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

How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–27 of 27 posts

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#21

Post by cmeacham98 »

joemazerino wrote: post #12
cmeacham98 wrote: post #5

The "beneficial" property you're referring to is "can be easily used to fund criminal behavior", which is typically not a desirable feature in a payment system. Many people believe LibGen/Sci-Hub are good forms of breaking the law - but if that is the case the solution is "make the things they do legal" rather than "make it easier to send criminals money over the internet".

Criminals have never had issues sending or receiving money over the internet. This excuse is just a smokescreen.

I'm not aware of any jurisdiction in the world (or rational human being) where the defense "other people commit the same crime too!" is valid.

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#22

Post by aww_dang »

notpachet wrote: post #9
aww_dang wrote: post #2

If there were no benefits to cryptocurrency people would not voluntarily use it. It really is that simple. And yes, I know there are dangers. "Think of the children!" If the regulated financial infrastructure was a better alternative, there would be no need to create decentralized cryptocurrency platforms. There was a time when the hacker motto was "information wants to be free". Today HN largely cries, "There outta…

> "The emerging frontier of cryptocurrency is another opportunity for disruption, reconstitution and capture." This should be FTX's epitaph.

Yes, it fits well with FTX's connections to the regulatory state. Specifically the SEC chairman Gary Gensler.

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#23

Post by [deleted] »

cmeacham98 wrote: post #21
joemazerino wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criminals have never had issues sending or receiving money over the internet. This excuse is just a smokescreen.

I'm not aware of any jurisdiction in the world (or rational human being) where the defense "other people commit the same crime too!" is valid.

[deleted]

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#24

Post by freefaler »

It's interesting to look at the "non-blockable" payment system from the point of view of "management error" theory.

When something is made "illegal" it's generally assumed that the process of generating the rules (laws) is creating mostly good rules. But this idea doesn't stand the test of time. Women voting? Nope... it's illegal. Different sexual orientation - illegal - must chop something off from you.

To have the ability to do something illegal is beneficial when rules are bad. A distributed system for settling a transaction between two agents are beneficial in ways we can't see now. But freedom to experiment is better than rules prohibiting everythig.

Another analogy is having root on your computer/server and phone. It's "illegal" to jailbrake your iphone, but you've paid for it and it's yours.

By limiting what's permissable and concentrating on "terrorism", "child pornography" who knows what can be missed.

Read about patent laws in 19th and beginning of 20th century how it helped US with technology transfer from Great Britain... it's the same process.

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#25

Post by wonnage »

cmeacham98 wrote: post #5

The "beneficial" property you're referring to is "can be easily used to fund criminal behavior", which is typically not a desirable feature in a payment system. Many people believe LibGen/Sci-Hub are good forms of breaking the law - but if that is the case the solution is "make the things they do legal" rather than "make it easier to send criminals money over the internet".

Also you:

> Also, I'm not even sure I agree with the "a tool can be used for evil so therefore taking features away is good".

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#26

Post by sshine »

cmeacham98 wrote: post #21
joemazerino wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Criminals have never had issues sending or receiving money over the internet. This excuse is just a smokescreen.

I'm not aware of any jurisdiction in the world (or rational human being) where the defense "other people commit the same crime too!" is valid.

I think the wheel fell off here.

Just because criminals send money online, it does not mean that sending money online is criminal.

Re: How is crypto/blockchain %100 not beneficial if it makes Sci-Hub libgen funded?

#27

Post by sshine »

nh23423fefe wrote: post #14
SkyBelow wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>which is typically not a desirable feature in a payment system. I think it would be desirable. Some people will get into specifics of which laws they like to break and which laws they want enforced, but my experience has been most people like the ability for some laws to be broken and it is a good thing in regards to some laws being unjust. It is hard to get a standard because we would basically be asking which laws…

This is incoherent. Some laws are unjust so I can choose what laws I want to follow and that's good because .... (implication that breaking laws causes them to become more just as opposed to more enforceable)

> Some laws are unjust so I can choose what laws I want to follow

It depends on your sense of justice, but ultimately, you have to follow your personal conscience also. Some are driven more by upholding the law and others more by their personal conscience.

Justice is even above the gods.

Human attempts to codify it is only as good as it gets.

Post reply on HN