Topic: Should we be trying harder to stop the BTC black market? - page 5. (Read 14845 times)

But the black market also caters to things that are fairly universally regarded as crimes against the person. Murder, forced prostitution, slavery and child trafficking for example. The answer is that you should probably do as your conscience tells you.

I think that, simply, like all companies, Bitcoin based ones should only comply with the minimum law requirements. And if businesses can find a way to ignore the law successfully (either like Silk Road, or by being distributed enough as to be impossible to regulate), they should do that too. Black markets still provide tons of benefits, from jobs to goods for those who need them, so I wouldn't consider them inherently bad (the only bad thing about them is that governments don't get their licensing fees and tax revenues, but on the other hand, black markets also don't receive business and security protections from government that legit markets get). Being able to skirt government laws and regulations also points out errors in those laws, such as the way Bitcoin does for "money transmitter license" requirements (the system itself is the money transmitter, so there's no one to buy the license). Likewise, skirting government laws points out errors of laws themselves, such as laws that may have had good intentions, but which shouldn't have existed in the first place, and being able to easily skirt them causes society to change its mind on them (such as copyright laws, which are now often ignored, especially in cases where videos are limited to specific regions, or TV episodes are available on Netflix/Hulu months after their original air date).

TL;DR Bitcoin should push the limits of what we consider moral or justifiable, as opposed to what we consider lawful, and thus help redefine the laws. It likely won't die any easier than Bittorrent.

I'm not aware of the owners of this blog claiming to be libertarian (though they may well have) and that would be outside the scope of this thread anyway. I'm not even saying anything against your stance (though I don't agree with it). It's more your self classification as a libertarian.

Some of us live in the real world, not an Ayn Rand fantasy.

Obviously governments are going to bump in to BTC financial service companies more and more often, and the legitimate ones will comply with regulations. Obviously law enforcement is going to be tracking people who are trading with BTC. Those who think they can flaunt the legal systems of the countries in which they operate (including where your customers are) will get shut down, there will be some 50 page thread about how shocked everyone is because the operator was so great, and more money will be lost.

I am trying to provoke discussion in regards to how this will affect bitcoin and how legal bitcoin financial companies should deal with it.

Congratulations, you are the 100th person to simply insult me claiming I want to police people instead of one of the 20 or so who have actually read the thread and contributed ideas of their own.

You guys can put money into companies who are sheltering people Interpol and the FBI want. The people who actually have a plan to deal with reality will still be running business in five years. I don't want to start a witch hunt or an inquisition and go after people, I want to know how major BTC related financial companies deal with, or plan to deal with, the very real concern of having legal problems due who is using their services.

There is a reason you can't openly drugs on this forum, and it has nothing to do with the operators 'not being libertarian enough' or 'wanting to interfere with trade'.

Sheer, unadulterated nonsense. I'm British by the way. Your insinuation that it's only American libertarians that favor gun rights is way, way off base.

Plus your urge to sic the government on those participating in voluntary trade?

You're in serious need of some self examination, dude.

I don't want to get into other people's shit at all. Keep in mind that in developed countries other than the US, supporting gun control is not "getting into people's shit".

For the 500th time I am simply posing the question of... fuck it, I can't sat it again.


lmfo that could not be a worse description of me. The last thing I have to do is defend my understanding of libertarian history or support for libertarian policies to you.

To all the Americans who call themselves "libertarians" mainly due to their gun ownership absolutism... what do you think about women who want to get a late term abortion?

hahaha just in case you thought the thread couldn't get more off topic.

I'm still unclear what OP is proposing be actually done about the "problem"

Black markets have existed since the dawn of time and will always be present.

Blackheart, for someone who self-identifies as a libertarian, it sure seems like you want to get into other peoples' shit a lot.

Being a libertarian isn't just about appearing cool like having an ipo/ad or wearing one of those bobbly hats with thick-rimmed glasses, it's about principles. I suggest you examine yours.

I disagree. BTC is just a currency, it's like a Toyota is just a car. Toyota isn't held responsible when some crook robs a bank with their car, and bitcoins are just a currency.

Right. And since it probably makes more sense to eradicate them before they complete the devices maybe it is stupid to warn them they should simply be eradicated without warning, since warning them might cause them to try to prevent us interfering with their plans to blow us all to hell with anthrax and nukes.

-MarkM-

Every time you open your mouth in this thread it's exactly what you want to do.

Like in this same post:


Bullshit, a small group of people thinks it's ok to develop and implement rules for everyone else and force everyone to follow those rules with violence. I never agreed to be part of your so called society.


Yes, I do think everyone can do whatever they want on their property as long as they don't hurt me or my property. And whatever includes owning nuclear weapons and anthrax.


I never said I shouldn't be. If people were completely free, meaning they had complete control and ownership over their body and the complete control and ownership over their property, owning nuclear weapons is someone thing they could do. Btw people can still do this, even if there are some words on a piece of paper written somewhere that they must not.

I would say some money laundering could be immoral if the money came from a dirty enough source. Basically how many tears and how much blood is on it before the laundering.

Both I suppose... but primarily legally. Once it becomes a crime to do something, that takes an awful lot of players and services out of the equation, right?

Do you mean that in a legal way or in a technical way?

sorry by trading I meant say selling and buying

This is a good question, but lacks its counterpart. Would it be difficult for legislators and courts to make trading bitcoins for fiat currency illegal? Trading fiat should've been made illegal decades ago, since it represents a promise of future labor, or 'debt'. This is monetary slavery. The more people who discover this, the greater will there will be to invoke change by one means or another. And we need change. Not the hopium Obama kind of change, but millions of people storming the political gates kind of change.

That's a great question, I'm sure people have discussed this at length, I would like to hear what others think. I don't envision them outlawing the possession of BTC necessarily, that seems too complex and unenforceable. More like making it illegal to convert BTC to debt currencies under some BS money laundering laws/regulations.

Do you think it would be difficult for legislators and courts to make trading fiat currency for bitcoins illegal?

So then please explain why you shouldn't be allowed to have nuclear or chemical weapons in your home.

I don't want to do that.



I'm not, we develop and implement rules as a society. We attempt to form our society based on the best interests of that society.

These generalized freedom arguments are so childish unless you think that everyone should be allowed anthrax and nuclear weapons in their homes. Why can't crazy fred protect his imaginary friend with mustard gas? Because, society.



lmao I know, that's why I would never live in Baghdad. Or Kentucky.



Exactly, now imagine it is a Muslim or undocumented Hispanic man who commits the crime...

If your goal is to destroy Bitcoin, then by all means stop the Bitcoin black market.  Otherwise, mind your own business.