Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 369 posts

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#261

Post by doggosphere »

ddingus wrote: post #247
doggosphere wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, so going back to our original discussion: How does the prosecution prove my intent to circumvent compliance orders? How do they prove that I moved the coins, or prove that I ordered the moving of the coins? Without evidence, this is quite impossible.

The coins moved. That doesn't just happen. There will be more orders. Who had access to the wallet, etc... Wiretaps, observation, all of it is part of the game now. In short, investigation will continue, as well all available means and methods applied to better understand who moved the coins and why they were moved. That is likely to be an expensive, potentially freedom limiting, time. Being unable to prove it NOW do…

Yes, evading the law would be work. But none of these options are possible if it was an account in a bank.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#262

Post by ddingus »

doggosphere wrote: post #259
ddingus wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In that scenario, the coins ended up somewhere other than where the court ordered. That didn't just happen. Someone intended it to happen. Investigations and all available means will be used to obtain the coins. That could continue for the remainder of time all involved have here.

Yes. I'm not a lawyer, but this is now an issue outside the purveyance of the original court order to decrypt. It requires new charges to be laid, evidence to be provided, and due process in reasonable time. My point was the hard physics of it: the assets can be moved, and proving who moved it is very difficult.

That order is very likely part of a greater matter, and that will likely remain unchanged, IMHO.

Others, myself included, totally recognize the physics. That doesn't change the law much, just how it's enforced.

Should all that prove ineffective, as in justice is not served, we can all look forward to new and innovative law too.

In the end, we've got the basic human control issues in play.

The basic human remedies will also remain in play.

Prime example being it's quite possible to make life a real living hell for people, if nothing else. It's also possible to make that all being worth it very difficult to actualize.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#263

Post by ddingus »

doggosphere wrote: post #261
ddingus wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The coins moved. That doesn't just happen. There will be more orders. Who had access to the wallet, etc... Wiretaps, observation, all of it is part of the game now. In short, investigation will continue, as well all available means and methods applied to better understand who moved the coins and why they were moved. That is likely to be an expensive, potentially freedom limiting, time. Being unable to prove it NOW do…

Yes, evading the law would be work. But none of these options are possible if it was an account in a bank.

It does work very similar to valuable assets stored somewhere though, and the law as well as other means and methods are long established.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#264

Post by breakfastduck »

vmception wrote: post #258
jariel wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Have a stash that people dont know about," ... is probably illegal in almost every known reasonable country because it usually amounts to tax evasion. So I'm not sure about this meme of "mega millionaires hiding their money is 'bad' if they identify as 'CEOs' but 'maybe good' if they identify as 'hackers'".

do it with money you already paid tax on lol. so so many options

This is actually a good point. The government know you've been paid it and you've paid tax but that doesn't mean you can't rightfully hide the rest of the money away somewhere.

They don't know if you spent the rest of it immediately or kept it if you never put it into a domestic bank.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#265

Post by panarky »

gamblor956 wrote: post #109
curiousllama wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it sounds silly but it’s legit. Tons of stories of people driving out to buy a car, getting pulled over, having $10k seized without being charged with a crime, and then having to sue to get it back under a presumption of guilt. Bitcoin is harder to seize under civil asset forfeiture. ETA: in the US. Not sure about other countries.

Or they could have just used a bank account. More people have lost money to Bitcoin scams and exchange fraud (see e.g. Mt Gox) than have lost their money to civil forfeiture. Depending on the price of Bitcoin, but (based on the current price of Bitcoin) more $$$ has been lost to crypto fraud as well.

This thread compares holding your wealth with a third party (such as in a bank) with holding your wealth yourself (such as in Bitcoin).

Your example isn't about Bitcoin, it's about third parties.

Far more $$$ has been lost to third parties than to Bitcoin.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#266

Post by jariel »

vmception wrote: post #258
jariel wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Have a stash that people dont know about," ... is probably illegal in almost every known reasonable country because it usually amounts to tax evasion. So I'm not sure about this meme of "mega millionaires hiding their money is 'bad' if they identify as 'CEOs' but 'maybe good' if they identify as 'hackers'".

do it with money you already paid tax on lol. so so many options

No 'lol' because gains/losses on those assets relate to taxation, also, in many regimes you'll have to declare it anyhow.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#267

Post by dorgo »

shitlord wrote: post #143
spurgu wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're getting downvoted, to my knowledge you're correct.

The IRS even has a $625k bounty for anyone who can break privacy coins like Monero! https://heraldsheets.com/irs-will-pay-625000-cracks-monero-n...

would you sell the secret how to break privacy coints for $625k?

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#268

Post by jariel »

breakfastduck wrote: post #264
vmception wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

do it with money you already paid tax on lol. so so many options

This is actually a good point. The government know you've been paid it and you've paid tax but that doesn't mean you can't rightfully hide the rest of the money away somewhere. They don't know if you spent the rest of it immediately or kept it if you never put it into a domestic bank.

You can indeed 'rightfully stash $1B in cash under your mattress' - but almost any other private/public storage mechanism will involve gains/losses which have to be disclosed.

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#269

Post by Seanambers »

vmception wrote: post #258
jariel wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Have a stash that people dont know about," ... is probably illegal in almost every known reasonable country because it usually amounts to tax evasion. So I'm not sure about this meme of "mega millionaires hiding their money is 'bad' if they identify as 'CEOs' but 'maybe good' if they identify as 'hackers'".

do it with money you already paid tax on lol. so so many options

If you make more money with this money you stash away, that is taxable as well in most places in the western world. You normally also are obligated to inform the government wherever you are about your holdings in the west.

The way to get around this, is to start an offshore company in whats referred to as an tax haven. Basically its a company that has an unknown owner normally some legal secretary or a lawyer firm stands as owner and somewhere there is a presigned agreement by them that transfers the ownership of the shares in the company to someone else that you can write in(TBD). So the company is basically in limbo between owners .

But yeah, that how you would do it, of course its a bit more, but that is the gist of it.Just make sure the legal company you hire or find on google isn't hacked, lol. Oh, and also, don't get a company card with this offshore company and use it to buy groceries, the tax people look out for that sort of thing :)

Re: U.S. Feds Seized Nearly $1B in Bitcoin from Wallet Linked to Silk Road

#270

Post by doggosphere »

klodolph wrote: post #260
doggosphere wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point was to show the flexibility and control over owning your assets. Accounts can be frozen and its game over.

I don’t understand what point you are trying to make, I guess. What I’m hearing is that you can commit the same crimes, but now you can commit these crimes with Bitcoin, and maybe the law will catch up with you, maybe it won’t. It doesn’t sound much like flexibility and control, it sounds like gambling that you are better at hiding assets in Bitcoin than other types of assets. If you are living in the US and spending…

The point I'm trying to make:

Taking someone's assets vs coercing them to hand over their assets, are not the same thing.

You can take my gold, my dollars, my factories, my real estate, all by force.

You can take my freedom, you can take my life, by force.

You cannot take my Bitcoin by force. You might be able to put me through enough pain for me to give it up. But this is not a guarantee.

We have been discussing this in the context of being a sneaky cyber criminal with a just law system. But imagine you live in a nation where the government (military junta) is "nationalizing" all wealth and assets. Then tell me the best way to protect your money.

Post reply on HN