crime, general disinclination of people to deal with dirt, or a good content cleanup job.)
  - miracle2k 4y ago
    > If you do not do evil, then you have nothing to fear. If you have something to fear despite doing no evil, let's fix the government. So - if I have to fear being being shutoff from the financial system by private actors who dislike me, despite not having been convicted of a crime, a law to ensure my right to be served.
    - throwaway290 4y ago
      What private individual was blocked by MasterCard? Private actors significant enough don't care about you enough to not deal with you unless dealing you puts them in legal jeopardy. At which point you might want to ask yourself why.
acdha 4y ago
> Good luck stopping a criminal in another country profiting from crime by accepting bitcoin Interesting choice of examples: the FBI found bitcoin to be very helpful in exactly that context since it gave hard evidence linking criminals together. https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-video-crypto-anonymity-myth/ https://www.wired.com/story/tracers-in-the-dark-welcome-to-v... This idea that police agencies haven’t figured out how to talk with their colleagues in other countries is oddly anachronistic given that we have examples going back to before the turn of the previous century.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  It is helpful with those who don't use mixers, like the article says. I'm sure criminals not smart enough to use mixers are not the ones making the real money.