Where is the FBI in this? It was a FBI black op against silk road -> follow the money! Who was silk road's bank < Mt Gox - Who bankrupt Mt Gox < FBI Who had access to Trademill database < FBI Who authorized the attack on BitCoin after saying don't use it's not safe < FBI Today the seizure of all BitCoin in BTC-e is done by the FBI - Hopefully the number of FBI SA's going to jail over this Black Op will be limited. But, their greed is transnational to hide their seizure of overseas assets.. that is, What was seized and who accounted for it! Think DrugWar - we will be looking for SA's living beyond their means as with silk road
BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
171–180 of 256 posts
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#172The question for me is: why US? He is a Russian citizen, the company is based in Bulgaria, servers in Russia, legal HQ in Cyprus and all the services operated from Seychelles - arrested in Greece. The MtGox hack affected a Japanese company. I'm not debating the nature of the crimes, etc - I am just wondering, when does it become a US case? I can get the "there were US customers" - but why not Europe? Or Japan? Or Rus…
The US has this "thinking" that the world is just their backyard. It is not really in the law, strictly speaking. But if you have been watching the news, they strongly interfere with countries for their own (or their politicians) benefit. For example, they hit Libya with missiles right when Al-Gaddafi sent troupes to defend from future-ISIS militants. So yes, the US will get involved in stuff that matters to it. > Th…
You're not wrong, but also dismiss some tough moral choices. I'd argue that attacking Libya was against U.S. strategic interests. Since 9/11 Gaddafi had substantially improved relations with the west. He gave up his nuclear program and was basically acting as Europe's bouncer. Since he fell the migrant crisis has exploded. North Korea and Iran learned that despite all promises otherwise, the only way to ensure regime survival is nukes.
So why did the U.S. intervene? Gaddafi was going to ruthlessly slaughter everyone in Benghazi. He said so, and had the tanks to do it rolling across the desert. It turns out that the U.S. military is really good at killing tanks in the desert (esp in a low air defense threat environment), so the White House and DoD knew that they would have blood on their hands if they stood by and watched. Also, unlike Syria, Gaddafi had no strategic allies to complicate things. That is, other than us.
And now we get to suffer the long term consequences of preventing that genocide by stabbing a new friend in the back. We saved lives in Benghazi and toppled a ruthless dictator. We also fueled the rise of ISIS, and helped pave the way for nuclear confrontations in Korea and the Middle East.
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#173The question for me is: why US? He is a Russian citizen, the company is based in Bulgaria, servers in Russia, legal HQ in Cyprus and all the services operated from Seychelles - arrested in Greece. The MtGox hack affected a Japanese company. I'm not debating the nature of the crimes, etc - I am just wondering, when does it become a US case? I can get the "there were US customers" - but why not Europe? Or Japan? Or Rus…
> If you start a gay social network in US, can Russia come in (the first time you are flying in one of the Russia's partners territories) and say "you are breaking Russian gay laws, you are under arrest"? Yes.
Russia mostly prefers to block websites instead of prosecuting their creators. E.g. btc-e.com (but not btc-e.nz) was blocked in Russia but they didn't care about its owners.
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#174Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's criminal to be evading disclosure and tracking requirements even if all the money was obtained legally. It was criminal to help fuel a nuclear arms race that put everyone at risk of nuclear holocaust. It was criminal to destroy Iraq for bullshit reasons. It's criminal to kill people with drones based on metadata. But criminalizing money laundering? That's just power tripping.
I've answered this elsewhere but basically money laundering is responsible for keeping the wheels turning in a lot of real criminal activities like human trafficing and illegal weapons trade.
OK, so to play the devil's advocate, let's take the example of btc-e. btc-e did do a lot of business with criminal enterprises, it appears, but they also had a lot of legitimate users.
So how is that different from a restaurant deep in mob territory in some urban area that serves tons of mobsters dinner every evening? Should that restaurant be prosecuted? How about the corner grocery that serves the same mobsters? I mean, food is just as critical to surviving as money is, right?
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#175I still don't understand, the U.S. is charging a Russian with a white collar crime? The crime was committed outside the U.S., he didn't come to the U.S., the servers weren't in the U.S., Mt.Gox was based out of Japan, and Greek police arrested him. I've seen this enough to know this is common, but what is going on with this world?
As others have noted, the US didn't just make up jurisdiction here or declare that they can prosecute anything anywhere -- the charges include an allegation that he transferred stolen BTC to a US-based company. That creates a crime the US has jurisdiction to prosecute. It really is time for people to stop being gobsmacked at the idea that once you get entangled with an entity in a particular country, anything you do…
You haven't really explained or justified anything. "Them's the rules!!!"
What if Thailand wanted to extradite you because you joked about their king on HN?
You would just laugh, not make a point about "well, what do you expect when you challenge a nation's royal sovereignty? Have some respect on the internet! Thailand takes this very seriously."
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#1761) Arresting btc-e admin made all US customers to lose their balances on btc-e exchange. I highly doubt btc-e will come back online. 2) If you run online exchanger and have a single US customer, then you have to register your operation in USA. I find it ridiculously stupid.
It gets better: while criminal charges for illegal banking practices are part of United States Code (title 18 covers crimes), the banking REGULATIONS that one must adhere to are codified at the State level. This means you must apply for 50 or so different licenses in order to legally do business as a Money Transfer Agent and Money Services Busimess in the United States. Although it seems overly burdensome and deliber…
You can cover >25% of the US population in just the top 3 states (CA, TX, NY).
The system isn't that strange, almost every business in the US is primarily regulated by the states. What's strange is that most Americans don't realize this.
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
You missed the part where he personally transferred stolen money into the US, and hosted his service in the US.
If hosting is enough to be considered present in the US, then the US cloud providers better get ready for some unpleasantly stiff competition. I'm not sure it's a factor here.
> If hosting is enough to be considered present in the US, then the US cloud providers better get ready for some unpleasantly stiff competition.
That has been the case for a really long time, hasn't it?
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US has this "thinking" that the world is just their backyard. It is not really in the law, strictly speaking. But if you have been watching the news, they strongly interfere with countries for their own (or their politicians) benefit. For example, they hit Libya with missiles right when Al-Gaddafi sent troupes to defend from future-ISIS militants. So yes, the US will get involved in stuff that matters to it. > Th…
You're not wrong, but also dismiss some tough moral choices. I'd argue that attacking Libya was against U.S. strategic interests. Since 9/11 Gaddafi had substantially improved relations with the west. He gave up his nuclear program and was basically acting as Europe's bouncer. Since he fell the migrant crisis has exploded. North Korea and Iran learned that despite all promises otherwise, the only way to ensure regime…
It's not clear that you can really cast it as a successful effort to save lives either, given that it's plunged Libya into violent, sectarian civil war.
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at the actual charges in the indictment. All the BTC-e stuff is not what he's charged with. He's charged with transferring stolen Mt Gox Bitcoins to Tradehill, a San Francisco based exchange (now defunct). That's the US connection that will seal his extradition. They also allege that BTC-e is (at least partially) hosted in the US and does business with many US companies, which is likely true. But that's not what…
Yes, the blockchain is a fantastic resource for Feds prosecuting financial crimes. In order to get away with these things you need to have flawless opsec, because the moment they can connect one thing to you everything quickly unravels.
For me it's now Monero or nothing.
Re: BTC-e and its founder charged in 21-count indictment over hack of Mt. Gox
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
And of course there's no victims in money laundering. It's a victimless crime that has the sole purpose of helping prosecutors when they aren't able to find a real crime. While the laundry operation is victimless it often directly assists crimes that have very real crimes: Trafficking Drug abusers [0] Illegal weapons trade [1] [0]: Esp. as since it is currently illegal they suffer a lot as getting their drugs means d…
That might be totally true, but money laundering as a crime itself is just a cover for prosecutors inability to find the real crimes. It's about as morally defensible as asset seizures.
That seems pretty bogus. You're telling me that you think if I operate a front business and help human traffickers launder their money (thereby helping them to cover up their crime), but don't involve myself with human trafficking itself, I've done nothing wrong, and prosecuting me would be morally indefensible?