I wonder if the Mt Gox parties et al who were robbed will be refunded their bitcoin, since there is a ledger, or if the government will just keep everything. How could a refund be accomplished anyway? Would one need proof of owning a wallet that was emptied?
Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
61–70 of 142 posts
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#62This is what I never understood about bitcoins's reputation, especially earlier on, about its supposed anonymity. I suppose that's much less the case now. But it always seemed odd that people considered it at all anonymous when the blockchain kept a record of everything. Sure it might not be immediately identifiable with a specific individual, but unless it was a wholly closed system, entry & exit points would always…
When all the exchanges have KYC then it will be hard to hide from the law with Bitcoin. For example you buy $1000 of bitcoin on localbitcoins. But that guy is just a trader who buys them from an exchange. You do something nefarious with the BTC and they trace it back to an exchange transaction, to the seller who gives you up.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very bizarre to state the obvious use cases, then nullify it with handwaving. The current cost to move $10m of bitcoin across international borders is about $1. Attempt the same via conventional means and you'll quickly realise it's benefits go beyond monetary efficiency. As for current working use cases Factom[0] stores an auditable timestamped data trail in a merkle tree structure, which is then anchored into the b…
And, yet, it cost me eight bucks to move a few hundred bucks from Coinbase BTC into USD. Also, are BTC transaction fees really that low ($1 for a 10m transaction)? I've been hearing complaints for a while now about how long it takes to process minimum fee transactions. I don't have any experience with it, as I haven't messed around with BTC in a few years, but, it's definitely part of the argument for the changes hap…
There was a spam campaign for the last 9 months from the pro-centralization camp to drive fees up to fit their narrative that we needed centralization (bigger blocks). But that stopped when segwit became clear it would lock in, and not free transactions are clearing.
In the past several weeks I've done transactions for less than a dollar that cleared in the next block. (the cost is more to do with size than the amount of money-- $1m in a single address costs a lot less than $1m in 1M addresses)
Unfortunately due to the lingering effects of the spam attack, some fee estimation software is way off.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#64Aside from theft - of which the only evidence is money passing through the wallet of people associated with him - it seems that no crime was committed. Another attack on Bitcoin, and the war on drugs continues to kill more than the drugs themselves.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is basically money laundering, right?
It's privacy. Money laundering is a fake crime and propaganda by governments with prosecutors unable to find real crime. It's as bad as calling copyright infringement "theft" or even "piracy", though the later term has been pretty watered down. Or how banks push the idea of "Identity theft" as if someone stole your identity versus the bank failing to verify your identity. We don't call encryption "information launder…
The real crime is tax evasion.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#66> The language in the indictment about BTC-e’s “criminal design” mimics the indictment against Liberty Reserve — an anonymous currency service taken down by law enforcement in 2013 — which also accused the online exchange of having a “criminal design” and a system “designed so that criminals could effect financial transactions under multiple layers of anonymity.” Basing the indictment on the intent of the design - so…
The money laundering statutes are so broad that you are a felon under them if you take money out of your savings and put it in your checking in order to make your credit card payment one month. Even if all three are at the same bank and none of the money is the result of a criminal activity.
Citation?
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#67What about ordinary people who had money/bitcoins/other cryptocurrency on btc-e? What will happen with money in btc-e's wallets?
It sounds like the US just got control of the domain, not the server(s).
Some reports that their other domain may still be up (btc-e.nz), but it just hangs for me.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#68> There are many legitimate uses of Bitcoin What are those. I have claimed here and will repeatedly do so -- there are none. I mean, sure, there are a few companies which integrate the sell-your-bitcoins-buy-our-product in one go but the volume of that is near irrelevant. And no, international transfers do not count as a usage because not only the sender needs to buy bitcoins the seller needs to sell them too...
Very bizarre to state the obvious use cases, then nullify it with handwaving. The current cost to move $10m of bitcoin across international borders is about $1. Attempt the same via conventional means and you'll quickly realise it's benefits go beyond monetary efficiency. As for current working use cases Factom[0] stores an auditable timestamped data trail in a merkle tree structure, which is then anchored into the b…
I bet Morgan Stanley can move their $10M pretty cheaply already.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the legal status for moving $10m across international borders like that?
You don't, as a rich person, want to have all your assets in a single jurisdiction. You want to spread them as far as possible, for multiple reasons, and for this you need a cheap transfer way: - resilience against political "changes" (esp. China, Russia); money that is under foreign, unaffiliated regulatory regime cannot be seized by authorities at home - taxes: you want to secure your cash/assets from sudden taxes…
Rich people who want to move $Ne+6 around without using a bank is an important and common use case.
Re: Why the feds took down one of Bitcoin’s largest exchanges
#70> There are many legitimate uses of Bitcoin What are those. I have claimed here and will repeatedly do so -- there are none. I mean, sure, there are a few companies which integrate the sell-your-bitcoins-buy-our-product in one go but the volume of that is near irrelevant. And no, international transfers do not count as a usage because not only the sender needs to buy bitcoins the seller needs to sell them too...
You mean, what are legitimate uses for decentralized internet cash? Besides everything that physical cash is good for, plus many more uses made possible because you can send money without exchanging physical tokens? Come on...
Physical cash is great for tax evasion and criminal activity.