3 ms·

Frankly, my moral and ethical code is quite different to what is legal. "State money transmission laws" belong to a set of legal rules that I don't care about

Frankly, my moral and ethical code is quite different to what is legal. "State money transmission laws" belong to a set of legal rules that I don't care about as long as nobody gets harmed (physically or w.r.t. his property). Also, one person being arrested doesn't imply that he has done something bad (unfortunately). These days there are even people that did something bad and wander freely the earth. Please base you story on immoral or unethical behavior and not on infringement of arbitrary laws. I have no problem with trusting your judgement but I do know that I don't trust your lawmaker.

fabulist 13y ago
I'm an avid anarchist, and no fan of the law, but do you not think its immoral for a company to misrepresent itself in order to get preferential treatment under the law? Doesn't that hurt us all by weakening the systems that (attempt to) keep organizations like CLI Holdings from running amok? As US taxpayers (forgive the presumption), don't court room shams like this expend our collective treasure? While I must confess that I do not fully understand the motives at play, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty, I'm struggling to find a reason for a profitable company to file for bankruptcy which isn't fraudulent.
- terranstyler 13y ago
  That looks fraudulent, no doubt! I just wanted to criticize that many of the arguments in the original article refer to activities like violating the "state money transmission laws" or "money laundering" and "suspicious transactions" (http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=5618295 http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=5618295)
vbuterin 13y ago
They're _a lobbying group_. They don't release educational materials, they don't write code, the main thing that they do is lobby. I too agree that Charlie Shrem is 100% morally innocent (with the exception of other alleged sins like borrowing a huge pile of btc and not paying it back), but the fact is that if you're going to have a lobbying group you should be damn well sure that everyone involved is squeaky clean.
- terranstyler 13y ago
  True. The problem for all of us could be that people often forget that "An idea is not responsible for the people that believe in it" (some "Don Marquis" said that)
- rjzzleep 13y ago
  > u should be damn well sure that everyone involved is squeaky clean. i don't think that's how it works, unless you mean clean of negative publicity. i really doubt most lobbying are clean, but you don't hear about them, because they act like the kings concubines.
- gibybo 13y ago
  They don't write code? Gavin Andresen is a founding member of the Bitcoin Foundation and the lead developer for the reference Bitcoin client. I'm pretty sure he also owns and operates Bitcoin.org, which has been the unofficial official homepage of Bitcoin for years.
  - vbuterin 13y ago
    Gavin doesn't operate bitcoin.org; that's another developer. You are right that the foundation does pay his salary, but the fact is that compared to its endowment and its legal expenses the portion of its money that goes out to developers is rather tiny.
- lotsofmangos 13y ago
  with the exception of other alleged sins like borrowing a huge pile of btc and not paying it back It isn't usually called borrowing when you don't give stuff back.
leobelle 13y ago
> Frankly, my moral and ethical code is quite different to what is legal. Just an aside. This may be an incriminating statement to make, especially without anonymity. I don't know what it is like in Europe, but I doubt an American lawyer would feel well knowing that a client has littered the internet with weapons a future prosecutor could find online with a simple Google search for your name. I'm not sure what the benefit is for revealing this attitude, even if you do feel strongly in this regard.
- terranstyler 13y ago
  I'd argue that "having a different code" does not at all entail any illegal action. People often have very different opinions (for example tax laws), yet they comply with the given law. But then again, taken out of context (the "no harm" part), an eager prosecutor could use it (successfully or not) so I suppose you are right. Just as a side note: This is not how it should be, and ironically and most unfortunately, your statement reinforces my original point :(

fabulist 13y ago

I'm an avid anarchist, and no fan of the law, but do you not think its immoral for a company to misrepresent itself in order to get preferential treatment under the law? Doesn't that hurt us all by weakening the systems that (attempt to) keep organizations like CLI Holdings from running amok? As US taxpayers (forgive the presumption), don't court room shams like this expend our collective treasure? While I must confess that I do not fully understand the motives at play, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty, I'm struggling to find a reason for a profitable company to file for bankruptcy which isn't fraudulent.

terranstyler 13y ago
That looks fraudulent, no doubt! I just wanted to criticize that many of the arguments in the original article refer to activities like violating the "state money transmission laws" or "money laundering" and "suspicious transactions" (http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=5618295 http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/index.html?id=5618295)

vbuterin 13y ago

They're _a lobbying group_. They don't release educational materials, they don't write code, the main thing that they do is lobby. I too agree that Charlie Shrem is 100% morally innocent (with the exception of other alleged sins like borrowing a huge pile of btc and not paying it back), but the fact is that if you're going to have a lobbying group you should be damn well sure that everyone involved is squeaky clean.

terranstyler 13y ago
True. The problem for all of us could be that people often forget that "An idea is not responsible for the people that believe in it" (some "Don Marquis" said that)
rjzzleep 13y ago
> u should be damn well sure that everyone involved is squeaky clean. i don't think that's how it works, unless you mean clean of negative publicity. i really doubt most lobbying are clean, but you don't hear about them, because they act like the kings concubines.
gibybo 13y ago
They don't write code? Gavin Andresen is a founding member of the Bitcoin Foundation and the lead developer for the reference Bitcoin client. I'm pretty sure he also owns and operates Bitcoin.org, which has been the unofficial official homepage of Bitcoin for years.
- vbuterin 13y ago
  Gavin doesn't operate bitcoin.org; that's another developer. You are right that the foundation does pay his salary, but the fact is that compared to its endowment and its legal expenses the portion of its money that goes out to developers is rather tiny.
lotsofmangos 13y ago
with the exception of other alleged sins like borrowing a huge pile of btc and not paying it back It isn't usually called borrowing when you don't give stuff back.

leobelle 13y ago

> Frankly, my moral and ethical code is quite different to what is legal. Just an aside. This may be an incriminating statement to make, especially without anonymity. I don't know what it is like in Europe, but I doubt an American lawyer would feel well knowing that a client has littered the internet with weapons a future prosecutor could find online with a simple Google search for your name. I'm not sure what the benefit is for revealing this attitude, even if you do feel strongly in this regard.

terranstyler 13y ago
I'd argue that "having a different code" does not at all entail any illegal action. People often have very different opinions (for example tax laws), yet they comply with the given law. But then again, taken out of context (the "no harm" part), an eager prosecutor could use it (successfully or not) so I suppose you are right. Just as a side note: This is not how it should be, and ironically and most unfortunately, your statement reinforces my original point :(