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

U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

decrypt.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 174 posts

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#61

Post by woodruffw »

EGreg wrote: post #54
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

I've been following this discussion in Washington and on Hacker News. I'm moderately anti-crypto--I don't buy the pitch but am open to being wrong and believe folks should be free to do what they want with it. I've also been struck by the proliferation of bank-like services without bank-like obligations. This stretches from fractional-reserve and maturity-transforming services like Tether to exchanges/dealers like Bi…

What makes you anti-crypto specifically? To me, crypto means cryptography, that enables both digital signatures and encryption. Are you against end-to-end encryption as well, for the same reasons? Let me dive into the root issue head-on. I understand you only had in mind cryptocurrencies, but there is a far wider issue at play here, that must be discussed substantively. This is generally about removing the middleman…

> What makes you anti-crypto specifically? To me, crypto means cryptography, that enables both digital signatures and encryption. Are you against end-to-end encryption as well, for the same reasons?

This is an unreasonable contortion of the OP’s comment. Conflating cryptocurrency (an industry rife with scams) to cryptography (a branch of discrete mathematics) belies precisely the reason people don’t take cryptocurrency boosters seriously.

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#62

Post by [deleted] »

alksjdalkj wrote: post #50

I don't really follow any cryptocurrency news but wasn't one of the main appeals early on that it would be independent from any governments? Specifically that it could be a currency not subject to the oversight and sanctions of the US treasury? I guess "cryptocurrency" is different from "cryptocurrency industry", but it still seems like the ecosystem as a whole should be more resilient to actions from the US governme…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#63

Post by JumpCrisscross »

zarzavat wrote: post #51
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

I've been following this discussion in Washington and on Hacker News. I'm moderately anti-crypto--I don't buy the pitch but am open to being wrong and believe folks should be free to do what they want with it. I've also been struck by the proliferation of bank-like services without bank-like obligations. This stretches from fractional-reserve and maturity-transforming services like Tether to exchanges/dealers like Bi…

The entire point of cryptocurrency is precisely to enable bank-like services without bank-like obligations, to enable individuals to be their own bank and manage their own money if they want to. You're right that it's unsurprising that the US Senate does not care about this problem. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that the cryptocurrency world does not care about the US Senate. This will just end up being another…

> point of cryptocurrency is precisely to enable bank-like services without bank-like obligations

Crypto has shown some rules are unnecessary or even harmful. They should be repealed, across the board. In other cases, many cases, it's reinforced some rules' necessity. Their scope should be broadened. That's what's going on here.

If the sole value of cryptocurrencies is in evading the rules, it's going to have a tough time.

> the cryptocurrency world does not care about the US Senate

Whether someone cares about the law isn't relevant to lawmaking or enforcement. (This attitude is also counterproductive. It leads to disengagement, which virtually guarantees more-onerous rules than would have been necessary.)

> will just end up being another "I promise I'm not a US person" checkbox when you sign up for cryptocurrency services

This, alone, is insufficient. AML duties aren't discharged by an "I promise I'm not a money launderer or tax evader" checkbox.

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#64

Post by frankbreetz »

alksjdalkj wrote: post #50

I don't really follow any cryptocurrency news but wasn't one of the main appeals early on that it would be independent from any governments? Specifically that it could be a currency not subject to the oversight and sanctions of the US treasury? I guess "cryptocurrency" is different from "cryptocurrency industry", but it still seems like the ecosystem as a whole should be more resilient to actions from the US governme…

Governments can't control it in a sense that they can't create more of it and can't sensor transactions(sanctions) .

If you think of it as the same idea of gold, the government can't make more it. They can limit transactions to a degree, but they can't really stop one person from handing another person a suitcase full of gold. They can make laws around it, but they will not necessarily be enforced. There is of course oversight over gold, but the government doesn't have as much control as fiat. Namely they can't make an infinite amount just by passing a bill.

The government can make as many laws as they want, whether they are enforced or not is another matter.

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#65

Post by kryogen1c »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

I've been following this discussion in Washington and on Hacker News. I'm moderately anti-crypto--I don't buy the pitch but am open to being wrong and believe folks should be free to do what they want with it. I've also been struck by the proliferation of bank-like services without bank-like obligations. This stretches from fractional-reserve and maturity-transforming services like Tether to exchanges/dealers like Bi…

> If the answer is there should be no AML, KYC and/or reporting by cryptocurrency companies, we have no common ground on this argument.

this hits the nail on the head, imo. its the central argument. i dont think its as unambiguous as you say, though.

payment processors are _right now_ acting as extrajudicial legislators. many LEGAL business, like porn and weed, are restricted from operating on major payment networks.

this is assuming you and your government are on the same side. there are many places in the world where crypto is a boon to the oppressed.

not to detract from your point. crypto has a clear and direct path to cybercrime. just saying its not so clear.

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#66

Post by [deleted] »

frankbreetz wrote: post #64
alksjdalkj wrote: post #50

I don't really follow any cryptocurrency news but wasn't one of the main appeals early on that it would be independent from any governments? Specifically that it could be a currency not subject to the oversight and sanctions of the US treasury? I guess "cryptocurrency" is different from "cryptocurrency industry", but it still seems like the ecosystem as a whole should be more resilient to actions from the US governme…

Governments can't control it in a sense that they can't create more of it and can't sensor transactions(sanctions) . If you think of it as the same idea of gold, the government can't make more it. They can limit transactions to a degree, but they can't really stop one person from handing another person a suitcase full of gold. They can make laws around it, but they will not necessarily be enforced. There is of course…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#67

Post by logicchains »

woodruffw wrote: post #48
EGreg wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you anti-crypto specifically? Edit: see my sister comment for much more info

Not OP, but the absence of AML/KYC appears to be (very explicitly) one of their points against cryptocurrencies.

From a proponent's perspective that's a big point in favour of cryptocurrencies. AML has been completely ineffective; there's absolutely zero evidence to show it's reduced drug usage or terrorism, drug gangs now are richer than ever before. What it has been effective at is making banking and achieving financial privacy way harder for the average individual. AML is like the war on drugs: it makes normal people's lives more miserable while being completely ineffective at stopping the thing it's supposed to stop, and is used as an excuse to give authoritarian governments more and more power.

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#68

Post by [deleted] »

kryogen1c wrote: post #65
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

I've been following this discussion in Washington and on Hacker News. I'm moderately anti-crypto--I don't buy the pitch but am open to being wrong and believe folks should be free to do what they want with it. I've also been struck by the proliferation of bank-like services without bank-like obligations. This stretches from fractional-reserve and maturity-transforming services like Tether to exchanges/dealers like Bi…

> If the answer is there should be no AML, KYC and/or reporting by cryptocurrency companies, we have no common ground on this argument. this hits the nail on the head, imo. its the central argument. i dont think its as unambiguous as you say, though. payment processors are _right now_ acting as extrajudicial legislators. many LEGAL business, like porn and weed, are restricted from operating on major payment networks.…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#69

Post by starkd »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

I've been following this discussion in Washington and on Hacker News. I'm moderately anti-crypto--I don't buy the pitch but am open to being wrong and believe folks should be free to do what they want with it. I've also been struck by the proliferation of bank-like services without bank-like obligations. This stretches from fractional-reserve and maturity-transforming services like Tether to exchanges/dealers like Bi…

But the power and potential disruption of cryptocurrency is the anonymity. It's the benefits of cash brought to the digital world. I understand the dangers of the criminal element, but underground economies benefit oppressed people when governments turn tyrannical. If you're response to that is only that "it can't happen here", I don't know what to say. They can and do happen faster than anyone realizes. And they are not quick to give power back.

Re: U.S. Senate Vote in Favor of Amendment That Threatens Crypto Industry

#70

Post by Fnoord »

woodruffw wrote: post #61
EGreg wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you anti-crypto specifically? To me, crypto means cryptography, that enables both digital signatures and encryption. Are you against end-to-end encryption as well, for the same reasons? Let me dive into the root issue head-on. I understand you only had in mind cryptocurrencies, but there is a far wider issue at play here, that must be discussed substantively. This is generally about removing the middleman…

> What makes you anti-crypto specifically? To me, crypto means cryptography, that enables both digital signatures and encryption. Are you against end-to-end encryption as well, for the same reasons? This is an unreasonable contortion of the OP’s comment. Conflating cryptocurrency (an industry rife with scams) to cryptography (a branch of discrete mathematics) belies precisely the reason people don’t take cryptocurren…

It is shameful the cryptocurrency community hijacked the term crypto. Cryptography is the very thing cryptocurrency relies on to make their technology working in the first place (if we may call it 'working', YMMV). Cryptography is used in vastly more important systems, it is much more important than cryptocurrency. I mean, without cryptography you could not even use something like Git to develop software such as Bitcoin. You wouldn't be able to distribute a C library securely, something on which Bitcoin relies on.
Post reply on HN