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

271–280 of 611 posts

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

#271

Post by ta1243 »

htoiertoi345345 wrote: post #70
jihadjihad wrote: post #33

> [The Patriot Act] contains many sunset provisions beginning December 31, 2005, approximately four years after its passage. Before the sunset date, an extension was passed for four years which kept most of the law intact. In May 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunset Extensions Act of 2011, which extended three provisions. These provisions were modified and extended until 2019 by the USA Freedom Act,…

"USA Freedom Act" We're truly living in Orwell's world.

For nearly quarter of a century.

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

#272

Post by palmfacehn »

user34283 wrote: post #232
palmfacehn wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Talk about rejecting nuance, but now the state is "all powerful" because you can't transact privately. Yes, the state has control of finance and transactions. It always does. Democracies are build on principles like Popular sovereignty, political equality, or the rule of law. Private transactions or tax-free property isn't a democratic feature. Yes, it's that obvious.

Even if you accept those premises, reasonable people would expect limits on the power of the state to infringe upon property rights, even when backed by a popular majority. Furthermore, the principle of individual self-ownership is a key starting point for modern, liberal ideas of law. Of course you are free to reject those premises, but I would characterize that as authoritarian rather than obvious.

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

#274

Post by nostrademons »

calibas wrote: post #157
jihadjihad wrote: post #33

> [The Patriot Act] contains many sunset provisions beginning December 31, 2005, approximately four years after its passage. Before the sunset date, an extension was passed for four years which kept most of the law intact. In May 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunset Extensions Act of 2011, which extended three provisions. These provisions were modified and extended until 2019 by the USA Freedom Act,…

> In 2020, efforts to extend the provisions were not passed by the House of Representatives, and as such, the law has expired. The wording is confusing. Two provisions expired, not the entire Patriot Act. https://web.archive.org/web/20250306093943/https://www.nytim...

The Wikipedia article is quite confusing, and seems to imply that those two provisions expired because they were the only two provisions not sunsetted already. The table indicates that most of the law sunsetted on March of 2006:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#Section_expiration...

But then they say "The first act reauthorized all but two Title II provisions. Two sections were changed to sunset on December 31, 2009"

But the first act was passed in 2005, and so it's unclear whether it reauthorized provisions only until 2006 or a longer term.

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

#275

Post by ozozozd »

user34283 wrote: post #217
rocqua wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot a few things on that list that people would like freedom for: advocating for (or against) trans rights, protesting against the deportation of migrants, advocate against gun-control, and donating to (anti) palestinian causes Are just a few things that people would like the freedom to do. The point being, financial privacy is an important part of having a functioning democracy. But at the same time, financia…

> financial privacy is an important part of having a functioning democracy No, I don't think it is. Perhaps privacy for speech and voting are.

How is privacy for voting different than privacy for funding the candidate?

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

#276

Post by realo »

user34283 wrote: post #217
rocqua wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You forgot a few things on that list that people would like freedom for: advocating for (or against) trans rights, protesting against the deportation of migrants, advocate against gun-control, and donating to (anti) palestinian causes Are just a few things that people would like the freedom to do. The point being, financial privacy is an important part of having a functioning democracy. But at the same time, financia…

> financial privacy is an important part of having a functioning democracy No, I don't think it is. Perhaps privacy for speech and voting are.

Heinous speech is allowed in the USA but is totally illegal in Canada.

I live in Canada. Anonymous heinous speech? No thank you. Go away.

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

#277

Post by atomic128 »

eof wrote: post #109
chain030 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essentially decentralisation sounds nice, but doesnt work in practice.

Bitcoin, tor, bittorrent are all perfect examples of decentralization simply not working in practice

I can't tell if you are being sarcastic. Obviously Bitcoin doesn't "work" for any purpose. But in contrast, Tor obviously works. Here are constantly updating HTTP response dumps from the Tor hidden service ecosystem: https://rnsaffn.com/zg4/ (NSFW) There is a lot happening inside the Tor network.

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

#278

Post by owlbite »

n0n0n4t0r wrote: post #17
Mistletoe wrote: post #13

Maybe in 2028 a presidential candidate can run with removing the Patriot Act as one of their campaign points. I suspect the world will be very different then. The America I knew, remembered, and loved started dying with the passage of the Patriot Act.

[flagged]

There will almost certainly be an election in 2028. The degree to which it will be rigged through gerrymandering, voter intimidation, voter suppression and/or blatant cheating is a different question.

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

#279

Post by ta1243 »

garciasn wrote: post #48
conception wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you imagine the world today if Bernie had won?

An interesting what-if scenario; but, let's assume Sanders won and all else remained largely the same as it has: Unless the Sanders Administration had a very favorable or majority Democrat Congress aligned with his progressive wing, many proposals would be outright blocked or heavily compromised. Knowing our limitation that everything else has stayed largely the same as history since, this wouldn't be the case. The h…

> Unless the Sanders Administration had a very favorable or majority Democrat Congress aligned with his progressive wing, many proposals would be outright blocked or heavily compromised

This is a feature, and why Trump's second term is so different to his first, or Bidens, or Obamas, or Bush, or Nixon. You'd probably have to go back to FDR for such sweeping changes to the US state.

Trumps first term was overturning norms in behavior, but not overturning the way the entire governing system works, all four estates.

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

#280

Post by tormeh »

krapp wrote: post #251
komali2 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My big ask is, was it always this stupid? Like, all these huge historical events and figures, did it all go down as stupidly and clownishly as the modern USA? Was there an early 20th century fascist Europe equivalent to a man named Big Balls being beat up by children and a fascist police action being triggered as a result? Was there a Napeolonic era equivalent to a media figure known for making light of school shooti…

[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.
Post reply on HN