5 ms·

Somehow I'm not surprised that Mt. Gox was completely unlicensed as a "money transmitter", and that they denied involvement in such on their bank account questi

Somehow I'm not surprised that Mt. Gox was completely unlicensed as a "money transmitter", and that they denied involvement in such on their bank account questionnaire. For once this at least seems like a legitimate takedown.

ctdonath 13y ago
“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.” ― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged And when the evidence is presented in a stark, context-free, spin-managed manner, casual observers tend to agree with the charges. There was no question the feds would take an interest in Bitcoin with desire to take it down, and duly analyzed all paperwork from that perspective until they found an excuse to. Require enough paperwork, and somewhere a sufficient transgression will be found.
- ubernostrum 13y ago
  Yes, the government is the most evil thing in the history of evil, there is no such thing as a justified law, and this is just the parasites trying to leech off of and get power over the brilliant Galt-like geniuses whose intelligence was so inestimably massive that they apparently consciously filed a legal form that said "oh, that thing that we do and advertise that we do? Of course we don't do that".
  - javert 13y ago
    > Yes, the government is the most evil thing in the history of evil, there is no such thing as a justified law, I agree that the quote is overblown in this context, but your argument is a strawman. Ayn Rand made strong intellectual arguments in _support_ of government and the rule of law, in contrast to anarchists and various flavors of libertarians.
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    Yes, the government is the most evil thing in the history of evil Governments, in practice, do tend to be sources of substantial amounts of "evil" behavior. Probably the largest source, outside of religious institutions. So while your attempt at sarcasm is appreciated, it's pretty off base. there is no such thing as a justified law Nah, limit "law" to nothing more than a collective extension to our innate, individual right to self-defense[1], and you'd find very few arguments against it, even from radical libertarians. [1]: http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
    - rayiner 13y ago
      I can't understand how you trash religions institutions in one paragraph, then veer off into the utterly supernatural by talking about "innate" individual rights in the next.
      - mindcrime 13y ago
        I'm sorry you don't understand.
        javert 13y ago
        You might find the uncle of this comment to be interesting/relevant.
        mindcrime 13y ago
        That was overly snarky. I apologize, I guess I'm just in a pissy mood today for some reason.
- javert 13y ago
  The feds have not taken bitcoin down, and they don't even seem to be trying to at this point. Speaking as an Objectivist, the quote is becoming somewhat apt for the us financial industry, which is (and long has been) by far the most government-controlled industry. But its not yet apt for bitcoin in particular.
  - alan_cx 13y ago
    Isn't calling yourself an Objectivist, subjective?
    - javert 13y ago
      Why would it be?
    - sageikosa 13y ago
      I don't think javert being an Objectivist varies based on the observer.
- mindcrime 13y ago
  There was no question the feds would take an interest in Bitcoin with desire to take it down, and duly analyzed all paperwork from that perspective until they found an excuse to. Require enough paperwork, and somewhere a sufficient transgression will be found. BINGO. Give this man a cookie. This kind of thing was inevitable, and you'd have to be blind to think the US Government is OK with even the idea of an unregulated currency like Bitcoin... even though it's not actually "anonymous" in the sense that some people claim. The fact that, combined with Tor it can be used in a pretty-damn-close-to-anonymous manner, and that it could enable a completely separate side/underground economy if it ever become popular enough (even without the ability to convert in and out of USD) you have to figure the US Gov (and other world governments) are going to take efforts to hinder its adoption. Why? Because control of money == power. And governments don't like it when the little people take back a little bit of their power.
  - mrb 13y ago
    1) The US govt is ok with Bitcoin: the Department of Treasury's FinCEN published guidance tacitly approving Bitcoin. This legal action is purely about MtGox who unlawfully did not register as an MSB. 2) There is already a completely anonymous store-of-value allowing a underground economies: plain old face-to-face USD cash transactions. Ever seen drug lords busted with stacks of USD bills? 3) The US govt is ok with transactions in a currency they don't control: it is perfectly legal to pay, for example, in Iranian rial on the US territory, if the seller and buyer agree to use this currency. You seem to be some sort of tinfoil-kind-of-guy who thinks the government is out there to "stop Bitcoin".
    - mindcrime 13y ago
      The US govt is ok with Bitcoin: the Department of Treasury's FinCEN published guidance tacitly approving Bitcoin. This legal action is purely about MtGox who unlawfully did not register as an MSB. So you believe everything the government tells you? Because we all know that no government agency or agent has ever distorted or misrepresented the truth, ever. There is already a completely anonymous store-of-value allowing a underground economies: plain old face-to-face USD cash transactions. Ever seen drug lords busted with stacks of USD bills? True, but irrelevant in this context. Bitcoin and USD aren't the same thing. Try crossing the border carrying large sums of physical USD bills sometime. Bitcoins, OTOH, can be exchanged digitally. Not even close to being in the same ballpark. The US govt is ok with transactions in a currency they don't control: it is perfectly legal to pay, for example, in Iranian rial on the US territory, if the seller and buyer agree to use this currency. Again, this is irrelevant, as using Iranian rial is even less convenient than using USD, at least in the US. You seem to be some sort of tinfoil-kind-of-guy who thinks the government is out there to "stop Bitcoin". Please refrain from personal attacks, this is not Reddit. I trust our government about half as far as I can throw it, but that doesn't make me a "tinfoil guy". It makes me somebody who has at least a passing familiarity with history and who can use a little logic, reason and inference here and there. That's all. I'm not claiming there's some big, grand, X-Files like conspiracy going on here... but to ignore the fact that the US Government has many reasons to try to quietly put the screws to bitcoins seems unreasonable to me.
- betterunix 13y ago
  "There was no question the feds would take an interest in Bitcoin with desire to take it down" Perhaps, but the only reason that is relevant to attacking a Bitcoin exchange is if Bitcoin cannot survive without exchanges. I personally agree with that view, as everything I have seen suggests that no standalone Bitcoin economy is possible. On the other hand, a large number of people in the Bitcoin community disagree and seem to think that a Bitcoin economy can be bootstrapped. "Require enough paperwork, and somewhere a sufficient transgression will be found." The paperwork in this case was not very complicated; it plainly asks if the business transfers money at the request of its customers, and MtGox simply answered "no." It is not as though MtGox is being investigated for not filling out paperwork or for a bad answer to an ambiguous or confusing question. MtGox was already engaged in exchanging Bitcoin for USD and was already performing transfers of money for its customers when those forms were filled out. I agree with your general sentiment, but I seriously doubt that anyone in the government was sitting there saying, "Bitcoin is a threat, let's take it down! Start with this exchange!" More likely, some regulator somewhere saw that Bitcoin was becoming popular and said, "Let's make sure they are following the same laws that other financial companies are expected to follow." Those laws predate Bitcoin; they may have been set up to protect large banks from small competitors, or they may have been created to protect individual Americans from fraud and predatory companies, but that is an entirely separate issue.
kefka 13y ago
I would also expect the same treatment towards paypal. They are not licensed as a money transmitter in my state of Indiana, nor are they licensed in others. They also routinely hold funds past the 10 day statutory time allowed by most states they are licensed in.
- tzs 13y ago
  PayPal is licensed in Indiana. [1] [1] https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm
  - kefka 13y ago
    Well. I do stand corrected. My knowledge was a few months out of date, and I didn't check the license page for updates. However, that still does not invalidate my claim that paypal grossly violates money transmission acts by regularly holding money past most statue times.
- xxpor 13y ago
  Uhh, debatable. IN licence: https://www.paypal-media.com/assets/pdf/license/IN_MT_License_2013.pdf https://www.paypal-media.com/assets/pdf/license/IN_MT_Licens... The rest of them are here: https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm
MichaelGG 13y ago
If you use a loose definition of "legitimate" that includes all the laws the USG enacts, then sure. Most of these laws are just a way to increase seizures so the USG can continue to grow, raiding the population. Just so happens this particular one is federal, instead of local cops and DAs.
- scott_karana 13y ago
  Absolutely agreed: that's why I emphasized seems in my own comment.

ctdonath 13y ago

“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.” ― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged And when the evidence is presented in a stark, context-free, spin-managed manner, casual observers tend to agree with the charges. There was no question the feds would take an interest in Bitcoin with desire to take it down, and duly analyzed all paperwork from that perspective until they found an excuse to. Require enough paperwork, and somewhere a sufficient transgression will be found.

ubernostrum 13y ago
Yes, the government is the most evil thing in the history of evil, there is no such thing as a justified law, and this is just the parasites trying to leech off of and get power over the brilliant Galt-like geniuses whose intelligence was so inestimably massive that they apparently consciously filed a legal form that said "oh, that thing that we do and advertise that we do? Of course we don't do that".
- javert 13y ago
  > Yes, the government is the most evil thing in the history of evil, there is no such thing as a justified law, I agree that the quote is overblown in this context, but your argument is a strawman. Ayn Rand made strong intellectual arguments in _support_ of government and the rule of law, in contrast to anarchists and various flavors of libertarians.
- mindcrime 13y ago
  Yes, the government is the most evil thing in the history of evil Governments, in practice, do tend to be sources of substantial amounts of "evil" behavior. Probably the largest source, outside of religious institutions. So while your attempt at sarcasm is appreciated, it's pretty off base. there is no such thing as a justified law Nah, limit "law" to nothing more than a collective extension to our innate, individual right to self-defense[1], and you'd find very few arguments against it, even from radical libertarians. [1]: http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html
  - rayiner 13y ago
    I can't understand how you trash religions institutions in one paragraph, then veer off into the utterly supernatural by talking about "innate" individual rights in the next.
    - mindcrime 13y ago
      I'm sorry you don't understand.
      - javert 13y ago
        You might find the uncle of this comment to be interesting/relevant.
      - mindcrime 13y ago
        That was overly snarky. I apologize, I guess I'm just in a pissy mood today for some reason.
javert 13y ago
The feds have not taken bitcoin down, and they don't even seem to be trying to at this point. Speaking as an Objectivist, the quote is becoming somewhat apt for the us financial industry, which is (and long has been) by far the most government-controlled industry. But its not yet apt for bitcoin in particular.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  Isn't calling yourself an Objectivist, subjective?
  - javert 13y ago
    Why would it be?
  - sageikosa 13y ago
    I don't think javert being an Objectivist varies based on the observer.
mindcrime 13y ago
There was no question the feds would take an interest in Bitcoin with desire to take it down, and duly analyzed all paperwork from that perspective until they found an excuse to. Require enough paperwork, and somewhere a sufficient transgression will be found. BINGO. Give this man a cookie. This kind of thing was inevitable, and you'd have to be blind to think the US Government is OK with even the idea of an unregulated currency like Bitcoin... even though it's not actually "anonymous" in the sense that some people claim. The fact that, combined with Tor it can be used in a pretty-damn-close-to-anonymous manner, and that it could enable a completely separate side/underground economy if it ever become popular enough (even without the ability to convert in and out of USD) you have to figure the US Gov (and other world governments) are going to take efforts to hinder its adoption. Why? Because control of money == power. And governments don't like it when the little people take back a little bit of their power.
- mrb 13y ago
  1) The US govt is ok with Bitcoin: the Department of Treasury's FinCEN published guidance tacitly approving Bitcoin. This legal action is purely about MtGox who unlawfully did not register as an MSB. 2) There is already a completely anonymous store-of-value allowing a underground economies: plain old face-to-face USD cash transactions. Ever seen drug lords busted with stacks of USD bills? 3) The US govt is ok with transactions in a currency they don't control: it is perfectly legal to pay, for example, in Iranian rial on the US territory, if the seller and buyer agree to use this currency. You seem to be some sort of tinfoil-kind-of-guy who thinks the government is out there to "stop Bitcoin".
  - mindcrime 13y ago
    The US govt is ok with Bitcoin: the Department of Treasury's FinCEN published guidance tacitly approving Bitcoin. This legal action is purely about MtGox who unlawfully did not register as an MSB. So you believe everything the government tells you? Because we all know that no government agency or agent has ever distorted or misrepresented the truth, ever. There is already a completely anonymous store-of-value allowing a underground economies: plain old face-to-face USD cash transactions. Ever seen drug lords busted with stacks of USD bills? True, but irrelevant in this context. Bitcoin and USD aren't the same thing. Try crossing the border carrying large sums of physical USD bills sometime. Bitcoins, OTOH, can be exchanged digitally. Not even close to being in the same ballpark. The US govt is ok with transactions in a currency they don't control: it is perfectly legal to pay, for example, in Iranian rial on the US territory, if the seller and buyer agree to use this currency. Again, this is irrelevant, as using Iranian rial is even less convenient than using USD, at least in the US. You seem to be some sort of tinfoil-kind-of-guy who thinks the government is out there to "stop Bitcoin". Please refrain from personal attacks, this is not Reddit. I trust our government about half as far as I can throw it, but that doesn't make me a "tinfoil guy". It makes me somebody who has at least a passing familiarity with history and who can use a little logic, reason and inference here and there. That's all. I'm not claiming there's some big, grand, X-Files like conspiracy going on here... but to ignore the fact that the US Government has many reasons to try to quietly put the screws to bitcoins seems unreasonable to me.
betterunix 13y ago
"There was no question the feds would take an interest in Bitcoin with desire to take it down" Perhaps, but the only reason that is relevant to attacking a Bitcoin exchange is if Bitcoin cannot survive without exchanges. I personally agree with that view, as everything I have seen suggests that no standalone Bitcoin economy is possible. On the other hand, a large number of people in the Bitcoin community disagree and seem to think that a Bitcoin economy can be bootstrapped. "Require enough paperwork, and somewhere a sufficient transgression will be found." The paperwork in this case was not very complicated; it plainly asks if the business transfers money at the request of its customers, and MtGox simply answered "no." It is not as though MtGox is being investigated for not filling out paperwork or for a bad answer to an ambiguous or confusing question. MtGox was already engaged in exchanging Bitcoin for USD and was already performing transfers of money for its customers when those forms were filled out. I agree with your general sentiment, but I seriously doubt that anyone in the government was sitting there saying, "Bitcoin is a threat, let's take it down! Start with this exchange!" More likely, some regulator somewhere saw that Bitcoin was becoming popular and said, "Let's make sure they are following the same laws that other financial companies are expected to follow." Those laws predate Bitcoin; they may have been set up to protect large banks from small competitors, or they may have been created to protect individual Americans from fraud and predatory companies, but that is an entirely separate issue.

kefka 13y ago

I would also expect the same treatment towards paypal. They are not licensed as a money transmitter in my state of Indiana, nor are they licensed in others. They also routinely hold funds past the 10 day statutory time allowed by most states they are licensed in.

tzs 13y ago
PayPal is licensed in Indiana. [1] [1] https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm
- kefka 13y ago
  Well. I do stand corrected. My knowledge was a few months out of date, and I didn't check the license page for updates. However, that still does not invalidate my claim that paypal grossly violates money transmission acts by regularly holding money past most statue times.
xxpor 13y ago
Uhh, debatable. IN licence: https://www.paypal-media.com/assets/pdf/license/IN_MT_License_2013.pdf https://www.paypal-media.com/assets/pdf/license/IN_MT_Licens... The rest of them are here: https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm https://www.paypal-media.com/state_licenses.cfm

MichaelGG 13y ago

If you use a loose definition of "legitimate" that includes all the laws the USG enacts, then sure. Most of these laws are just a way to increase seizures so the USG can continue to grow, raiding the population. Just so happens this particular one is federal, instead of local cops and DAs.

scott_karana 13y ago
Absolutely agreed: that's why I emphasized seems in my own comment.