7 ms·

Preventing you from spying on and making rules about other people’s money is a legitimate purpose, and no amount of patriot act talking points and proposals for

Preventing you from spying on and making rules about other people’s money is a legitimate purpose, and no amount of patriot act talking points and proposals for the redistribution of consequences will change that.

colesantiago 3y ago
> Preventing you from spying on and making rules about other people’s money is a legitimate purpose Regulations will change this and you will be unable to cash out unless you identify yourself to KYC. cryptocurrency is not anonymous, it is pseudonymous so the privacy argument is completely moot. Also crypto is a pyramid scheme at best, a ponzi scheme at its worst.
- alphanullmeric 3y ago
  “It’s the law” is not an adequate justification of the law. My argument isn’t moot because your intention is to violate my privacy, regardless of how good you think I am at protecting it. Again, keep your hands off my things. No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams.
  - Melting_Harps 3y ago
    > No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams. The vocal detractor's hostility is only matched by the their ignorance and arrogance; they assume because they have no use for it that no else does either. Again, I've tried to win them with reason, and even put challenges in order for them to put their money where their mouths are; but they just shirk it and go on about disparaging it without any real substance. o be fair, I think 99% of crypto are scams, too; what they don't realize is that is often their cohort (SBF and al the VC money and SV might behind him) who do the most scamming.
    - colesantiago 3y ago
      > they assume because they have no use for it that no else does either. I'll go a step further: Crypto has no use case that hasn't been already solved by the current financial system and it is not private at all. In fact most users have dwindling and no confidence with crypto: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-of-americans-arent-confident-in-the-safety-and-reliability-of-cryptocurrency/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-... > Again, I've tried to win them with reason, and even put challenges in order for them to put their money where their mouths are; but they just shirk it and go on about disparaging it without any real substance. And where is the substance in the crypto industry? The answer is the sum of the amount of use cases they are trying to find. Zero.
    - tempera 3y ago
      You are trying to reason in good faith with someone who receives money to post. These are the narrative ninnies, who push a narrative on subjects like: war, surveillance, lockdowns, elections. Can't let forming opinion to chance, not here, not on reddit, not anywhere!
      - colesantiago 3y ago
        > You are trying to reason in good faith with someone who receives money to post. Source? or do you always keep making things up? Even if I was being paid to post, I would not use crypto to accept payment.
  - colesantiago 3y ago
    > My argument isn’t moot because your intention is to violate my privacy, We both know cryptocurrencies aren't private at all so it is moot point and a fool's errand to use crypto as a means for anonymous and private transactions > No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams. So companies and small businesses have voluntarily participated in crypto phishing and crypto ransomware scams? Why do you keep blaming victims and when are you going to stop?
    - alphanullmeric 3y ago
      I find it hilarious that you intentionally quote one half of a sentence knowing the other half would defeat the argument you make. No, and phishing and ransomware aren’t what you’re targeting. Since you intend on banning general usage of crypto, you need to prove I’m being scammed when I volunteer to run a set of instructions on my computer that are available for me to read. Which is an impossible task, because your response to my “I consent” is “No you don’t”.
      - colesantiago 3y ago
        > I find it hilarious that you intentionally quote one half of a sentence because the other half would defeat the argument you make. It wouldn't because the coming regulations will compel those exchanges working with crypto to force you to use KYC to cash out your cryptocurrencies, even your cold wallet isn't safe from this. Significant volatile prices and regular manipulative depeggings of stablecoins will force you to make a compromise to cash out to an exchange. All roads lead to KYC in either case. So yes your privacy point is well and completely useless. > No, and phishing and ransomware aren’t what you’re targeting. But you know that businesses are being targeted which defeats your ridiculous previous point on 'No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams.' You're also ignoring the truth that they aren't private, so my point still stands and you know it. Nobody accepts Monero, Bitcoin in the real world, so if you're serious about privacy you wouldn't use crypto. > Since you intend on banning general usage of crypto, you need to prove I’m being scammed when I volunteer to run a set of instructions on my computer that are available for me to read. Which is an impossible task, because your response to my “I consent” is “No you don’t”. This is complete nonsense, and won't hold in any court regardless of country. See my crypto ransomware argument that you keep ignoring.
  - timcavel 3y ago
    [dead]

colesantiago 3y ago

> Preventing you from spying on and making rules about other people’s money is a legitimate purpose Regulations will change this and you will be unable to cash out unless you identify yourself to KYC. cryptocurrency is not anonymous, it is pseudonymous so the privacy argument is completely moot. Also crypto is a pyramid scheme at best, a ponzi scheme at its worst.

alphanullmeric 3y ago
“It’s the law” is not an adequate justification of the law. My argument isn’t moot because your intention is to violate my privacy, regardless of how good you think I am at protecting it. Again, keep your hands off my things. No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams.
- Melting_Harps 3y ago
  > No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams. The vocal detractor's hostility is only matched by the their ignorance and arrogance; they assume because they have no use for it that no else does either. Again, I've tried to win them with reason, and even put challenges in order for them to put their money where their mouths are; but they just shirk it and go on about disparaging it without any real substance. o be fair, I think 99% of crypto are scams, too; what they don't realize is that is often their cohort (SBF and al the VC money and SV might behind him) who do the most scamming.
  - colesantiago 3y ago
    > they assume because they have no use for it that no else does either. I'll go a step further: Crypto has no use case that hasn't been already solved by the current financial system and it is not private at all. In fact most users have dwindling and no confidence with crypto: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-of-americans-arent-confident-in-the-safety-and-reliability-of-cryptocurrency/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2023/04/10/majority-... > Again, I've tried to win them with reason, and even put challenges in order for them to put their money where their mouths are; but they just shirk it and go on about disparaging it without any real substance. And where is the substance in the crypto industry? The answer is the sum of the amount of use cases they are trying to find. Zero.
  - tempera 3y ago
    You are trying to reason in good faith with someone who receives money to post. These are the narrative ninnies, who push a narrative on subjects like: war, surveillance, lockdowns, elections. Can't let forming opinion to chance, not here, not on reddit, not anywhere!
    - colesantiago 3y ago
      > You are trying to reason in good faith with someone who receives money to post. Source? or do you always keep making things up? Even if I was being paid to post, I would not use crypto to accept payment.
- colesantiago 3y ago
  > My argument isn’t moot because your intention is to violate my privacy, We both know cryptocurrencies aren't private at all so it is moot point and a fool's errand to use crypto as a means for anonymous and private transactions > No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams. So companies and small businesses have voluntarily participated in crypto phishing and crypto ransomware scams? Why do you keep blaming victims and when are you going to stop?
  - alphanullmeric 3y ago
    I find it hilarious that you intentionally quote one half of a sentence knowing the other half would defeat the argument you make. No, and phishing and ransomware aren’t what you’re targeting. Since you intend on banning general usage of crypto, you need to prove I’m being scammed when I volunteer to run a set of instructions on my computer that are available for me to read. Which is an impossible task, because your response to my “I consent” is “No you don’t”.
    - colesantiago 3y ago
      > I find it hilarious that you intentionally quote one half of a sentence because the other half would defeat the argument you make. It wouldn't because the coming regulations will compel those exchanges working with crypto to force you to use KYC to cash out your cryptocurrencies, even your cold wallet isn't safe from this. Significant volatile prices and regular manipulative depeggings of stablecoins will force you to make a compromise to cash out to an exchange. All roads lead to KYC in either case. So yes your privacy point is well and completely useless. > No, and phishing and ransomware aren’t what you’re targeting. But you know that businesses are being targeted which defeats your ridiculous previous point on 'No, things you voluntarily participate in aren’t scams.' You're also ignoring the truth that they aren't private, so my point still stands and you know it. Nobody accepts Monero, Bitcoin in the real world, so if you're serious about privacy you wouldn't use crypto. > Since you intend on banning general usage of crypto, you need to prove I’m being scammed when I volunteer to run a set of instructions on my computer that are available for me to read. Which is an impossible task, because your response to my “I consent” is “No you don’t”. This is complete nonsense, and won't hold in any court regardless of country. See my crypto ransomware argument that you keep ignoring.
- timcavel 3y ago
  [dead]