How to make a supervillain, step 1
Jokes aside, after 5 years, I'm not sure how he will not hold a serious grudge (if he didn't have one already) against the USA.
US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
351–360 of 587 posts
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#352According to the original complaint, a few months after being interviewed by an FBI agent on returning from his trip to North Korea, Griffith had the following conversation over text messages: Griffith: I need to send 1 [REDACTED UNIT OF CRYPTOCURRENCY] between North and South Korea. Other Guy: "Isn't that in violations of sanctions?" Griffith: It is. A few day later, also in text messages to someone else: Someone: W…
Sounds like some light treason.
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#353Earlier quoted context omitted.
Source for those curious about this: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1222646...
It is interesting that the cryptocurrency in question is not named (simply referred to as "Cryptocurrency-1"). Possibly because there are ongoing investigations about it? If this was bitcoin, they would likely state that.
probably USDT?
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#354This is so sad, how does locking him up for 5 years really helps anyone? or keep anyone safer? He did something stupid maybe, but his work was exploring how digital systems can help bring peace to the world, and he thought a good place for that to happen is NK, so who doesn't agree with that? None of the information he presented was secret, it was all publicly available. For comparison here is a company that actually…
> but his work was exploring how digital systems can help bring peace to the world Surely nobody is that naive? Wars and sanctions aren't a technical problem that can be "solved" with a "digital system".
[deleted]
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#355Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comparison is striking. Kennedy ordered a naval "quarantine" to prevent missiles from reaching Cuba. By using the term "quarantine" rather than "blockade" (an act of war by legal definition), the United States was able to avoid the implications of a state of war. After several days of tense negotiations, an agreement was reached between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive…
> Russia did invade Ukraine a second time. In the real world, Russia never stopped the first invasion, it just consolidated, worked to advance, and then massively escalated.
Sure, depending on if you definition of invasion requires advancement, or if occupations counts.
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#356Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not an entire nuclear war, but you may remember the end of the second world war.
you all are being disingenuous by the mere highlighting of “who used nuclear weapon”, as opposed to “who is now able to use”. But, please do soldier on.
The post read "... only user of nuclear weapons in combat", and you replied, "… only user …?" You chose to leave it at that, and in English, this implies that you disagree with the fact of the two quoted words, "only user", not that you disagree with the point the parent was making via that fact. If it is actually the latter, you should clarify. It's very reasonable for everybody to take your post the way they did, and has nothing to do with politics or dishonesty.
Also, the sarcasm is unnecessary.
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#357Wait the title calls this guy a cryptography expert but nowhere in the article is that mentioned again? He just seems to be a cryptocurrency researcher?
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#358Earlier quoted context omitted.
> as a means of settling disputes As a means of forcing someone to unwillingly settle a dispute in your favor that is. I have no sympathy for North Korea, but sanctions are not an alternative to war. Sanctions are an alternative to bullets.
Sabotaging your own military's weapons still sounds an awful lot like treason
Sanctions have never ever in human history worked, so more like sabotaging one's placebos...
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#359This is so sad, how does locking him up for 5 years really helps anyone? or keep anyone safer? He did something stupid maybe, but his work was exploring how digital systems can help bring peace to the world, and he thought a good place for that to happen is NK, so who doesn't agree with that? None of the information he presented was secret, it was all publicly available. For comparison here is a company that actually…
He expressly stated he knew he was helping to evade financial sanctions and you think it's "sad" to punish him for violating the laws of our country?
How does it help anyone? It sets the tone that people who break the rule of law will be punished. It establish that there is real "stick" so that other people do not perpetrate similar crimes with other rogue states.
Re: US sentences crypto expert to 5 years after North Korea blockchain presentation
#360Could someone explain why this wouldn't fall under freedom of speech? Sounds like there were not government secrets nor did the expert have a security clearance that would have held him to a higher standard. If Tor researchers gave a presentation at a security conference on how to install Tor, knowing full well that some would use it to engage in the proliferation of CSAM, would that also not fall under free speech?
Same reason you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. There are limits to freedom of speech, especially when it interferes with national defense. Schenck v. United States is an interesting case where the supreme court ruled that passing out fliers to encourage resistance to the draft is not protected by the first amendment. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States
[deleted]