Topic: Do NOT declare that you have ever owned bitcoins (Read 6549 times)
It's a good job I aint got any coins and only made out I did so I could learn what i did
How can a nation tell who's using crypto currency? Isn't there a level of anonymity that will make it cumbersome trying to pinpoint who to tax?
Well it sure is a lot easier than figuring out who is using paper cash...
I would actually say that it is about equal! And frankly in many ways bitcoins are better than pure cash. If you have any faith in crypto at all you have to imagine that the goods and services available through bit/other coins will only continue to increase.
How can a nation tell who's using crypto currency? Isn't there a level of anonymity that will make it cumbersome trying to pinpoint who to tax?
Well it sure is a lot easier than figuring out who is using paper cash...
What about the wallet on your computer? Don't you think it's existence is sufficient proof that you own the bitcoins at the addresses it contains?
That would be sufficient proof, but in order to get your computer, they would need a warrant, and in order to get a warrant, they would need to have some proof already.
Also, you could (and should) use a program like TrueCrypt to encrypt your entire hard drive. That way, it will be impossible to know if you had any wallets on your PC.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/09/12/key-disclosure-laws-can-be-used-to-confiscate-bitcoin-assets/
Well. Have one or two coins in a wallet. And thousand in the other. Pausible deniability. Done.
What about the wallet on your computer? Don't you think it's existence is sufficient proof that you own the bitcoins at the addresses it contains?
That would be sufficient proof, but in order to get your computer, they would need a warrant, and in order to get a warrant, they would need to have some proof already.
Also, you could (and should) use a program like TrueCrypt to encrypt your entire hard drive. That way, it will be impossible to know if you had any wallets on your PC.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonmatonis/2012/09/12/key-disclosure-laws-can-be-used-to-confiscate-bitcoin-assets/
What about the wallet on your computer? Don't you think it's existence is sufficient proof that you own the bitcoins at the addresses it contains?
That would be sufficient proof, but in order to get your computer, they would need a warrant, and in order to get a warrant, they would need to have some proof already.
Also, you could (and should) use a program like TrueCrypt to encrypt your entire hard drive. That way, it will be impossible to know if you had any wallets on your PC.
People should pay taxes on bitcoins. It's probably the only thing that can prevent a complete shutdown.
No. Thinking that you can stop the Mafia by giving them even more money is absurd. Any action that would speed up the inevitable collapse of the current system is morally justified, and is good for Bitcoin. Dump more dollars. Get more bitcoins.
There are a lot of threads about taxation and FinCEN regulation on this forum. Now you can pay taxes, register yourself as Money Service Business (MSB) and sleep well, but... The state won't stop and will continue to strangle Bitcoin. One day it will make Bitcoin illegal.
Now the state collects data who uses Bitcoin, so in the future (when Bitcoin becomes illegal) they'll pay very close attention to those who declared that they "touched" bitcoins. It's a well known trick:
1. Pretend you are just going to regulate something.
2. Collect data about users.
3. Make it illegal.
4. Spy the users.
5. Prosecute those who violate the law.
Keep this in mind...
Now the state collects data who uses Bitcoin, so in the future (when Bitcoin becomes illegal) they'll pay very close attention to those who declared that they "touched" bitcoins. It's a well known trick:
1. Pretend you are just going to regulate something.
2. Collect data about users.
3. Make it illegal.
4. Spy the users.
5. Prosecute those who violate the law.
Keep this in mind...
Wouldn't spying on users come 3rd? Seeing how making it illegal would stop their constant source of usage patterns,etc.Banning it comes 4th I think as, they'll have enough info to chase after all the users after snooping on them all first (after collecting that info before hand).
3rd take as long as to put signature under the law.
There are a lot of threads about taxation and FinCEN regulation on this forum. Now you can pay taxes, register yourself as Money Service Business (MSB) and sleep well, but... The state won't stop and will continue to strangle Bitcoin. One day it will make Bitcoin illegal.
Now the state collects data who uses Bitcoin, so in the future (when Bitcoin becomes illegal) they'll pay very close attention to those who declared that they "touched" bitcoins. It's a well known trick:
1. Pretend you are just going to regulate something.
2. Collect data about users.
3. Make it illegal.
4. Spy the users.
5. Prosecute those who violate the law.
Keep this in mind...
Now the state collects data who uses Bitcoin, so in the future (when Bitcoin becomes illegal) they'll pay very close attention to those who declared that they "touched" bitcoins. It's a well known trick:
1. Pretend you are just going to regulate something.
2. Collect data about users.
3. Make it illegal.
4. Spy the users.
5. Prosecute those who violate the law.
Keep this in mind...
Wouldn't spying on users come 3rd? Seeing how making it illegal would stop their constant source of usage patterns,etc.Banning it comes 4th I think as, they'll have enough info to chase after all the users after snooping on them all first (after collecting that info before hand).
However I can create a random bistring of zeroes and ones that doesn't have 11 anywhere in it.
You can. But the longer that bitstring gets, the less likely a 1 always being followed by a 0 gets. Perhaps you just don't get how big "infinite" really is?Oh, and you'll note that I did say "random or pseudo-random."
Very well, you have shown me that you can construct an infinite bitstring which excludes a particular finite bitstring. But we're not talking about your constructed pattern. We're talking about Pi. Pi does not follow that pattern. So let me amend my statement: Any infinite, non-repeating random or pseudo-random bitstring contains all finite bitstrings. Somewhere. I might even say that any infinite, non-repeating bitstring not specifically constructed to exclude them contains all finite bitstrings.
Take an infinite supply of alpha-bits, and set them down one after the other in no particular order. Do this long enough, and you will reproduce Shakespeare's collected works.
Count incrementally in Hexadecimal, and you will eventually get every private key in existence.
00010100 00010001
I guarantee that I have just reproduced, via copy and paste from here, someone's bank card PIN. Maybe even yours. (I checked, it's not mine)
Even if I granted you this false statement, you have to demonstrate that pi is random to establish your original claim. Unfortunately pi is far from random.Take an infinite supply of alpha-bits, and set them down one after the other in no particular order. Do this long enough, and you will reproduce Shakespeare's collected works.
Count incrementally in Hexadecimal, and you will eventually get every private key in existence.
00010100 00010001
I guarantee that I have just reproduced, via copy and paste from here, someone's bank card PIN. Maybe even yours. (I checked, it's not mine)
However I can create a random bistring of zeroes and ones that doesn't have 11 anywhere in it.
Stick to something you understand and can prove.
Consider the number that is a zero, a one, 2 zeroes, a one, 3 zeroes, a 1, etc.
010010001...
Clearly this is non repeating and infinite. Show me where 11 appears in this bitstring?
Very well, you have shown me that you can construct an infinite bitstring which excludes a particular finite bitstring. But we're not talking about your constructed pattern. We're talking about Pi. Pi does not follow that pattern. So let me amend my statement: Any infinite, non-repeating random or pseudo-random bitstring contains all finite bitstrings. Somewhere. I might even say that any infinite, non-repeating bitstring not specifically constructed to exclude them contains all finite bitstrings.010010001...
Clearly this is non repeating and infinite. Show me where 11 appears in this bitstring?
Take an infinite supply of alpha-bits, and set them down one after the other in no particular order. Do this long enough, and you will reproduce Shakespeare's collected works.
Count incrementally in Hexadecimal, and you will eventually get every private key in existence.
00010100 00010001
I guarantee that I have just reproduced, via copy and paste from here, someone's bank card PIN. Maybe even yours. (I checked, it's not mine)
Sort of along the same lines, technically calculating pi is illegal. Since it contains all finite bitstrings
Um, what makes you say that? I'm pretty sure it's untrue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
Quote
π is an irrational number, which means that it cannot be expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers (such as 22/7 or other fractions that are commonly used to approximate π); consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never settles into a permanent repeating pattern.
Calculate far enough, you'll get any data you want. (Yes, that may be further than practical to calculate, but it's there. Eventually.)
Consider writing pi in binary. That never repeats, and can be considered a decimal number too. But you'll never ever see the single digit "2" never mind longer sequences.
Edit: And you'll also find numerous instances of "00000010" which is the standard binary representation of the digit "2." Any infinite, non-repeating bitstring contains all finite bitstrings. Somewhere.
Consider the number that is a zero, a one, 2 zeroes, a one, 3 zeroes, a 1, etc.
010010001...
Clearly this is non repeating and infinite. Show me where 11 appears in this bitstring?
If you're wise you could do all your trades over the counter on localbitcoins or whatever. Anyone who's used an exchange likely has a papertrail. That trail is strongest if you've sent them ID.
Sort of along the same lines, technically calculating pi is illegal. Since it contains all finite bitstrings
Um, what makes you say that? I'm pretty sure it's untrue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
Quote
π is an irrational number, which means that it cannot be expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers (such as 22/7 or other fractions that are commonly used to approximate π); consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never settles into a permanent repeating pattern.
Calculate far enough, you'll get any data you want. (Yes, that may be further than practical to calculate, but it's there. Eventually.)
Consider writing pi in binary. That never repeats, and can be considered a decimal number too. But you'll never ever see the single digit "2" never mind longer sequences.
The "considered a decimal number too" is an artifact. The fact that a binary number looks like a decimal number does not make it a decimal number for purposes of computation. There are no eleven-toed sloths.
Sort of along the same lines, technically calculating pi is illegal. Since it contains all finite bitstrings
Um, what makes you say that? I'm pretty sure it's untrue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
Quote
π is an irrational number, which means that it cannot be expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers (such as 22/7 or other fractions that are commonly used to approximate π); consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never settles into a permanent repeating pattern.
Calculate far enough, you'll get any data you want. (Yes, that may be further than practical to calculate, but it's there. Eventually.)
Consider writing pi in binary. That never repeats, and can be considered a decimal number too. But you'll never ever see the single digit "2" never mind longer sequences.
Edit: And you'll also find numerous instances of "00000010" which is the standard binary representation of the digit "2." Any infinite, non-repeating bitstring contains all finite bitstrings. Somewhere.
Sort of along the same lines, technically calculating pi is illegal. Since it contains all finite bitstrings
Um, what makes you say that? I'm pretty sure it's untrue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
Quote
π is an irrational number, which means that it cannot be expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers (such as 22/7 or other fractions that are commonly used to approximate π); consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never settles into a permanent repeating pattern.
Calculate far enough, you'll get any data you want. (Yes, that may be further than practical to calculate, but it's there. Eventually.)
Consider writing pi in binary. That never repeats, and can be considered a decimal number too. But you'll never ever see the single digit "2" never mind longer sequences.
In my opinion, it would be impossible to prove that you own bitcoins, unless you officially admitted it.
Consider the example of computer hacking - it is impossible to prove that you personally was doing the hacking, even if your IP gets logged during the hack. I have read about many cases where hackers were tracked by their IP and convicted, but in ALL those cases the hacker has admitted guilt. I have never ever read about a case, where someone would be convicted of hacking, only because of their IP, while they denied doing the hacking. If you have heard of any such cases, please correct me.
The same applies to bitcoin - it would be impossible to prove, if bitcoins were used by you, or just by someone pretending to be you. Even if a bitcoin address was posted on your facebook page, who could prove, if it was really posted by you, or by someone who hacked your facebook?
Consider the example of computer hacking - it is impossible to prove that you personally was doing the hacking, even if your IP gets logged during the hack. I have read about many cases where hackers were tracked by their IP and convicted, but in ALL those cases the hacker has admitted guilt. I have never ever read about a case, where someone would be convicted of hacking, only because of their IP, while they denied doing the hacking. If you have heard of any such cases, please correct me.
The same applies to bitcoin - it would be impossible to prove, if bitcoins were used by you, or just by someone pretending to be you. Even if a bitcoin address was posted on your facebook page, who could prove, if it was really posted by you, or by someone who hacked your facebook?
What about the wallet on your computer? Don't you think it's existence is sufficient proof that you own the bitcoins at the addresses it contains?
Sort of along the same lines, technically calculating pi is illegal. Since it contains all finite bitstrings
Um, what makes you say that? I'm pretty sure it's untrue.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
Quote
π is an irrational number, which means that it cannot be expressed exactly as a ratio of two integers (such as 22/7 or other fractions that are commonly used to approximate π); consequently, its decimal representation never ends and never settles into a permanent repeating pattern.
Calculate far enough, you'll get any data you want. (Yes, that may be further than practical to calculate, but it's there. Eventually.)
In my opinion, it would be impossible to prove that you own bitcoins, unless you officially admitted it.
Consider the example of computer hacking - it is impossible to prove that you personally was doing the hacking, even if your IP gets logged during the hack. I have read about many cases where hackers were tracked by their IP and convicted, but in ALL those cases the hacker has admitted guilt. I have never ever read about a case, where someone would be convicted of hacking, only because of their IP, while they denied doing the hacking. If you have heard of any such cases, please correct me.
The same applies to bitcoin - it would be impossible to prove, if bitcoins were used by you, or just by someone pretending to be you. Even if a bitcoin address was posted on your facebook page, who could prove, if it was really posted by you, or by someone who hacked your facebook?
Consider the example of computer hacking - it is impossible to prove that you personally was doing the hacking, even if your IP gets logged during the hack. I have read about many cases where hackers were tracked by their IP and convicted, but in ALL those cases the hacker has admitted guilt. I have never ever read about a case, where someone would be convicted of hacking, only because of their IP, while they denied doing the hacking. If you have heard of any such cases, please correct me.
The same applies to bitcoin - it would be impossible to prove, if bitcoins were used by you, or just by someone pretending to be you. Even if a bitcoin address was posted on your facebook page, who could prove, if it was really posted by you, or by someone who hacked your facebook?
Jump to: