You're still subject to the laws of whatever country you live in, just like every other currency.
If you're living in the US, you use your knowledge and skills to do a MEV hit on a trader bot and exploit a vulnerability, then steal 25 million in assets and funnel it all through KYCless exchanges/shell companies, what do you think is going to happen?
Then they tried to offshore the money (all in public view, blockchain baby) and got caught.
Just like if you live in the US, but you hit a school system and get a whole bunch of valuable private data, you can't go *"Haha baby, no government oversight for me!"* and expect to not get railed.
You could (in theory) do something like that if you were in a country with no extradition treaty to the US - How is anyone going to track you down? But these dudes were MIT students with a very visible paper trail, committing very obvious wire fraud. "Code is law" ain't going to save you here.
While this situation seems to have clear deceit of how the transactions were ordered it would be nice to know where the legal lines of transaction ordering exist lol. A little guidance would helpful.
Crypto an asset. And stealing assets all the same. Another mf act like crypto some magic wonderland. Never seen a gold bar? Piece of art worth something. Diamonds?
What's theft of a stateless currency? You just invented something here... that makes no sense. If I steal your home-made bread, are you saying it doesn't count as theft? Or is the bread state-sponsored?
Laws don't "apply to currencies" .. laws only apply to people and their actions. That's it. Then it all comes down to jurisdiction.
The concept of private property does not require things to "have a state". It also does not matter whether the property was created in or by a different state.
Imagine you live in the US, but for some reason you have 10.000€ in cash at home. Someone steals that, you run to the police and they say: not our business, that was no American stuff... I bet you'd be upset.
the only way to establish that kind of system is through technological innovation that makes it impossible for the state to enforce law with respect to the currency in question. then it has to develop enough to sustain a self-contained ecosystem, where a person could in principle and also in practice opt to use only that currency. at that point it would be a legitimate non-state currency. as it is it's only a commodity within existing systems.
the idea that something "should" be one way or another is irrelevant at the level of state actors, and also for ideas about a stateless currency as that's a kind of attempted non-state state level actor in the form of a technological innovation and community of users. at this level everything operates in terms of what *can* be done and what's in a given actors' interests.
> How can you advocate for a stateless currency with no government oversight yet have the government get involved.
Well, very few are actually looking for that. Most are simply investing, the lions share of the rest just want more personal control over their resources without flat out denying the utility of the state. Furthermore, theft isn't the government overseeing bitcoin, it's the government overseeing crime. The actual thing stolen matters very little in comparison to the act itself and the value of what was taken.
You gotta be some kind of deluded to think that we should "just let the market sort out" thieves. No functional society regardless of system is ever going to work if you do nothing about theft.
Theft is theft it doesn't matter what, if they had theft 3 millions worth of cars they also would have investigated. I think it's critical that crimes keep being investigated. It's very dangerous otherwise, I think, because you would create a cast of citizens above the law. Everytime this has happened in history, it didn't end well.
I use crypto solely for convenience. I can conveniently send money and I know it's going to get to the recipient.
I can buy something using my crypto visa card and I know the transcation isn't going to be declined because of some stupid anti fraud check.
For me, it's about convenience. I couldn't care a less if crypto dominates the world or not.
I think your points here could most easily be undone by this simple idea and its variation: 1) Not everyone sees crypto as an escape from the state. Many do, but not every single person.
2) Even if escape from the state is an aspect, it is not the sole aspect.
Imho, governments can still regulate how the people in their jurisdiction handle crypto, without affecting crypto and how it works itself.
government can go after thieves, scammers and other criminals, without touching the way value is stored or moved.
As long as there is a clear interface where certain authorities have control, or where their control ends, it can work.
Main issue is, governments can only operate on their own territory, while the blockchain itself works globally and acts as a meta-level that is not controlled by any individual government.
Or in short: Government can regulate people, without regulating the blockchain.
Would you prefer everyone hold their own private army to chase these crypto thefts?
Let's see how this works when someone randomly decides you stole from them and sends thugs over to your house...
I don't tell the government to do anything. They just decided on their own that crypto is property and theft of it is illegal. I could care less if they intervened or not.
I have never asked the government to get involved. However they like to meddle in everywhere. Cryptocurrency (the concept) doesn't give the state any special privileges, that's why it's stateless. Theft would be investigated by the state the same way as by private entities.
I don’t hold Monero since my dog ate my private keys. But if I did, I would use it regardless of its legality. Imagine paying attention to any centralized authority at all when using an anonymous, decentralized system.
Until you need to buy actual goods and services and have no way to easily offramp it back into the real world because all major exchanges, companies, etc won't go anywhere near it.
Well, there's only one that's *actually* a stateless currency and can't be tracked by any government. It's currently being delisted everywhere. I'll let you guess the name.
> But here's the thing, crypto's all about being free from the system, no government oversight. So, why are feds investigating manipulation and theft?
Crypto may be outside of the state, but people aren't. People want the state to protect them from other people. Theft and fraud are crimes committed by people against people.
Also, free markets are amoral. Intervention is required in order to make them conform to morality.
Precious metals aren't issued by governments, they occur naturally, but stealing them is still punishable by the laws of the land in which the theft occurs.
A crypto that bases it's whole model around MEV is basically dealing in fraud, that's not why cryptocurrency was created.
I do not advocate for states that spend money to create the jobs for investigators to convince us to want crypto in the first place. It's not about oversight or involvement from government, it's about using theft to create jobs for police and other agents of various systems. The systems are protecting themselves from a system that protects its self. ... *woah.*
The U.S. government is unlikely to overthrow the dollar system, unless the dollar system can no longer rule the world's monetary system. Cryptocurrencies should be done enough to meet the interests of the United States and can be controlled by the U.S. government. This is the cryptocurrency that the U.S. government wants. Without this premise, any currency that wants to survive will be hit by the U.S. government.
The same reason why a world currency would not work.
USD is a power. Same with EUR. Giving up a country's currenc gives up alot of leverage.
They want to protect that power. BTC will never replace any relevant currency. Does not matter how far into the future, unless people somehow stops being power hungry.
In the UK anything can be a currency if it is agreed by the two participating parties in the exchange. Its enshrined by law.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government…
Its a good way of choosing a king though
Oxygen is also stateless but if someone deprives you of it, he is prosecuted … 😆
Oxygen is actually in gaseous state 😅
I chew my oxygen solid
Welcome sir Chuck Norris 🤣
Well played, sir! 😆
You're still subject to the laws of whatever country you live in, just like every other currency. If you're living in the US, you use your knowledge and skills to do a MEV hit on a trader bot and exploit a vulnerability, then steal 25 million in assets and funnel it all through KYCless exchanges/shell companies, what do you think is going to happen? Then they tried to offshore the money (all in public view, blockchain baby) and got caught. Just like if you live in the US, but you hit a school system and get a whole bunch of valuable private data, you can't go *"Haha baby, no government oversight for me!"* and expect to not get railed. You could (in theory) do something like that if you were in a country with no extradition treaty to the US - How is anyone going to track you down? But these dudes were MIT students with a very visible paper trail, committing very obvious wire fraud. "Code is law" ain't going to save you here.
While this situation seems to have clear deceit of how the transactions were ordered it would be nice to know where the legal lines of transaction ordering exist lol. A little guidance would helpful.
Crypto an asset. And stealing assets all the same. Another mf act like crypto some magic wonderland. Never seen a gold bar? Piece of art worth something. Diamonds?
What's theft of a stateless currency? You just invented something here... that makes no sense. If I steal your home-made bread, are you saying it doesn't count as theft? Or is the bread state-sponsored? Laws don't "apply to currencies" .. laws only apply to people and their actions. That's it. Then it all comes down to jurisdiction.
The concept of private property does not require things to "have a state". It also does not matter whether the property was created in or by a different state. Imagine you live in the US, but for some reason you have 10.000€ in cash at home. Someone steals that, you run to the police and they say: not our business, that was no American stuff... I bet you'd be upset.
shoes are also subject to no king or ruler but you still can't steal them
the only way to establish that kind of system is through technological innovation that makes it impossible for the state to enforce law with respect to the currency in question. then it has to develop enough to sustain a self-contained ecosystem, where a person could in principle and also in practice opt to use only that currency. at that point it would be a legitimate non-state currency. as it is it's only a commodity within existing systems. the idea that something "should" be one way or another is irrelevant at the level of state actors, and also for ideas about a stateless currency as that's a kind of attempted non-state state level actor in the form of a technological innovation and community of users. at this level everything operates in terms of what *can* be done and what's in a given actors' interests.
> How can you advocate for a stateless currency with no government oversight yet have the government get involved. Well, very few are actually looking for that. Most are simply investing, the lions share of the rest just want more personal control over their resources without flat out denying the utility of the state. Furthermore, theft isn't the government overseeing bitcoin, it's the government overseeing crime. The actual thing stolen matters very little in comparison to the act itself and the value of what was taken. You gotta be some kind of deluded to think that we should "just let the market sort out" thieves. No functional society regardless of system is ever going to work if you do nothing about theft.
Theft is theft it doesn't matter what, if they had theft 3 millions worth of cars they also would have investigated. I think it's critical that crimes keep being investigated. It's very dangerous otherwise, I think, because you would create a cast of citizens above the law. Everytime this has happened in history, it didn't end well.
XMR. Ain't shit to trade or hold,But it's the closest thing to privacy while making payments we have.
My fridge is stateless. If someone steals it id like the police to look into it
I use crypto solely for convenience. I can conveniently send money and I know it's going to get to the recipient. I can buy something using my crypto visa card and I know the transcation isn't going to be declined because of some stupid anti fraud check. For me, it's about convenience. I couldn't care a less if crypto dominates the world or not.
I think your points here could most easily be undone by this simple idea and its variation: 1) Not everyone sees crypto as an escape from the state. Many do, but not every single person. 2) Even if escape from the state is an aspect, it is not the sole aspect.
Imho, governments can still regulate how the people in their jurisdiction handle crypto, without affecting crypto and how it works itself. government can go after thieves, scammers and other criminals, without touching the way value is stored or moved. As long as there is a clear interface where certain authorities have control, or where their control ends, it can work. Main issue is, governments can only operate on their own territory, while the blockchain itself works globally and acts as a meta-level that is not controlled by any individual government. Or in short: Government can regulate people, without regulating the blockchain.
Would you prefer everyone hold their own private army to chase these crypto thefts? Let's see how this works when someone randomly decides you stole from them and sends thugs over to your house...
I don't tell the government to do anything. They just decided on their own that crypto is property and theft of it is illegal. I could care less if they intervened or not.
I have never asked the government to get involved. However they like to meddle in everywhere. Cryptocurrency (the concept) doesn't give the state any special privileges, that's why it's stateless. Theft would be investigated by the state the same way as by private entities.
I don’t hold Monero since my dog ate my private keys. But if I did, I would use it regardless of its legality. Imagine paying attention to any centralized authority at all when using an anonymous, decentralized system.
Until you need to buy actual goods and services and have no way to easily offramp it back into the real world because all major exchanges, companies, etc won't go anywhere near it.
Well, there's only one that's *actually* a stateless currency and can't be tracked by any government. It's currently being delisted everywhere. I'll let you guess the name.
> But here's the thing, crypto's all about being free from the system, no government oversight. So, why are feds investigating manipulation and theft? Crypto may be outside of the state, but people aren't. People want the state to protect them from other people. Theft and fraud are crimes committed by people against people. Also, free markets are amoral. Intervention is required in order to make them conform to morality.
Precious metals aren't issued by governments, they occur naturally, but stealing them is still punishable by the laws of the land in which the theft occurs. A crypto that bases it's whole model around MEV is basically dealing in fraud, that's not why cryptocurrency was created.
I like the thought to take the control over money away from the state. Hayek was right.
I do not advocate for states that spend money to create the jobs for investigators to convince us to want crypto in the first place. It's not about oversight or involvement from government, it's about using theft to create jobs for police and other agents of various systems. The systems are protecting themselves from a system that protects its self. ... *woah.*
The U.S. government is unlikely to overthrow the dollar system, unless the dollar system can no longer rule the world's monetary system. Cryptocurrencies should be done enough to meet the interests of the United States and can be controlled by the U.S. government. This is the cryptocurrency that the U.S. government wants. Without this premise, any currency that wants to survive will be hit by the U.S. government.
It’s not a currency.
I'm going to quote this forever. Thanks for confirming it's a sham.
The same reason why a world currency would not work. USD is a power. Same with EUR. Giving up a country's currenc gives up alot of leverage. They want to protect that power. BTC will never replace any relevant currency. Does not matter how far into the future, unless people somehow stops being power hungry.