Assange is free, examining Bitcoin's role

snerd

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

Quote from: Die_empty on June 27, 2024, 03:25:53 PM

Quote from: kryptqnick on June 27, 2024, 08:03:48 AM

I'm not a fan of Assange, Snowden, and other similar people, primarily because their distrust for the US seems to match their sympathy toward Russia, an authoritarian regime waging wars against other nations and oppressing its population.

A drowning man will hold anything to survive. I think these men move towards Russia because it might be the only country that can protect them from prosecution and going to jail in the US. It's just like befriending an enemy of your enemy for protection. But many people see them as freedom fighters. Yesterday, Assange was able to raise $872,000 in a few hours which exceeded the $520,000 emergency appeal he needed to cover his transportation and other expenses.

Quote from: odolvlobo on June 26, 2024, 04:33:42 PM

Quote from: buwaytress on June 26, 2024, 06:34:02 AM

Yesterday, The Times put WL's Bitcoin "war chest" at 4,000 BTC.

I'm proud to say that I donated a bunch of those in 2012 after Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal blockaded them. Now that mine are all spent, I wouldn't mind getting a few of those back Wink

I read a publication where Julian Assange was thanking the US for blocking donations to WikiLeaks through payment companies like Visa and MasterCard. His reason was that this blocking made him accept donations in cryptocurrencies. Assange believed that it was this policy that made WikiLeaks to invest in Bitcoin. I doubt if Assange still possesses those donated coins. Maybe he might have spent most of them on legal fees and other expenses. He had to rely on donations.to cover jet and recovery costs, so I doubt if he is still rich.

This, exactly! It is one of the ‘very’ few places where Obama’s drones wouldn’t dare to take him out. They were out for blood!

SickDayIn

member

Activity: 210

Merit: 31

You make a really good point, and I am really excited to see how this story evolves. His war chest of 4000 BTC, who knows if he even has access to that anymore. He has been in hiding and imprisoned for so many years. I am sure he doesn't trust a single individual in this world.

Die_empty

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 987

Give all before death

Quote from: kryptqnick on June 27, 2024, 08:03:48 AM

I'm not a fan of Assange, Snowden, and other similar people, primarily because their distrust for the US seems to match their sympathy toward Russia, an authoritarian regime waging wars against other nations and oppressing its population.

A drowning man will hold anything to survive. I think these men move towards Russia because it might be the only country that can protect them from prosecution and going to jail in the US. It's just like befriending an enemy of your enemy for protection. But many people see them as freedom fighters. Yesterday, Assange was able to raise $872,000 in a few hours which exceeded the $520,000 emergency appeal he needed to cover his transportation and other expenses.

Quote from: odolvlobo on June 26, 2024, 04:33:42 PM

Quote from: buwaytress on June 26, 2024, 06:34:02 AM

Yesterday, The Times put WL's Bitcoin "war chest" at 4,000 BTC.

I'm proud to say that I donated a bunch of those in 2012 after Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal blockaded them. Now that mine are all spent, I wouldn't mind getting a few of those back Wink

I read a publication where Julian Assange was thanking the US for blocking donations to WikiLeaks through payment companies like Visa and MasterCard. His reason was that this blocking made him accept donations in cryptocurrencies. Assange believed that it was this policy that made WikiLeaks to invest in Bitcoin. I doubt if Assange still possesses those donated coins. Maybe he might have spent most of them on legal fees and other expenses. He had to rely on donations.to cover jet and recovery costs, so I doubt if he is still rich.

PrivacyG

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 1873

Crypto Swap Exchange

Since it was supposed to be an alternative to Fiat and it worked for the Organization of Assange, it is clear that Bitcoin can be used that way and is fulfilling its purposes. I suppose it was a Safe Haven too, as much as it was a Currency. So the conclusion to me is this simplistic. Bitcoin works and Assange proved it through his Organization.

tranthidung

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 4085

Farewell o_e_l_e_o

Quote from: kryptqnick on June 27, 2024, 08:03:48 AM

It seems natural that certain people who are anti-government and/or very privacy-conscious would be driven toward Bitcoin. There are other coins that are more focused on anonymity, but none gained the reputation and trust of Bitcoin, and Bitcoin also gives an interesting mix of both respecting privacy and promoting transparency.

It's interesting and Bitcoin can give people a mean for privacy, transparency of transactions, decentralization of its network, and full control of their bitcoin. Depends on each person, with different demand on privacy, anonymity and knowledge, there will be different practical ways.

Quote

I'm not a fan of Assange, Snowden, and other similar people, primarily because their distrust for the US seems to match their sympathy toward Russia, an authoritarian regime waging wars against other nations and oppressing its population.

They turn their swords against their national governments but they fled towards another nation that is worse than their homelands, that sucks. If it is about human rights, it's truly to say that Russia is bad.

Their activities mean something for their homeland's citizens because it creates pressure on governments to change, minor or major, so their contributions have value, I have to recognize this. But if after all, they migrated to Russia and had to say sweet words about Russia just to satisfy that regime under Putin, it sucks again. Honestly I don't know Snowden has ever said sweet words about Russia or Putin.

kryptqnick

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1402

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

It seems natural that certain people who are anti-government and/or very privacy-conscious would be driven toward Bitcoin. There are other coins that are more focused on anonymity, but none gained the reputation and trust of Bitcoin, and Bitcoin also gives an interesting mix of both respecting privacy and promoting transparency.
I'm not a fan of Assange, Snowden, and other similar people, primarily because their distrust for the US seems to match their sympathy toward Russia, an authoritarian regime waging wars against other nations and oppressing its population.

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

Quote from: odolvlobo on June 26, 2024, 04:33:42 PM

I'm proud to say that I donated a bunch of those in 2012 after Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal blockaded them. Now that mine are all spent, I wouldn't mind getting a few of those back Wink

Was hoping to get some comments or opinions from people from back then, so you seem to be one of them. The general feeling I got was Bitcoiners on this forum weren't generally supportive, nor thought the focus on Bitcoin thanks to WL was good.

But I wonder if opinions changed since then. Bitcoin has many use cases, and WL being able to accept funding because traditional means weren't available is essentially a direct parallel to my own case as a freelancer just wanting to get paid. Blocked by PayPal, not able to have Visa/MC or even SWIFT in many places where I used to work.

Quote from: NotATether on June 27, 2024, 01:23:01 AM

Wikileaks should have been doing even better than places like this forum and other sites that have reserves of dozens or hundreds of BTC, but it's felt stagnant ever since law enforcement started closing in on Assange.

So I don't think they've actually got much of a use for all that money but it sure is handy to have around in case the site and servers get shut down or seized and they have to move shop elsewhere.

Yeah, they've not published anything new for years, in all practical purposes it's dead. But keeping documents accessible and distributed, security does cost money. I'm sure his legal fees too...

NotATether

legendary

Activity: 1568

Merit: 6660

bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org

Quote from: odolvlobo on June 26, 2024, 04:33:42 PM

Quote from: buwaytress on June 26, 2024, 06:34:02 AM

Yesterday, The Times put WL's Bitcoin "war chest" at 4,000 BTC.

I'm proud to say that I donated a bunch of those in 2012 after Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal blockaded them. Now that mine are all spent, I wouldn't mind getting a few of those back Wink

Wikileaks should have been doing even better than places like this forum and other sites that have reserves of dozens or hundreds of BTC, but it's felt stagnant ever since law enforcement started closing in on Assange.

So I don't think they've actually got much of a use for all that money but it sure is handy to have around in case the site and servers get shut down or seized and they have to move shop elsewhere.

yhiaali3

legendary

Activity: 1848

Merit: 1982

Fully Regulated Crypto Casino

Quote from: Floxynice on June 26, 2024, 08:40:38 AM

Thanks OP for this information. I am just reading about the Assange and Wikileaks saga for the first. This makes a whole lot of sense now, I have always thought Satoshi disappeared because he needed some privacy and probably give room for bitcoin to be used in a decentralized way without him/her/them interfering from time to time.

Now it is clear, Satoshi must be avoiding some sort of pressure from the government and those who weren't in support of the invention as at that time.

No one knows exactly what Satoshi was thinking at the time and why he chose to maintain his privacy. There are many reasons that can be thought of, such as avoiding government pressure or perhaps even imprisonment, as well as a practical application of Bitcoin’s basic idea of privacy and decentralization, or perhaps for other reasons that we do not know.

I sometimes wonder if Satoshi had not chosen to maintain his privacy and hide his identity, what might have happened? We probably would not have seen Bitcoin as it is today.

snerd

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

Here is an excellent X thread, fairly long and detailed as to what happened….

https://x.com/btcgandalf/status/1805625236404027394?s=61&t=aDfXmP80GYGpW18BPYLfcA

odolvlobo

legendary

Activity: 4466

Merit: 3391

Quote from: buwaytress on June 26, 2024, 06:34:02 AM

Yesterday, The Times put WL's Bitcoin "war chest" at 4,000 BTC.

I'm proud to say that I donated a bunch of those in 2012 after Visa, Mastercard, and Paypal blockaded Wikileaks. Now that my bitcoins are all spent, I wouldn't mind getting a few of those back Wink

Floxynice

member

Activity: 47

Merit: 12

Quote from: buwaytress on June 26, 2024, 06:34:02 AM

It doesn't matter what you think of Assange or WikiLeaks, I just thought it might be interesting to see how Bitcoiners today view the whole saga of 14 years, if at all they consider it.

Worth pointing out that the beginning of satoshi's exit began with Wikileaks.

Quote from: satoshi on December 11, 2010, 06:39:16 PM

It would have been nice to get this attention in any other context. WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet's nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.

As governments began shutting down funding routes to WL, Bitcoin provided an alternative. When the PC World article came out, this forum crashed from the number of new visitors coming to find out about Bitcoin.

I don't know how exactly it all happened, but I understand some (self-styled) cypherpunks and crypto anarchists helped set up WL to receive Bitcoin and that really has been what's kept the organisation alive all these years. I spoke to one myself, but they aren't a Bitcoin maximalist today, so I know not everyone stayed on the same path.

Yesterday, The Times put WL's Bitcoin "war chest" at 4,000 BTC.

Thanks OP for this information. I am just reading about the Assange and Wikileaks saga for the first. This makes a whole lot of sense now, I have always thought Satoshi disappeared because he needed some privacy and probably give room for bitcoin to be used in a decentralized way without him/her/them interfering from time to time.

Now it is clear, Satoshi must be avoiding some sort of pressure from the government and those who weren't in support of the invention as at that time.

tranthidung

legendary

Activity: 2310

Merit: 4085

Farewell o_e_l_e_o

Three past threads on it.

Two interesting posts from theymos and Peter Todd.

Quote from: theymos on March 07, 2011, 09:58:30 PM

Quote from: http://reason.com/blog/2010/11/30/assange-im-influenced-by-ameri

So as far as markets are concerned I'm a libertarian, but I have enough expertise in politics and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless you force them to be free.

Would the creator of Bitcoin say something like that?

Quote from: Peter Todd on January 18, 2017, 09:14:38 AM

For the record, I said that *I* met Assange, not Satoshi.

And there's nothing terribly interesting about that: he wanted to know more about Bitcoin, and someone who's a friend of a friend suggested we chat next time I was in London; I'm always happy to talk about Bitcoin to people.

un_rank

hero member

Activity: 644

Merit: 661

- Jay -

I am reading up on this case now, I have not heard anything of Assange or the association between wikileaks and satoshi disappearing under the radar before now.

With the circumstance surrounding his release, this may be the last we hear about this case.

- Jay -

buwaytress

legendary

Activity: 2968

Merit: 3684

Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!

It doesn't matter what you think of Assange or WikiLeaks, I just thought it might be interesting to see how Bitcoiners today view the whole saga of 14 years, if at all they consider it.

Worth pointing out that the beginning of satoshi's exit began with Wikileaks.

Quote from: satoshi on December 11, 2010, 06:39:16 PM

It would have been nice to get this attention in any other context. WikiLeaks has kicked the hornet's nest, and the swarm is headed towards us.

As governments began shutting down funding routes to WL, Bitcoin provided an alternative. When the PC World article came out, this forum crashed from the number of new visitors coming to find out about Bitcoin.

I don't know how exactly it all happened, but I understand some (self-styled) cypherpunks and crypto anarchists helped set up WL to receive Bitcoin and that really has been what's kept the organisation alive all these years. I spoke to one myself, but they aren't a Bitcoin maximalist today, so I know not everyone stayed on the same path.

Yesterday, The Times put WL's Bitcoin "war chest" at 4,000 BTC.

Topic: Assange is free, examining Bitcoin's role (Read 175 times)