I never disagreed with you on the surveillance and neither did MrMuppet. You can look at my first reply to you You think I want BTC to be used for criminal activities? Bitcoin adoption in the US is going great, PayPal, Visa, MC, Gucci, Tag Heuer, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Tesla, Fidelity, JP Morgan, and the US lawmakers are all supportive of Bitcoin That's not going to happen if we don't support legal usage of Bitcoin which includes transparency of transactions to make sure AML laws, tax evasion, and other illegal activities are not taking place Surveillance? Yes it is. Don't commit illegal acts using Bitcoin because the blockhain is a permanent and transparent public ledger
True, but all of this describes how permissioned systems have worked in the past, work now and will work in future. My argument was to MrPuppet to stop using "permissionless". Then I described to you how the lack of certain features like fungibility, privacy etc lead to surveillance which enables permission in the system because of which one needs to abide by KYC, AML etc. So permissionless, censorship resistance need to be dropped from the marketing. Good luck all of the other features. Signed: Poor Central Banker.
I really wanted to let you have the last word on this but just want to clarify why we disagree Permission means prior to the transaction. Surveillance is after transaction has occurred Let's take the case of KARASAV1Dl, Dm1trii, if he buys a computer, wipes out the OS, installs Linux and the Bitcoin software, generates brand new 100,000 BTC addresses and send me a few of those addresses If I send BTC to those new addresses, I don't think you'll disagree with me that the transaction will go through If I'm in the US or a US Citizen, I violated the law and if caught by the authorities, will face consequences If I'm part of the North Korea hacking team, it's just part of operations, I'm guessing and will never face any consequences what if I'm in Brazil, will anyone go after me if they find out? What if I'm in Vietnam? What if no one ever finds out that those addresses belong to KARASAV1Dl, Dm1trii? Permission vs Surveillance
Yes and you still don't get it that this is subversion, just like what you can somewhat do today in the credit card world or any of the existing fiat systems. The Blacklisted BTC address will become useless in a permissioned system like fiat can be and sometimes can be overcome if someone is stretching laws etc. Doesn't make it permissionless. What you are describing is one way to do it, in hopes of not getting traced back in some fashion down the road. Increasingly unlikely and I posted an example of the levels just being explored nowadays via surveillance and tracking. Very very disingenuous to market censorship resistance or permissionless anymore. Be more responsible.
SEC Commissioner Urges to Act Proactively on Crypto SEC Commissioner Urges to Act Proactively on Crypto By Anna Lyudvig - June 16, 2022 Anna Lyudvig Share Tweet Share Hester Peirce Hester Peirce, SEC Commissioner, said it’s in both investors’ and the SEC’s interest to take a more productive approach to crypto regulation. In her remarks at “Regulatory Transparency Project Conference on Regulating the New Crypto Ecosystem: Necessary Regulation or Crippling Future Innovation”, she was quite critical of the SEC’s approach, but remained optimistic that the SEC can change course. “Watching the SEC refuse over the past four years to engage productively with crypto users and developers has prompted feelings of disbelief at the SEC’s puzzling, out-of-character approach to regulation,” she said. “Using the tools Congress has given us and drawing on public input, we can provide regulatory clarity, facilitate iterative experimentation, and pursue bad actors in the crypto space,” she added. According to Peirce, it is time for the Commission to stop denying categorically spot crypto exchange-traded products. Until this year, she said, all of the futures-based exchange-traded products that were approved fell under the 1940 Act. In April of this year, however, the Commission approved the first non-1940 Act ETP holding bitcoin futures for listing and trading on an exchange. The Commission still has not approved any ETP based on the spot bitcoin market. She added that despite the success of futures-based ETP applicants over the past eight months, the Commission keeps denying spot bitcoin ETPs. Peirce said that the Commission has tried to cobble together a regulatory framework through enforcement actions, adding that enforcement is the appropriate tool to address the rampant fraud in the crypto space. One-off enforcement actions that represent the first time the Commission has addressed a particular issue publicly, however, are not the right way to build a regulatory framework, according to Commissioner. “For that, Congress gave us other tools, including the authority to craft tailored exemptions and notice-and-comment rulemaking,” she said. She added that enforcement actions short-cut the regulatory process, citing the recent $100m BlockFi settlement with the SEC and 32 states. She said that BlockFi is one of a number of companies that offers crypto lending products, which were determined to be securities products. The Commission, in its settlement, set out a path pursuant to which BlockFi could register under the Securities Act and register or take steps to qualify under an Investment Company Act exemption from registration, she explained. “The specific path laid out in settlement agreement crafted between BlockFi and the SEC, if successful, is likely to become the standard for regulation of crypto lending,” she said. “We might similarly consider, rather than a reactive enforcement approach, a proactive regulatory approach with respect to non-fungible tokens, stablecoins, decentralized exchanges, decentralized autonomous organizations, and other crypto innovations,” she said. Peirce further added that “people doing things in crypto need to consider whether the laws, including the securities laws, govern their behavior”. For this to happen in a more efficient and comprehensive way, the Commission needs to provide a level of clarity that heretofore has been absent, she sad. “The SEC could think through issues with people in the crypto community with an eye toward achieving our regulatory objectives pragmatically,” she said. “By doing so, we could both facilitate good actors’ compliance and inhibit bad actors much more effectively than we do through resource-intensive and delayed enforcement actions,” she added. Peirce mentioned that the CFTC and the SEC have worked effectively in the past in areas where their jurisdictions are closely linked. She added that a recent rule proposal that seems to implicate crypto platforms generated a number of comments from people and organizations willing to work with the SEC on crafting an appropriate regulatory approach. “People stand ready to work through the myriad questions and regulatory concerns around crypto. Now all we have to do is extend them a hand,” she said. https://www.tradersmagazine.com/fea...mmissioner-urges-to-act-proactively-on-crypto
nacho keys, nacho coins But I do keep a couple of BTC's on Coinbase... it's for the wife to get quick cash to our bank account if something happens to me I just tried sending out 1 BTC and I'm not encountering any problems. I never setup a whitelist address and have been using Coinbase for many years
Yes, you still do. If you do an on chain transfer peer2peer, there is no such thing as whitelisting. If you decide to interact with Tier1 exchanges or other regulated entities that have strict AML requirements that's your choice. But if I want to send you 1 BTC you just give me your public key and that's it. No permission and no middle man necessary to push that transfer. Trading is mostly done on exchanges which is why traders must comply with AML/KYC rules but payments can be done peer2peer on chain. Add decentralized exchanges to the mix...still no AML/KYC
I think you are trying to tell me what works to subvert the system. Each time I am trying to explain, someone comes back and tells me how easy it is to subvert the system of blacklists and whitelists. That you can deploy p2p mechanism to overcome or any other methods (there are 2 more which are far more private and safer for the time being) 1) This is NOT the point. A permissionless system doesn't even have the concept of blacklist and whitelists. What you can do to overcome it is meaningless. The point is that it has permissions now built around it just like TradFi. The lack of fungibility and private design makes it possible to enforce blacklists and whitelists. Whether you are able to subvert it is a different issue. Fiat doesn't impose restrictions in itself. It's architecture allows for making it happen and human elements to enforce it. Same in BTC now and much much tighter going forward. 2) It is not easy. You would have taken me up on that $1 bet to have more productive demonstration. Instead you saw what I was asked to do instead. Just because fiat is bad and permissioned doesn't mean there are no ways to beat the fiat system either. E.g if someone's bank account is seized, they can try to open another bank account and or other such methods. They *can* overcome many restrictions or whitelist and blacklist in tradfi too. It doesn't make fiat permissionless. In fact it is far easy to do things privately and without permission in TradFi than in BTC. Similar weaknesses in protocol and increasing innovation is BTC tracking and surveillance make the arguments for permissionless weaker and weaker over time and is false advertising. The Canadian truckers fiasco was another such big incident of p2p transactions to bypass bank restrictions failing. Donors have been tracked, funds seized etc. I am not sure why you are trying to defend BTC and what you might have read yourself as a marketing jargon, didn't think about understanding it, and are now recycling it verbatim. It makes no difference to BTC price. It is ok. I think this is why Tether needs to completely go to zero as well. It will reduce the stupidity and arrogance of the sector somewhat and more rational discussions across internet or otherwise and bring real adoption. Until Tether melts, a "Bitcoiner" could be anyone these days trying to personify arrogance as a way to give back to the tribe.
First of all...if your bank account is seized, you're fked, period. You can open another bank account but you're still flat broke. You cannot seize a BTC wallet unless you were stupid enough to leave your coins on an exchange. There is a story of a convicted criminal who used malware to mine BTC through a botnet. He got caught, he spent his time in jail but because he never told anyone his private keys, he still owns the BTC. Try to seize something that is a number in your head. Second, you're probably pretty new to the game, because when I started in 2015 there wasn't even KYC/AML on exchanges and the credo was and still is: Not your keys not your coins. Back then exchanges were a security issue so nobody would have been stupid enough to transact through exchanges unless you want to trade. Everyone with half a brain trades on exchange and withdraws right away and you usually use multiple exchanges. You need to stop viewing this asset class through a TradFi lens. Just because there has been built a gammut of service providers in this market does not mean you have to use any of this. If you want to get your hands on clean (meaning never transacted) BTC, you can just ring up a miner and buy it directly from the source. Delivery after payment or escrow, peer2peer, no exchange, no prime broker, no other counterparty involved....given you trade size. And if you are a small fry piker, just use the various P2P platforms like HodlHodl, Paxful, etc. or swap your stuff on a DEX like Uniswap or 1inch. Again, no 3rd party required. If you need cash to pay bills, you take out a loan and back it up with crypto. Lending/borrowing can be done via DeFi, too vs. stables. If you don't want to, you don't need to interact with traditional fincance at all. You don't ever need to sell any of your crypto if you don't want to. But you need to know how to run a portfolio, juggle interest rates and hedge yourself so your networth in crypto as well as USD isn't exposed to volatility. And by the way, I'm not trying to defend anything. I'm in this market since derivatives trading started on Bitmex and I had the advantage of knowing a thing or two about markets. Despite not being a HODLer it was extremely easy money and still is today. I probably made all the mistakes when it comes to trading, transacting and custody. I don't know how many people here on ET ever used a 1st generation Trezor that had insane security issues. I still have that piece of shit on my desk. Believe me, when you apply best practises you'll never ever need an exchange to do business for you and that's how it's meant to be. It's just difficult to learn. Of course, you have your opinion and you could stick with it. I just know from experience that it is not true....there is a difference between hearsay and reading tweets and putting money on the table to try it.