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

Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

fiod.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 827 posts

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#791

Post by d0mine »

loceng wrote: post #771
SigmundA wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the same guy who didn't know the difference between Infection Fatality Rate and Infection Fatality Ratio, then compared the The IF Ratio of Covid to the IF Rate of the Flu and proclaimed the Flu was deadlier because math, and straight faced didn't realize he had two orders of magnitude error. Then he post a video making fun of his video getting removed due to misinformation that he never retracted or correcte…

[flagged]

I'll bite: Turkey — true (Armenian genocide). USSR — false (genocide against who? there were famines (btw in US too). all people suffered).

Though I know that the opposite is claimed by propaganda (at least, Obama failed to recognize Armenian genocide, and anything bad is easily believed without questions about USSR).

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#792

Post by throwaway67743 »

internet_user wrote: post #722
preseinger wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only place on earth where gun ownership is considered a freedom rather than a threat to civil society is America.

Wrong. Czech Republic is a shall issue country in the heart of otherwise gunless Europe. 500 year long gun tradition. The only two times gun ownership/carry was suspended during those 500 years was under Nazi and Soviet occupation. Even foreigners from friendly nations can obtain a permit and carry, not even the USA doesn’t do it. Self-defence with deadly force enshrined in the constitution. Lower homicide rates than…

> Every gun permit is also automatically a concealed carry permit, again, not even the USA doesn’t allow in every state.

Not technically true, there needs to be a reason, but in most cases concealed carry is generally accepted.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#793

Post by pas »

thebradbain wrote: post #751
pas wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Murder is a legal category, it can be whatever we define it to be, so if legislation makes abortion murder then it is. Is it intentionally ending the life of a human being? Well, what life, what is a human being? It's intentionally terminating a pregnancy? Yes. Is that bad? Well, if the would-be-mother doesn't want it it's definitely bad, and if the would-be-mother wants it then it definitely seems cruel to not do it…

“If legislation makes abortion murder then it is.” I fundamentally disagree. You objectively cannot “kill” something that is not “alive”. That is just a fact of life itself. A government can legislate all they want, but it does not make an unborn fetus any more alive. And thus any law rooted in this idea is fundamentally absurd, preposterous, and so downright stupid that on the principle alone (aside from the many ot…

I understand your argument, but (IMHO) it just causes confusion if you try to apply common sense to legal statutes and concepts. (Yes, sure politically one can argue that there's a difference between waiting for someone and running them over intentionally with a car and between abortion, but at the same time others are free to disagree. There's no objective framework for this.)

The fetus is alive. It's a bunch of cells. There's a causal interaction to remove it from the host which makes it a bunch of dead cells.

Legislatig physics is stupid, but what if some state said by law which interpretation of quantum mechanics is the correct one? Stupid, but not much different than building codes. Or say that prions are alive and can run for office... stupid, but there used to be a lot of absurd laws. (If someone works on Saturday they shall be put to death. Sure, what's work? And then there are many many many interpretations of what's work.)

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#794

Post by bb88 »

notch656a wrote: post #781
bb88 wrote: post #775

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it does show a lack of respect for the rule of law, as well often a lack of empathy for others. The best predictor of whether you will commit a crime in the future, is if you've committed one in the past. I think the hardest one to talk about is the non-violent sex offender -- CSAM and the like. They have a high re-offending rate, and rehabilitation efforts aren't very effective in this area. On one hand they're…

1) The deterrent effect of gun-laws on felons are questionable when obtaining arms is trivial for anyone. Although I won't argue the punitive aspect of "justice" still remains. Note that just because laws don't always work doesn't mean we shouldn't have them, but see below. 2) If the punishment does actually have a deterrent effect (which is questionable, but lets presume it is true), then it should have a deterrent…

I don't think you did a great job of arguing your point, because you conflated me with whoever you argued with in the past, and then are dumping your angst from them upon me.

I do think my post triggered you though. You may want to think about why you reacted so strongly to this.

> And here's the nuke everyone likes to drop as a bad faith effort to force others to specifically defend CP offenders rather than generically non-violent criminals.

It's not bad faith. There are roughly 750,000 sexual offenders in the US. In 2020, the US held around 1.2M prisoners, and has about 5.1M felons in the population at large.

> If you believe CSAM offenders can't be rehabilitated and their crimes amount to torture/abuse of children...

I don't just believe it. There are studies to back it up. Note that the recidivism rates for sexual offenders below are vastly underreported as sexual offenses are not as likely to be reported as other offenses.

https://smart.ojp.gov/somapi/chapter-5-adult-sex-offender-re...

The question you didn't answer, is how to fix it -- but instead, blasting me for providing one, when you don't have a good faith solution yourself.

> If we're going to cherry pick offenses, I'd like to point out owning scary mushroom or an undersized lobster is a felony as well.

At any point in time, any passed law might be considered unjust in the future. The founding fathers said they wanted to make a "more perfect union" as a response to the punitive laws made by the Crown. MLK said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but bends towards justice." as a response to the human injustices to slavery and Jim Crow.

But as a whole, we -- that is society -- believe that crimes against children should not be legal, and that's the view I take as well. Real CSAM (not any artistic rendering) means some child in real life is being abused in real life.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#795

Post by notch656a »

bb88 wrote: post #794
notch656a wrote: post #781

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) The deterrent effect of gun-laws on felons are questionable when obtaining arms is trivial for anyone. Although I won't argue the punitive aspect of "justice" still remains. Note that just because laws don't always work doesn't mean we shouldn't have them, but see below. 2) If the punishment does actually have a deterrent effect (which is questionable, but lets presume it is true), then it should have a deterrent…

I don't think you did a great job of arguing your point, because you conflated me with whoever you argued with in the past, and then are dumping your angst from them upon me. I do think my post triggered you though. You may want to think about why you reacted so strongly to this. > And here's the nuke everyone likes to drop as a bad faith effort to force others to specifically defend CP offenders rather than generica…

Yeah you focused your whole post here again on CP / child abuse, apparently your favor topic, rather than other points. It's just a cheap shot designed to try and make this about defending (or not defending) the civil rights of the most hated segment of society rather than generically non-violent felons, and you know it. If you bothered reading what I said, I did propose that if they were unfixable and a threat to children they shouldn't be released from jail, which fixes your concern about them getting firearms. I get the fact that laws are ineffective aren't an argument against them, but it is worth noting making handguns illegal does fuck all to stop those people from getting one after released. Anyone can 3d print the frame in a few hours and have the slide shipped off the internet. If they can't be trusted in public not to hurt innocents they really shouldn't be released.

> when you don't have a good faith solution yourself.

Hilarious because you clipped off the second half of my sentence in my quote where I provided the answer. If you believe CSAM offenders can't be rehabilitated and their crimes amount to torture/abuse of children, then they need locked away forever or somehow gone from society.

Your obsession with CSAM is bizarre, I might add. And the fact you glossed over pretty much all my non-CSAM related points pretty much goes to show your intent here.

>believe that crimes against children should not be legal, and that's the view I take as well

My argument revolves around civil rights after full release from jail+probation/parole/community control, not whether crimes against children should be legal.

>You may want to think about why you reacted so strongly to this.

I really don't appreciate what I've seen you and many others do which is try to make someone who defends the civil rights of people who are free and released as someone who somehow doesn't want justice for children. These kinds of accusations made under the veil of academic debate are just an intelligent version of slinging shit at the schoolyard.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#796

Post by notch656a »

SigmundA wrote: post #786
sgjohnson wrote: post #783

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “well regulated” means “proficient, properly equipped, well trained, functioning as expected” or similar. You have to assess that phrase in the context of 18th century English. It has no relation whatsoever to what “regulation” means nowadays. > Do you think everyone should own a machine gun if they want? How about a rocket launcher? But almost everyone can own a machine gun or a rocket launcher, where not forbid…

>It has no relation whatsoever to what “regulation” means nowadays. So it doesn't mean background checks or proper record keeping? The meaning of the word has not changed since the 18th century and certainly doesn't mean no rules whatsoever. >But almost everyone can own a machine gun or a rocket launcher, where not forbidden by state law. Just pay a $200 transfer tax and wait 3-12 months for the ATF to process your t…

>That was my point, the second amendment does not mean you can own any arm you want and the heavy regulation on title 2 weapons, explosives and WMD's seems to work well in preventing their use in crimes without leading to tyranny and genocide.

my argument would be that it does mean you can own that things.

Bans on nukes, etc should be added as amendment to constitution if they're not allowed. They are arms. Should be easy to pass the amendment if the overwhelming majority agree.

The fact you can't buy a nuke isn't some gotcha on legitimacy of restrictions. Clearly nukes should be legal until the constitution is amended to exclude classes of arms and the hughes amendment for post-86 machine guns is blatantly unconstitutional.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#797

Post by SigmundA »

notch656a wrote: post #796
SigmundA wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It has no relation whatsoever to what “regulation” means nowadays. So it doesn't mean background checks or proper record keeping? The meaning of the word has not changed since the 18th century and certainly doesn't mean no rules whatsoever. >But almost everyone can own a machine gun or a rocket launcher, where not forbidden by state law. Just pay a $200 transfer tax and wait 3-12 months for the ATF to process your t…

>That was my point, the second amendment does not mean you can own any arm you want and the heavy regulation on title 2 weapons, explosives and WMD's seems to work well in preventing their use in crimes without leading to tyranny and genocide. my argument would be that it does mean you can own that things. Bans on nukes, etc should be added as amendment to constitution if they're not allowed. They are arms. Should be…

No right is unlimited and this has been upheld many times. From the decision Columbia v. Heller [1] which was delivered by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito all conservative and and actually struct down some restrictions:

(2) Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#798

Post by ziddoap »

phphphphp wrote: post #760
ziddoap wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can take the word "jailed" out of my comment, replace it with "responsible for", and I still think my point stands... You said: > If a company releases software that is used nefariously, there are very common legal actions to hold them accountable If you believe that, it follows that you believe that every developer of encryption algorithms should be "held accountable" (be it jail, or "responsible without prison"…

Most industry protections against liabilities are predicated on compliance with expectations about responsibility: the protection against liability is earned. For example, firearm manufacturers are protected from being held liable for actions taken with their firearms as long as they comply with their legal responsibilities, like not selling firearms to children. If a firearms manufacturer sold firearms to children,…

>If you knowingly build software that can be used for money laundering

You've retreated back to money laundering, but that is not what you originally were talking about.

You were pretty clear that you were talking about any software which is used nefariously. Which I pointed out that pretty much any software can be used nefariously (e.g. ssh, browsers, hosting software, etc.), but you keep avoiding that.

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#799

Post by TimJRobinson »

JeremyNT wrote: post #611
carlosdp wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also, in June—when the link says they began the investigation—it was publicly known Tornado was being used to launder money. If the developer kept working on it, they knew what they were doing. People keep saying this in this thread. Is everyone at WhatsApp also guilty of a crime for continuing to work on WhatsApp even though they know the Taliban uses it for communication?

Cryptocurrency mixers exist solely to launder money. This is literally all they are useful for. WhatsApp has legitimate, non-criminal use cases.

1. Russian citizens or political figures wanting to donate to friends and family in Ukraine without being prosecuted / jailed / killed.

2. Not wanting to give your entire financial history to every single person you interact with.

Do you like such a privileged life that you can't imagine a government or adversary using knowledge about your finances against you? Do you think Russians trying to help friends and family should be restricted from doing so because Putin says so?

Re: Arrest of suspected developer of Tornado Cash

#800

Post by sneed-oil »

jshen wrote: post #530
MrPatan wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear criminals keep using cash to launder money, but the central banks keep printing cash! Outrageous! Unbelievable behaviour! To jail with the lot, straight away!

The vast majority of cash is used for legitimate purposes, the same is not true of tornado cash. They are not remotely in the same ball park.

How can you possibly know that?
Post reply on HN