341–350 of 369 posts
I find it extremely amusing that the US government has over the last several years become one of the world's largest traders in bitcoin. It's not quite the path many were predicting back in the early 2010s, but Bitcoin has been full of surprises. If history is any guide, the bitcoin will be auctioned off sooner rather than later.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
which you only have to worry about when you have to tap into the rainy day fund, or when the collateral gets liquidated Because you can borrow against it instead of selling and without touching a financial institution, and this gives you liquidity without a tax event Welcome to the 2020s
>Because you can borrow against it instead of selling and without touching a financial institution, and this gives you liquidity without a tax event But how do you repay the loan without liquidating the bitcoin?
No different than unsecured debt
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The burden of proof falls on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Ex: Being in the vicinity of a crime when it takes place may make you a suspect (aka "fishy"), but this alone is not enough to prove guilt.
Buddy there are plenty of people in jail right now based on extremely flimsy evidence such as simply being in the vicinity of a crime. All your comments in the thread are about "proving it," when, at the end of the day, it's up to 12 people in a box, most of whom don't know the first thing about bitcoin. Refusal to decrypt, wife moving Russia, etc... The government is going to make an extremely convincing case, with…
- Can the prosecution show where and how Mr. X moved the funds while he was in jail?
- Can they show who he communicated with or ordered to abscond these funds?
- Can they identify who controls the funds now?
- Can they identify anyone else who may have had control of these funds while in their previous wallet?
The answer is basically no to any of those questions. This is simply because of the nature of crypto and mathematics; a set of seed words allows anyone to restore access on any machine, from anywhere on the planet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should look up coin joins (tumbling) as well as Monero protocols. It will blow your mind. Introducing this kind of complexity into tracing assets makes things very difficult.
The real world value entry and exit points are ever present. Mix it all one wants. It remains extremely difficult to avoid others knowing value, otherwise unaccounted for, finding it's way back. That plus a shake down of everyone the person ever knew remains potent, relevant and effective. I have followed the rough tech developments. None of what I wrote is impacted too much. Obtaining real world value of any signifi…
There are no longer "entry" and "exit" points because everyone uses it and accepts it. Crypto is a good as cash. Anything you can do with a suitcase full of illicit hundred dollar bills today, you can do with your phone tomorrow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't understand my point at all. Which is also my point.
You just said it would be obstruction of justice, yet a transaction occurring from a known wallet while a suspect is in custody is not enough to prove that. You'd have to prove the conspiracy. You're hand-waving the details away in an attempt to dismiss the argument. What does the prosecutor do when the funds get moved and the suspect is under lock and key? Because of the decentralized nature of crypto, you cannot ev…
Folks who think cryptocurrencies are magic cheat codes are just not aware of the flexibility and enormous powers that a court has to overwhelm mechanistic attempts to defeat their decisions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty impossible to beat the $5 wrench attack (or in the case of the government, 5 years in prison) unless you have anonymity, which Bitcoin does a very bad job of.
Multisig or SSS.
In my circles, That’s instructions forgetting away with murder: “Shoot. Shovel. Shut up.”
Does it mean something else in this context?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Buddy there are plenty of people in jail right now based on extremely flimsy evidence such as simply being in the vicinity of a crime. All your comments in the thread are about "proving it," when, at the end of the day, it's up to 12 people in a box, most of whom don't know the first thing about bitcoin. Refusal to decrypt, wife moving Russia, etc... The government is going to make an extremely convincing case, with…
It very well may be up to a jury (or a judge alone). And they'll hear questions like: - Can the prosecution show where and how Mr. X moved the funds while he was in jail? - Can they show who he communicated with or ordered to abscond these funds? - Can they identify who controls the funds now? - Can they identify anyone else who may have had control of these funds while in their previous wallet? The answer is basical…
Alternative story: NSA cracked the wallet's password and FBI invented Individual X as a cover story.