5 ms·

If my understanding is true, then bitcoin isn't really relevant here. They could have been selling hand written money tokens to people that they then used to pa

by jbb555 13y ago

If my understanding is true, then bitcoin isn't really relevant here. They could have been selling hand written money tokens to people that they then used to pay their drug dealer with. The allegations are about intent and money laundering. If this is all as presented, this is good for bitcoin. The fact that a criminal has been caught is good. The fact that they were using bitcoin to commit their crime makes it doubly good they were arrested as it reflects badly on the community.

dragonwriter 13y ago
> If my understanding is true, then bitcoin isn't really relevant here. They could have been selling hand written money tokens to people that they then used to pay their drug dealer with. The allegations are about intent and money laundering. Exactly. > If this is all as presented, this is good for bitcoin. Perhaps, but to the extent that the value of bitcoin is supported by people buying it based on (a) the perception that they can use it in can't-get-caught criminal schemes, or (b) the perception that other people will buy it for that reason, then events like this (and them being reported widely in the media) are bad for bitcoin (value). It's good for mainstream adoption if it is perceived as cleaning the criminals out of the ecosystem more than as a sign that the ecosystem is infested with criminals.
- maaku 13y ago
  > Perhaps, but to the extent that the value of bitcoin is supported by people buying it based on (a) the perception that they can use it in can't-get-caught criminal schemes, or (b) the perception that other people will buy it for that reason, then events like this (and them being reported widely in the media) are bad for bitcoin (value). I would rather such people left the Bitcoin community. IMHO that would increase the value of bitcoin, even if it means a dip in the price.
venomsnake 13y ago
It is also good for bitcoin because suddenly the government admits by its actions that it is indeed a currency.
- jerf 13y ago
  There's never been any question about whether the government will see it as a currency for the purposes of buying drugs, or avoiding taxes, or anything else it perceives to be you using BitCoin to avoid its laws. There's oodles and oodles of precedent on that front, not least of which is the fact you still must pay taxes on barter transactions, for instance, in which there is definitely no "currency" involved on either side. The question is whether it will ever see it as something that, in addition to being bad, is also at least neutral or potentially good as well. Or, put another way, when the government finds out you used BitCoin for something, is it going to see that as as neutral as using an Amazon giftcard, or is that going to be a presumption that there's something else shady going on? Perhaps even to the point of considering that fact alone sufficient to start issuing warrants?
  - krapp 13y ago
    Did you watch the recent Senate hearing on cryptocurrencies? They seem to have already admitted that there are legitimate uses for Bitcoin, etc. I think businesses in general are more scared of it than the government is.
    - jerf 13y ago
      The Federal government is a big thing. A couple of Senators orally agreeing BitCoin might be useful isn't much consolation if the law enforcement branch decides to start treating it as de facto evidence of drug involvement. (To be clear, I'm not "rooting" for the government to find it that way... I'm just trying to look clearly at the situation and not conflate desires with reality.)
      - krapp 13y ago
        I'm not saying that would be impossible, but I just don't see the evidence as clearly-cut as others appear to. There's a 'desire' among some in the cryptocurrency community to see themselves on the front lines of a war against the state and regulated commerce as well.
- 13y ago

by jbb555 13y ago

dragonwriter 13y ago

> If my understanding is true, then bitcoin isn't really relevant here. They could have been selling hand written money tokens to people that they then used to pay their drug dealer with. The allegations are about intent and money laundering. Exactly. > If this is all as presented, this is good for bitcoin. Perhaps, but to the extent that the value of bitcoin is supported by people buying it based on (a) the perception that they can use it in can't-get-caught criminal schemes, or (b) the perception that other people will buy it for that reason, then events like this (and them being reported widely in the media) are bad for bitcoin (value). It's good for mainstream adoption if it is perceived as cleaning the criminals out of the ecosystem more than as a sign that the ecosystem is infested with criminals.

maaku 13y ago
> Perhaps, but to the extent that the value of bitcoin is supported by people buying it based on (a) the perception that they can use it in can't-get-caught criminal schemes, or (b) the perception that other people will buy it for that reason, then events like this (and them being reported widely in the media) are bad for bitcoin (value). I would rather such people left the Bitcoin community. IMHO that would increase the value of bitcoin, even if it means a dip in the price.

venomsnake 13y ago

It is also good for bitcoin because suddenly the government admits by its actions that it is indeed a currency.

jerf 13y ago
There's never been any question about whether the government will see it as a currency for the purposes of buying drugs, or avoiding taxes, or anything else it perceives to be you using BitCoin to avoid its laws. There's oodles and oodles of precedent on that front, not least of which is the fact you still must pay taxes on barter transactions, for instance, in which there is definitely no "currency" involved on either side. The question is whether it will ever see it as something that, in addition to being bad, is also at least neutral or potentially good as well. Or, put another way, when the government finds out you used BitCoin for something, is it going to see that as as neutral as using an Amazon giftcard, or is that going to be a presumption that there's something else shady going on? Perhaps even to the point of considering that fact alone sufficient to start issuing warrants?
- krapp 13y ago
  Did you watch the recent Senate hearing on cryptocurrencies? They seem to have already admitted that there are legitimate uses for Bitcoin, etc. I think businesses in general are more scared of it than the government is.
  - jerf 13y ago
    The Federal government is a big thing. A couple of Senators orally agreeing BitCoin might be useful isn't much consolation if the law enforcement branch decides to start treating it as de facto evidence of drug involvement. (To be clear, I'm not "rooting" for the government to find it that way... I'm just trying to look clearly at the situation and not conflate desires with reality.)
    - krapp 13y ago
      I'm not saying that would be impossible, but I just don't see the evidence as clearly-cut as others appear to. There's a 'desire' among some in the cryptocurrency community to see themselves on the front lines of a war against the state and regulated commerce as well.
13y ago