491–500 of 901 posts
Ilya Lichtenstein (YC S11) is the co-founder of YC-backed MixRank. Heather Morgan, his wife, is apparently a serial entrepreneur, investor, and "contributor" to Forbes.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sarahemerson/crypto-lau...
Shouldn't all true crypto believers hate this news? It's the government trying to enforce their opinion of who should own those Bitcoins, thereby taking power away from the owner that the network has decided on, which would be "whoever has the cryptographic keys".
“True crypto believers” seems like a loaded phrase these days because I feel like most crypto believers are riding it’s wave to legitimacy. And things like this push it further towards that goal. I don’t see how anyone could really still believe in the original ideals behind Bitcoin. They made something but not what they wanted.
Does anyone know if Bitfinex will get this returned to them (and hopefully repay users) .. or what the next steps in this story might look like?
After this hack, Bitfinex account holders took a haircut (30% or so) and were given tokens representing the remainder of their dollar-denominated account balances. Those tokens were paid in full in 2017ish. Later, the UK, Portugal, and Poland seized $1B or so of Bitfinex customer funds due to the funds being delivered by Crypto Capital Corp who was found to be engaged in money laundering. Bitfinex issued LEO tokens t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
She's also a rapper, and not a very good one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DIuPPmY9mw
Her delivery reminds me of a CEO being forced by their HR department to "do a rap" in the 2000's to "relate" to their employees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I noticed both on twitter and his HN posts, there's a big gap between 2015 and 2019.
il on May 15, 2013 >As the anarchists and idealists on HN will soon learn, the decentralized nature of Bitcoin won't make a difference if anyone transmitting it is in violation of federal law. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5714963 Did he change his mind?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's be fair to these individuals and not presume guilt. In the US, it's "innocent until proven guilty". Media is so quick to assume the person is guilty just because of an allegation.
For non-high profile investigations (investigations that were not in the media before charges), announcing charges typically has a large body of evidence and a lot of confidence in the accusation. Of course innocent until proven guilty applies but the justice department knows that and still brought charges. At the very least, they believe they've proven beyond a reasonable doubt his guilt. High profile cases with pub…
No, if following general DoJ policy, they believe that the evidence is sufficient that they will be able to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, but that's not the same as them already having proven that.
> High profile cases with public pressure change the equation a bit and can cause charges to be brought on people who normally would not.
Usually, I think the opposite is the case: generally, the DoJ is more careful in high-profile cases, not more cavalier.
Heather Morgan explaining how you can social engineer yourself out of a bad situation, can't make this shit up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If he goes somewhere which doesn't have extradition, FED's will just call him and tell him they will go public that he has $4B bitcoin and ALL criminals will be hunting them after that.
I'm not certain I understand. There are billionaires in the world already. How do they protect themselves from criminals? Granted, their billions aren't in cash. However, once he fled the country he could immediately start converting his position to other assets that aren't so easily stolen. He'd also be able to afford to hide himself, pay taxes and bribes, and pay for some security.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In reality, crypto's true purpose is a moving target, so it can never be criticized because that's not what crypto is really about. Bitcoin is a tool. Like hammer or a shotgun. You can use it whatever way you want. There is no centrally defined "purpose".
This is the Adolf Eichmann defense. Trains are just tools, and he was making them run on time. Any infrastructure has a purpose. It’s fair to ask why Bitcoin exists and whose project it is.
Hint: Millions of people use Bitcoin as a:
- store of value to protect purchasing power over time
- inflation hedge to protect savings from the ravages of inflation
- a hedge to protect against corrupt governments manipulating currency
- protection from negative real interest rates
- censorship-resistant payments
- anonymous payments with instant finality (Lightning)
Money is a tool like any other. Cash, gold, NFTs, Bitcoin, and credit cards can be used for good or evil, lawful or unlawful purposes. The technology isn't inherently moral or immoral. It is just a tool.
The "it's really for nazis" argument is particularly weak. The critics must be getting desperate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let's be fair to these individuals and not presume guilt. In the US, it's "innocent until proven guilty". Media is so quick to assume the person is guilty just because of an allegation.
There is what appears to be a rather amusing side-effect of this principle: “The arrests today show that we will take a firm stand against those who allegedly try to use virtual currencies for criminal purposes.” - Assistant Attorney General Kenneth A. Polite Jr. [My emphasis.] There's no reason for the Justice Dept. not to take a firm stand against those who try to use virtual currencies for criminal purposes, or sa…
Actually, the 'allegedly' bit was inserted because the defendants in this case are alleged to have committed some criminal act(s). They have not been proven (whether via a trial or a plea agreement) to have done so.
The defendants may well be "guilty," or they may not. That's what the legal process (as flawed as it may be) is constituted to determine.
Forming an opinion at to whether or not anyone has committed an illegal act(s) is perfectly normal and reasonable. However, unless you're a member of a jury in a trial, your opinion generally won't affect the outcome.
All that said, defendants are "alleged" to have committed criminal act(s) until the case has been adjudicated, whether that be by trial or plea agreement.
N.B.: IANAL.