Topic: Moral Obligations of Bitcoin (Read 2032 times)

I'm currently selling protection kits that solve this problem.

For 100BTC I can send you a bag of fine grain sand and a shallow box (please state head size).

I want to know how the OP even come up with an idea as sick as "building a dungeon for 2 year olds" ... I mean really?

Do we really have to drag out the absolute worst in humanity in attempts to smear bitcoin?

So OP how much do you know about dungeons for 2 year olds, you seem to have some background knowledge or interest in such disgusting ideas? Why is that I wonder? What exactly are your motivations for bringing up such an evil thought?

Passing blame onto bitcoins (or the hammers used to build dungeons) for the actions of dark souls and sick minds in the realms you might inhabit is not going help with redemption or whatever else it is you might be seeking, morally speaking.

God help you, is all I can think to such a spiritually empty line of reasoning.

I've seen this thread in the past and wondered what the real purpose or intent of the original poster was.  I can't understand why anyone including myself bothers to respond to such a question.

This is a bit like asking about the moral obligations of having a bank account with BCCI which was the bank that said yes to Terrorists and Dictators.

The question is never "Is it moral", but "Is it legal".

Good question: Are you with us or against us?   

It depends on how you define 'good price'. Is it at market price, 5% below, 10% below ? No serious trader would do a trade where he loses out a lot on the trade. So personally, if somebody got in touch with me and said they wanted to do a larger transaction with a 15% surcharge, my alarm bells would ring. I am sure though, that some traders would not hesitate to the deal, as many are greedy. I would simply decline such a person. If he however said that he was willing to pay something reasonable like a 3-5% surcharge, then I would be more interested. So the answer is that I would simply decline the transaction if I felt something was fishy.


Yes, as money or bitcoins is only tools, you have no responsibility to check anything at all, unless of course there's some reasons to be very suspicious for whatever reason. If there comes one scary man, and he lays out plans on the table and goes on about how he's going to bomb a building, then I think it's time to call the police. But I don't see that happening!


I know of people that have rejected trades for various reasons. I heard one trader rejected an otc deal because the other party bluntly stated he was a drug dealer. In another event the money in question was the results of a heist where cash was stolen, so the trader in question would not accept the cash deposit from the thief.

Some people are just plain stupid and tell outright they're involved in crime, then if you're a legitimate trader, you don't deal with such people.

Apparently you have a moral obligation not to use $USD? It is just drug money.

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-08-14/health/cocaine.traces.money_1_cocaine-dollar-bills-paper-bills?_s=PM:HEALTH

Yes! You better trace it all the way back to a coinbase tx!

If you look in the Marketplace, there are a few individuals who are very clearly conducting money laundering operations with Bitcoin.  To the users of this forum's credit (and moderators) these are generally highlighted in big bold red letters that these are money laundering operations.

To answer your question, if I am aware that a transaction is being done to further illegal activities (like in the example above) then I would not conduct the transaction.  For the most part, you just need to use common sense and intuition.  Like the old saying, if it's too good to be true, it probably is.  There will be cases where people will unknowingly conduct transactions with those who are engaging in illegal activities but as mentioned, this happens with all currencies.

Ben is going to print $1 Trillion  this year to buy UST's and MBS's so that his banking friends can continue to make record bonuses.

our Fed gov't is going to run another $1 Trillion in deficit spending so that they can continue to remain in office and fund their pet programs.

where's these checks and balances you refer to?

There's a really nasty terrorist organization headquartered on the Potomac River, and I think my bank may be involved with them. What should I do?

This is very true. You HAVE moral obligations when accepting bitcoins.

In fact, in order to clear your conscience, you have to send the 10% here 1JuZoErGwTucetm7Ac33aA9wfjkn2eASza

In a matter of fact, in my country I am required by law to be a licensed Financial Service Provider in order to be allowed to run a BTC exchange.

But when trading $ to Yen you would probably be required by law in your country to register as a currency trader and you would be required to do a certain amount of reporting and due diligence.  Such as requiring valid ID for exchange, reporting amounts over a certain amount etc... etc...so it kind of answers the question of obligations for you, as the government tells you exactly what your obligations are and then you can just kind of forget about it and brush it off as "I did what I was supposed to do"

I believe the non-aggression principle is the most important ethic rule to live by and the answer to this question should be clear then. If you have a good reason to believe that you are aiding terrorist in any way by trading with them, you could argue that you assist in a terrorist act and are inflicting aggression towards innocents.

The problem is of course when there is enough reason to believe that you are in fact dealing with terrorist. Normally, they don't want to reveal themselves and when you trade bitcoins for a living, you might not have the time to investigate every deal in detail. Nor should you. When you recognize someone from the FBI most wanted list on the other hand, you have the moral obligation to inform the authorities, since failing to do so clearly increases danger towards others.

He could easily do both. Financing his dungeon with his tamagotchis sells.

But I get what you mean. So, lets replace that example in a way that it actually makes sense:

The guy could have been busy selling tamagotchis for bitcoins, and he's just cashing out.

Or he could have been busy selling slaves and he's just cashing out.

And still I see no difference in doing this with BTC than with any other currency. If I'm exchanging $ to Yen or $ to BTC, there are the same obligations involved.

What you call "terrorism" others call "freedom-fighting", and vice versa!

Over the course of your life, you've unknowingly made all kinds of business deals and taken personal actions that directly helped people whose actions of some kind you would find objectionable. You didn't do a background check on everyone whom you personally helped...

It's part of the Human Condition to unknowingly help such people, because of the vast number of mutual and one-sided beneficial interactions we have with all kinds of people.

"Moral obligations" exist only in the realm of advanced, mentally healthy, living beings; even a lower living being, such as a dog has no moral obligations, not to mention objects of any kind.

The whole premise of this thread is as ridiculous as asking whether or not a rock has any moral obligation not to be thrown at someone! 

Because with fiat money laundering schemes it's fairly easy to see whether you are a part of a scheme or not (yeah if you are accepting payments from random people and forwarding 80% you know you are laundering money).  But with Bitcoin one can fall into a grey area where you are not really sure what's going on with the money around you, and you can keep it that way if you want.

The guy could have been busy selling tamagotchis for bitcoins, and he's just cashing out.

Or he could be building a dungeon in his basement for 2 year olds.

There is still no difference between this and money laundering schemes with fiat.

In my country they are currently warning to not accept routing schemes. - They are offering you to make one or more payment to you Bank account or to give you cash and you have to forward 80% to another Bank account and keep the 20%.

I don't see the difference if there is Bitcoin involved.

But with fiat currencies one can morally justify accepting most cash (such as supermarket money etc...) without much thought because one can assume (possibly falsely) that there are some kind of checks and balances behind it.

Whether it's true not you can feel like it's not your problem because there are government agencies, companies and banks and you can dismiss the responsibility by thinking "I'm sure they're checking it all out".

But when El Binhamidi Boom Boom comes to you with $20,000 worth of bitcoins for 75% market price, you know there is no one but you between him and cash.  And without you he may not have been able to get cash because an international wire transfer may have been flagged, or cash in his underwear on the plane may have been found, etc...

I'm mostly focusing on terrorism because I think most people would find it morally disturbing so makes for clearer examples.