Topic: Risk of jail for developers. Should you be anonymous? - page 5. (Read 1809 times)

The government cannot arrest you based on something that you did when it was not a crime. If Bitcoin was made illegal to develop then using it would also be illegal. No one can be held responsible for open source projects unless they are actively committing changes to the project after it has been illegal to do so. I think there are a lot of reasons why you should remain anonymous when developing public open source software but I do not think this is one of the reasons.

Tracked, yes. But to be suppressed, is much harder, especially in a decentralized setting.

I mean, we have the internet. So do they, but they only use it for collecting data (espionage and infiltration activities are restricted to what they call "important" cases that likely some other agency knows about as well).

With the internet, you become unstoppable at sharing stuff.

Staying completely anonymous in the modern world is nearly impossible. I'm sure CIA, FBI and all other "three letter agencies" know who Satoshi was, who Bitcoin developers were/are etc. Anonymity doesn't exist, it's only a dream. If you start going against the system, you will be identified and tracked asap.

I can't comment on Africa but the news from China doesn't really look bad. It shows a solid growth in both adoption (number of users) and the number of transactions processed. The value processed was reported to surpass 100 billion yuan ($13.94 billion) recently, they claim that it is out of initial stage and is being used more.

I never understoond this statement about CBDCs! People use fiat that is printed by the government and the banking system that is centralized and corrupt. They trust both of them. CBDC is not really a different thing, it is centralized and both issued and controlled by the government and the banksters just like fiat is.
If people were to stop trusting the system, they would  dump fiat first and move to bitcoin not continue using fiat and not trust CBDC!

"Unstoppable"? Debatable, ser. I believe the latest feedback on CBDC use in the African regions and China were not very good. The people do not trust it. Perhaps unstoppable in implementation, because the government will try to force it on their citizens, BUT it's not unstoppable if everyone demands cash and harder forms of money like Bitcoin.




That's their narrative. The developers are developing a tool for permissionlessness and censorship-resistance. The U.S. Dollar is also used for money laundering and terrorism, is that the Federal Reserve's fault?


When the government pushes Bitcoin, and crypto in general further underground, I believe there would be no choice but for developers to become more anonymous. Does that make the situation safer for the government? Or more dangerous?

Everyone makes mistakes regardless of who they are and how knowledgeable they are, and sometimes one mistake can have big consequences.

This is why diversification is mandatory. EU is only 13% of all the countries in the world with only about 5% of the population.

Actually the more time passes, the more bitcoin will be adopted ergo it becomes a lot harder to crack down on something that a large percentage of the population uses. Imagine if today they wanted to ban smart phones compared to banning them when they first came out!

I also wonder if by being not anonymous you are more prone to hacking attempts. I mean the fact that Luke Dashjr got his coins hacked was pretty shocking to me. Im still wondering how someone that has such a high level of expertise got hacked, that im considering he got compromised IRL somehow.


But you are applying linear thought where the EU courts remain somewhat reliable against individual state rulings. Im talking about supranational laws that would apply all over the EU. Stuff like MICA applies on all members. They could just agree that Bitcoin posses systemic risk against the Euro or something along the lines, you know the classics (money laundering, financing terrorism) and ban it as well as prosecute anyone developing it. I know this sounds insane but im talking long term. In 50 years things can change a lot, what seems now impossible may become possible eventually.

At the moment, a lot of crypto projects have done a good job casting themselves in the devil's light (like Luna and OneCoin and BitConnect and literally any pump & dump scheme) that the public would like to see the developers behind them jailed.

Unfortunately, this concept is generalized to all crypto projects including the ones that have no intention of hurting anyone, such as Bitcoin.

Speaking of popular opinion and jurisdiction,
Is cryptocurrency or projects anything close to having those?
For the most we know, the population that aren't hooked up with the cryptocurrency or its derivative projects are far less compared to the few of us that have anonymously adopted the system today. How does that go for popular opinion and the government as we all know a several miles away from anything cryptocurrency or its related projects adoption.

The most we've seen is there development of the CBDC as a way to combat cryptocurrency which isn't going so well with them as we know it.

Although, government in the ne of jurisdiction shouldn't make slave or inhibits a person's freewill to 8nbest when it doenst hurt nobody. The harms that might follow from cryptocurrency investments are often due to an investors inability to DYOR.

I don't see developers to be at any risk for putting something out there. That's no crime.

Such problem could be partially migrated with security/privacy oriented OS such as Qubes OS. With proper usage separation between VM/Qube, it's less likely you'll make a mistake. Even if you're hacked, the hacker most likely only have access of the hacked VM/Qube. And considering cryptocurrency is bulletproof could trip you up in the future.

Without people, crypto is defenseless [it can be taken offline or banned, it's not The Terminator].

But people have weapons they can defend themselves with. This includes devs.

We're not talking about firearms here, but rather legal (your licenses, jurisdiction and international law) and popular support (public opinion, empathy, demonstrations & consensus).

The above's for if its a nation state. If you're up against a bunch of internet stalkers then running some more handles usually does the trick in throwing them off.

It is pretty hard to stay anonymous on the internet. Especially if you are a dev that has to work on a project all the time. Fixing bugs, creating updates all the time, sooner or later you will make a mistake and lose your anonymity. Hell, even if you do everything right, you still may lose your anonymity because some clever bastard may hack you.

That’s one of the weaknesses of crypto imo. Crypto itself is bullet proof but their devs aren’t.

To buttress on what you have just said mate, I think the CBDCs as a centralized entity are just scared of loosing total control in the coming years as digital currency is gradually taking a centre stage all over the globe and this threaten their whims and caprices as it were before the coming of decentralized digital currency. And the anonymity of developers like Satoshi is one astute technique I must say that has outsmart the centralized systems (government) for sure and there has been no loophole to trace bringing an end to it.

How did you say this dude? I don't believe that by 2025 the value of bitcoin and Ethereum will be zero, this is just your speculation and I don't know where you got this opinion from.

    Don't you know that there are many ways to get bitcoin or Ethereum huh? It is very clear that bitcoin is called a peer-to-peer currency, you should know that here. So, meaning Bitcoin is far different from the banks.

I would like to stray a little in bringing up an analogy that could explain responsibility as per producer and user.

Let's Let's guns for an example. It is used for peace as much as war and spreading terror. Its not up to the producer to decide what purpose its user would be using it for. User defines purpose and is held responsible for that.

Anonymity in cryptocurrency has been some means to ensure there isn't any centralisation to it on the part of the developer and that's part of the reasons why Satoshi stayed completely clear of the network and not staying clear of issues with the government.

The development of all these CBDCs only points to one fact, the importance of a digital currency but for CBDCs, the are centralized and tide to a government still.

As we all know that there are some people who want to control the woord world and also it's economy. And as a world is going upward and moving towards digitalization, there are will be some flaws and also some pros and cons.
As for as digital euro or other currency is developing and that it could be a major problem too. And also there will be some famous developers might get charges and for those who are anonymous and wants to be decentralized than they can be saved from this types of scandals.
As still there are some governments think that Btc and other crypto are source of money laundering and it could be a true too. Cause a lot of many people are depositing money into Cryptocurrency and they are saved.

Public figures facing charges is probably the ultimate solution they have in store for us.  Fear of ECB is the last thing they want us to have.  For now, one strategy works very well.  The money laundering excuse to do all of this.

I really believe things will become worse and more severe the more resistance they meet.  If they get enough people out of Cryptocurrencies by a certain deadline, next plan is up.  Will it be public charges?  Will it be calling Bitcoin once again a currency used in crime?  I have no idea.  But if they impose through fear, they will meet too much skepticism and they do not want that.

They want to outlaw us slowly and only call declared addresses and transactions lawful.  This way, people will easily bend over and obey.

Think about it.  If I pointed a knife at you while telling you some body is bad, you would not know that person is bad.  You will first question why the pointed knife.  If I told you some body is currently investigated by the FBI and repeated this to you every week for an year, it is probable you will avoid interacting with that person.

They are playing mind games.  Do not fall for them.  I know for a fact that using Bitcoin the way we are using it today will be outlawed in the future by ECB calling it a support of crime.  They want to know every thing.  And they will at one point do whatever it takes to find out.  Yet there will be people like me who will not care.  To me, I rather rot in prison than obey their twisted plans.  At that point, prison will offer you more freedom than being 'free' will.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

Developer here.


Bullshit. We would challenge such a notion in EU courts on antitrust grounds if they bring an iota of monopoly on the table.

That is how you use their own weapon against them.


They can't go after developers of open-source projects because the no-liability clauses protect them.

For example, if Tornado Cash developer was not involved in money laundering himself then the Dutch would not have a valid reason to arrest him (OFAC sanctions do not count).

In case of a ban within the EU the BTC price would be much higher within the EU than outside of it. Black market prices always come at a premium.

Either way I don't think CBDCs will become much of a thing within the foreseeable future. Sure, governments will dabble in it and some people will use it but I don't think it will replace cash any time soon. Even for societies that are already cashless the incentives to switch to CBDCs seem to be rather limited.

I think you should, especially if you're designing something that emphasizes on privacy. We're moving towards a more oppressive regime, all of us in Europe, no doubt.

There's indeed tendency to repeal cash, and switch to completely digital money. I don't know what kind of reference you want, though. One where Lagarde makes such tremendous statement?

Seriously, that's your conclusion? You haven't understood bitcoin well, buddy.