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

The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

tftc.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 611 posts

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#351

Post by warkdarrior »

fsflover wrote: post #175
chain030 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet for the average person has converged to a handful of products and services. Your point being? People prefer centralised stuff since it takes care a lot of stuff for them. They dont actually care all that much about technology that yield decentralised outcomes. I know that may be difficult for many here to comperehend.

People prefer centralized services until they enshittify, after which people move to the next thing, thanks to the decentralization.

> people move to the next thing, thanks to the decentralization

This does not quite follow. Care to explain more? What I observe in practice is that people move from one centralized service to the next centralized service (e.g., X->BlueSky) but rarely from centralized to decentralized.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#353

Post by xienze »

mrguyorama wrote: post #286
yepitwas wrote: post #257

War on Terror AUMF is still in force and is why the President can just decide to bomb whatever country they want without asking for permission, now. All that shit after 9/11 was crazy and dangerous, and some of us said that at the time, and go figure, the fucking obviously true things we were saying have turned out to be... true. What a surprise.

People who protested this horse shit were called unamerican for christs sake. Bush Jr said the literal words "you are either with us, or against us". The right went into utter hysterics about France not wanting to help our BS invasion. The right loves to say that violent rhetoric is the left's fault, while they wished us harm for not wanting to invade a random country in the middle east that wasn't even related to th…

> The right loves to say that violent rhetoric is the left's fault

Well you know, they are the ones constantly comparing Republicans to Hitler, the Nazis, calling them fascists, making direct claims that electing Trump would lead to the end of democracy, having "punch Nazis" be a rallying cry, and so on. Not really crazy to see how that might influence people to think that killing Trump or even a conservative podcaster is necessary to save the world.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#354

Post by integralid »

tormeh wrote: post #280
krapp wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There's a lot of stupid people out there waiting for someone who knows how to speak to them. Sounding like a country bumpkin and being unimpressive to the elites is probably good qualities if you want to be that sort of person.

>a lot of stupid people

I mean not being condescending to them would go a long way.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#355

Post by joe_the_user »

lukeschlather wrote: post #237
decimalenough wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The draft text explicitly bans single-use addresses, which are used by any self-respecting wallet (Exodus, Ledger, Trezor) these days. The actual problem with the article/headline is that the "Patriot Act" has expired. Although I'm sure there are plenty of similarly vague laws that could be used to justify this.

What text are you referring to? The article has a screenshot of a tweet with a screenshot of an excerpt that seems fair to paraphrase as "anyone behaved in this sort of activity is suspicious." I don't see anything about a ban and if you're only using single-use addresses that seems probably not suspicious in absence of all the other things which if you're doing all of them, seem objectively like they can only be des…

The article has some references but not to a "draft text". The article makes no claims that a bill or other regulation-with-text is in the works. The image that serves as the topic of the article is apparently a tweet of the author of the article.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#356

Post by krunck »

moduspol wrote: post #11
elif wrote: post #5

I'm confused how the connection was made between "here are our guidelines for suspicious activity" and "self custody is outlawed"

> creating and using single-use wallets, addresses, or accounts, and sending [cryptocurrency] through such wallets, addresses, or accounts through a series of independent transactions One could argue that's how normal Bitcoin wallets work. The addresses are deterministic based on your passphrase (or derived private key). The addresses don't need to get reused because there's no real value in doing so, and no real cos…

Yes. Single-use addresses protect me. If you store your entire balance under a single address then anybody you transact with can see your entire balance by lookup up the transaction. Single-use addresses protects you from people snooping around looking for worth while $5 wrench attacks.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#357

Post by sundarurfriend »

TheGRS wrote: post #315

I have deep disagreements with my father on this subject. He worked as a federal agent for 30 years, mostly in digital forensics. He does not believe in the right to privacy in any of the same ways I do. Whereas I believe a right to privacy in your tools and communication is essential, he believes they infringe on the government's ability to catch criminals. Classic justification of "if you're not a bad guy, what do…

> the folks on HackerNews and related sites mostly have a privacy-first worldview

It's more that the privacy-first folk are the ones that bother expressing opinions in threads like this. I think these days, a large part of HN audience doesn't especially care about privacy, and a good chunk of us are the ones that created the current privacy hellscape we have.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#358

Post by xienze »

mrguyorama wrote: post #298
mothballed wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By referendum I meant to be able to vote directly on a specific law. If you look at how weed was legalized, it required a referendum in many (most?) states because no representative wants to be the guy that has his face plastered everywhere when some kid dies after he smokes some legal weed and smashes into a pole, even if most his constituents wanted the policy. Representatives generally have to be risk averse to ge…

>If you look at how weed was legalized, it required a referendum It only required a referendum in some states because most US states are controlled by Republican governors and legislatures who openly defy what their own constituents want without fear of being voted out, because republicans vote republican no matter what. Republican voters will say "I want to legalize weed", their elected representative spouts literal…

> Democrat politicians respect citizen referendums, even when they are stupid and against democrat policies, like in California where Uber is not an employer because that's how the people voted.

LOL what, apparently you forgot about Proposition 187, which California voters voted "yes" on, got tied up in the courts, and then when a Democrat governor came into power he let the appeals die.

Proposition 8: voters voted to ban gay marriage, courts said "nah we're not going to do that." Judges aren't technically politicians but that line is a little blurry at times.

Re: The treasury is expanding the Patriot Act to attack Bitcoin self custody

#360

Post by bsenftner »

bsenftner wrote: post #167

I have a grad school professor that owes me $1M dollars on a bet that the Patriot Act would never end. I told him he was painfully naive and not suitable to each graduate school economics with such thinking.

If the United States ends, I win. It's looking pretty probable today, with this inescapable cascading of everything traditionally considered American Values, and the POTUS openly defying the US Constitution with zero repercussions beyond wimpy whispered protests. Then there is the media doing EVERYTHING in it's power to accelerate this destruction...
Post reply on HN