Live data from Hacker News

For Sale: 29,656.51306529 Bitcoins

usmarshals.gov

421–424 of 424 posts

Re: For Sale: 29,656.51306529 Bitcoins

#421
post #420
post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why people keep trying to frame BTC as some sorts of criminals tool. Fast, nearly anonymous and free long distance transactions are a pretty big deal for non-criminals as well. Did you ever try transferring a bigger amount of money to a country outside the EU and US? You'd be astonished by the fees and timescales involved. Services like Western Union and Moneygram are not just used by criminals.

Fast international money transfer is something that is already handled very well for those that truly need it. I know for a fact that the european central bank handles large volume transactions in a matter of seconds if not less. There is really no reason why traditional banks could not offer significantly shorter processing times for the majority of their services, it is just not in their interest to do so.

it is just not in their interest to do so

Interest is the keyword here. Banks collect it on their customers' money while they declare it to be 'in-flight'. This is the main reason why transactions that should take seconds are still deliberately delayed for days.

Re: For Sale: 29,656.51306529 Bitcoins

#422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is having bitcoin on a website illegal, even if you don't buy anything?

The question is irrelevant. The moment I transfer a bitcoin to Silk Road, it's no longer my bitcoin. It's theirs. I've exchanged it for a promise from Silk Road to pass on the bitcoin to someone else or return it to me when I ask. The government never seized my bitcoin. They seized Silk Road's bitcoin. This means Silk Road has more liabilities than assets. And since Silk Road hasn't given me a promissory note in exch…

Good point, and I didn't think of that.

Re: For Sale: 29,656.51306529 Bitcoins

#423
post #258
post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually is does mean that it's worth what it sells for. The nature of seized goods increases the risk premium demanded from a buyer resulting in a lower price. Sources of risk: 1) Goods aren't as they seem. Drug dealers may not have treated the goods as well as average owner. 2) Risk of violence. I wouldn't want to buy some drug dealer's prized yacht... wouldn't sleep well. 3) Illiquid good. If it's hard to resale t…

> Now, if the good was completely fungible, risk-free and totally liquid (think cash), there would be no expected discount because of risk.. just transaction cost. How is that not the case here?

Not totally liquid. That's a lot of bitcoints being sold. The buyer could not go ahead and sell all of those coins immediately after getting them without severely impacting the price. The buyer would probably need a couple of weeks to unload those BTC without moving prices much. That creates risk as there's a lot of volatility in BTC. As a result, the range of possibilities on what you would eventually sell those BTC for is wide. If you could (and maybe you can... I'm not super aware of all the BTC instruments these days) buy/sell BTC derivatives (options/futures) you would be able to transfer that risk to someone else, but it would be at a cost. This cost would roughly translate to how much you would be willing to pay to be able to sell a bitcoin at a future date at today's market price.

As a result, a buyer would be willing to pay market price - transaction costs - risk transfer cost.

Pricing the risk is of course tough as future volatility is especially tough to predict for BTC. But this is the fundamental rubric for how one would view the transaction.

Re: For Sale: 29,656.51306529 Bitcoins

#424
post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why it is better if the same resource could be used to make something good - e.g. build a hospital for the poor or feed some starving people, etc.?

because incentives distort actions. if what is seized is destroyed of value, then there is no longer any motivation to view seized property as some sort of fund raising drive.

That's why separation of incentives from actions is important. If the police has no control over the money and can not benefit from it, they do not have incentive for abuse. The hospital which will get the money may have, but they won't have the means.
Post reply on HN