Bitcoin discussion and news

[StakerOne]

what if you disagree with HMRC? Do you just have to accept what they are saying. Sounds pretty authoritarian to me.

You're not disagreeing with HMRC. You're disagreeing with a smart contract that HMRC published on the blockchain, along with it's soucecode.
You had endless simulation tools that would have told you tax implications for your transactions.
It's not like you didn't see it coming.
Not as authoritarian as a tax inspector who goes heavy on some people but light on others.
And certainly not as authoritarian as a CBDC in which case HMRC would simply take the money off you first, then telling why they took it afterwards.

 

[StakerOne]

So the government can use it to stop tax evasion and therefore must have access to your wallets, or do you just give the wallets you want to be taxed to the government so tax is voluntary?

Replying to your previous point about why I don't think people who use Crypto are going to pay more tax is because a lot of the biggest players in Crypto are anti-tax.

There are widly different players in crypto. For example a bitcoin maximalist or a monero maximalist would absolutely despise people like me.
Such people would be anti-tax, but they won't be getting anywhere.

 

[StakerOne]

What if it's a bad contract? What purposes are served by making contracts indelible, when there could be any number of legitimate reasons to delete it? A mistake was made in writing it, it's not legally enforceable, and so on.

Professional developers would actually publish 2 smart contracts instead of one.

The first is the one that the public are made aware of. It's a proxy contract that simply takes in the data and commands.

On the first proxy contract, there is a special state value that only the owner of that smart contract can set - that state value points towards the second smart contract that does all the real work.

It's impossible for the first smart contract to go run wrong because all it does is call the second passing through the data.

So it's only the second real contract or the ones it relies on that can go wrong. (Remember the contracts it relies on, are also going to be proxies)

if the second one goes wrong, they simply create a new smart contract with the fixes and point the proxy smart contract towards it.

There are security solutions developers can pay for to monitor the memory pool for the blockchain for any suspecious activity .. if it see's it, then it can simply submit competing transactions that would cancel out the rougue ones.

And on case actual money is lost, there are a number of decentralised insurance solutions out there.

Some developers even go so far as to offer decentralised insurance on the blockchain to new customers of their DeFi products.

 

[elbows]

Please explain WHY you believe open, permissionless, public blockchains are rigged.

I am not making that claim about every aspect of all of these systems and technologies.

I struggle to bother to debate the details of this stuff with massive fans of this stuff because the thing overall is a stinky swamp. Its polluted by the vast number of proponents who are attracted to all of this stuff because they love the potential to make money out of swings in the value of cryptocurrencies. In order to bother to engage with people in discussions about the technology, I would need to be convinced that the people I was talking to were not in it for that sort of profit, and would be just as interested in the technology if there were no things attached to it which allowed that sort of 'investment opportunity', market based gambling etc. There are far too many 'to the moon' wankers who are promoting specific things because they have a stake in them, or some kind of position which they think is served by joining in with the hype and ramping.

 

[StakerOne]

So the government can use it to stop tax evasion and therefore must have access to your wallets, or do you just give the wallets you want to be taxed to the government so tax is voluntary?

Replying to your previous point about why I don't think people who use Crypto are going to pay more tax is because a lot of the biggest players in Crypto are anti-tax.

Today (Outside of crypto) - HMRC relies on good will and only has so much resources to investigate people.

CBDC world - HMRC will tax you as soon as you make the money - make no mistake, they will be able to help themselves with CBDCs and there will be no transparancy because you've no way of knowing whether the rules are being applied to everyone equally.

Blockchain / Crypto world - HMRC will need your co-operation to logon to their website so they can see all of your transactions - it's your data, some or all of it encrypted on the blockchain. Once on that website, you're interacting with the same DAPP and smart contracts as every other UK taxpayer. You either pay up what the smart contract thinks you owe, or you don't. Under normal circumstances that's non payement.

Another bonus is that the HMRC smart contract and DAPP only sees the private transactions while calculating what you owe. After that, nothing.

So a strong privacy argument there because no human gets to know about your financial affairs. Not an account or tax inspector.

However, if the govenment of the day, is really, reallly unreasonable to the point that we're all pissed off, we all simply don't pay just like today - mass civil disobediance is an option, unlike with CBDCs.

Re your point about "giving away more tax" - No we won't be. If more people pay their taxes, then we'll all be paying less.

Public blockchains are the way forward. We keep our money and our privacy, while the government gets paid the taxes that it's owed.

 

[StakerOne]

I am not making that claim about every aspect of all of these systems and technologies.

I struggle to bother to debate the details of this stuff with massive fans of this stuff because the thing overall is a stinky swamp. Its polluted by the vast number of proponents who are attracted to all of this stuff because they love the potential to make money out of swings in the value of cryptocurrencies. In order to bother to engage with people in discussions about the technology, I would need to be convinced that the people I was talking to were not in it for that sort of profit, and would be just as interested in the technology if there were no things attached to it which allowed that sort of 'investment opportunity', market based gambling etc. There are far too many 'to the moon' wankers who are promoting specific things because they have a stake in them, or some kind of position which they think is served by joining in with the hype and ramping.

Today, twitter had an outage.
LENS protocol never has an outage!

Of course there are loads of people in it to make money. There's nothing wrong with tokenomics / game theory to ensure the success of this way of doing things.

Equally there are going to be a lot of people against it to protect their own self-vested interests.

I can see how a lot of people on the left would be against it or even afraid of it. The left has tradionally believed in a large national state setting all the rules, with people using the state for many services.

Along comes this new way of doing things, that has the long term potentional to take functions off the state, mixed in with a bunch of bitcoin maximalists who telling anyone that listens, that somehow Bitcoin will swallow up everyone else.

There's no way a communist would cheer on cryptos, because communism is one ideology that would be under threat.

Let's face it, there's going to be kids right now using blockchain to horde in game NFTS, trading them with their friends, flipping them around and making money in the process and theres not a lot the government can do about that, if it even wanted to.

And that's the thing. We can't turn back the clock. The genie is out of the bottle. Kids don't want to pay in cash, they'll use their phones and debit cards.

They also ain't going to look at the poltiics of it all -- they'll generate their own crypto wallets within minutes and take to it like a fish to water.

The trends are our friends here. Crypto is being adopted, especially amongst the young and new developers are falling over themselves to get into it and why wouldn't they? The saleries pay more than any other sector.

 

[BigTom]

You're not disagreeing with HMRC. You're disagreeing with a smart contract that HMRC published on the blockchain, along with it's soucecode.
You had endless simulation tools that would have told you tax implications for your transactions.
It's not like you didn't see it coming.
Not as authoritarian as a tax inspector who goes heavy on some people but light on others.
And certainly not as authoritarian as a CBDC in which case HMRC would simply take the money off you first, then telling why they took it afterwards.

If you have simple finances that is fine, but if you have complex finances you need an accountant to tell you if the smart contract is taxing you correctly. Tax calculator are no use if you don't know what type of income you have or what deductions you are allowed etc.

Or you need the in depth knowledge of accounts and tax laws that accountants have which the average person doesn't.

 

[StakerOne]

I used to own a house but some Korean hacking collective got to my NFT. Oh well, thems the breaks.

Oh No! Report it to the Land Regisry DAO, they will open up a case with a recognised JusticeDAO ... made up of imparitial legal professionals, who will investigate and vote on the matter, if they agree it was stolen, then you will automatically be issued a replacement NFT and the stolen one, which was tagged as disputed, will now be blacklisted.
A ledger is immutable so we know the truth. As long as we as a collective recognise that truth, we can action it using the same immutable ledger.

 

[kabbes]

But if HMRC looks at the blockchain to determine how much you owe in taxes, why do we need an accountant? HMRC will tell you what you owe, you pay it and that's the end of it.

There speaks somebody who has no professional involvement with the tax system.

 

[StakerOne]

If you have simple finances that is fine, but if you have complex finances you need an accountant to tell you if the smart contract is taxing you correctly. Tax calculator are no use if you don't know what type of income you have or what deductions you are allowed etc.

Or you need the in depth knowledge of accounts and tax laws that accountants have which the average person doesn't.

If all of your finances are on the blockchain, it doesn't matter how complicated they are, computers can keep up - every rule that is sat in an accountant's head is utimately programmable ... the type of transactions they are, is small problem, because a blockchain can store that as some kind of meta data.

At the end of the day, it's all transparent and fair as we all have to play by the same rules - published code that is run against our transactions.

 

[kabbes]

Professional developers would actually publish 2 smart contracts instead of one.

The first is the one that the public are made aware of. It's a proxy contract that simply takes in the data and commands.

On the first proxy contract, there is a special state value that only the owner of that smart contract can set - that state value points towards the second smart contract that does all the real work.

It's impossible for the first smart contract to go run because all it does is call the second passing through the data.

So it's only the second real contract or the ones it relies on that can go wrong. (Remember the contracts it relies on, are also going to be proxies)

if the second one goes wrong, they simply create a new smart contract with the fixes and point the proxy smart contract towards it.

There are security solutions developers can pay for to monitor the memory pool for the blockchain for any suspecious activity .. if it see's it, then it can simply submit competing transactions that would cancel out the rougue ones.

And on case actual money is lost, there are a number of decentralised insurance solutions out there.

Some developers even go so far as to offer decentralised insurance on the blockchain to new customers of their DeFi products.

Sounds completely straightforward. A completely straightforward shooting weekend.

Imagine the nightmare of just having something printed on paper that you sign! Who wants that? Much easier to have an army of programmers and multiple contracts with embedded clauses that can’t be countermanded by the courts.

 

[StakerOne]

There speaks somebody who has no professional involvement with the tax system.

A tax system that's built around trust in tax payers and tax inspectors.
In future it will be built around the blockchain.
It has to be, because that's where the real action is happening, whether you like it or not.
I see a future where the banks will use public blockchains themselves ... there will be no escape or refuge from this and that's a good thing.

 

[kabbes]

A tax system that's built around trust in tax payers and tax inspectors.
In future it will be built around the blockchain.
It has to be, because that's where the real action is happening, whether you like it or not.
I see a future where the banks will use public blockchains themselves ... there will be no escape or refuge from this and that's a good thing.

And your expertise in tax is…?

 

[StakerOne]

Sounds completely straightforward. A completely straightforward shooting weekend.

Imagine the nightmare of just having something printed on paper that you sign! Who wants that? Much easier to have an army of programmers and multiple contracts with embedded clauses that can’t be countermanded by the courts.

Certaintly not the government. The government knows best and if they manage to get us all on CBDCs you'll can go and do one, the government will take what it wants and to hell what you think, they've got climate change, food rationing and an economy to run! Who needs an army of people complaing about taxes? The government has better things to do!

 

[Storm Fox]

Oh No! Report it to the Land Regisry DAO, they will open up a case with a recognised JusticeDAO ... made up of imparitial legal professionals, who will investigate and vote on the matter, if they agree it was stolen, then you will automatically be issued a replacement NFT and the stolen one, which was tagged as disputed, will now be blacklisted.
A ledger is immutable so we know the truth. As long as we as a collective recognise that truth, we can action it using the same immutable ledger.

Who appoints the People to the JusticeDAO is that JusticeDAO is recognised in Korea. What is the Korean JusticeDAO thinks the other person is the legitimate holder of the house NFT?

At the moment this is practically impossible, plus it takes time for the house transaction to complete so there is time to catch the fraud. In fact you can set up alerts here Property Alert to notify you if someone tries anything. But with a house NFT it gone

 

[kabbes]

Certaintly not the government. The government knows best and if they manage to get us all on CBDCs you'll can go and do one, the government will take what it wants and to hell what you think, they've got climate change, food rationing and an economy to run! Who needs an army of people complaing about taxes? The government has better things to do!

Well, I would wish you luck with your libertarian dystopia, but I really don’t.

 

[StakerOne]

And your expertise in tax is…?

I don't need to be an expert in taxes. I can see the direction of travel and the authoritarians will lose.

 

[kabbes]

I don't need to be an expert in taxes. I can see the direction of travel and the authoritarians will lose.

You do need to be an expert in taxes if you’re going to make pronouncements about how the tax system currently works and how it could work better.

Come on, don’t even worry about professional qualifications or professional involvement. Just let us know about whether you have particularly complicated personal tax affairs?

 

[StakerOne]

Well, I would wish you luck with your libertarian dystopia, but I really don’t.

Well there's no point wishing you luck is there? The authoratarian dystopia where the government controls all, isn't going to happen.

 

[StakerOne]

You do need to be an expert in taxes if you’re going to make pronouncements about how the tax system currently works and how it could work better.

Come on, don’t even worry about professional qualifications or professional involvement. Just let us know about whether you have particularly complicated personal tax affairs?

Please. It's commonly accepted that tax inspectors around the world take most peoples tax returns on trust. You don't need to be an expert in anything to know that.

I'm an IT man. Computers make complicated things easy. If they can't do it today for a particular use, they will eventually.

 

[Shippou-Sensei]

Computers don't make complicated things easy. They just do maths fast.

 

[StakerOne]

Who appoints the People to the JusticeDAO is that JusticeDAO is recognised in Korea. What is the Korean JusticeDAO thinks the other person is the legitimate holder of the house NFT?

At the moment this is practically impossible, plus it takes time for the house transaction to complete so there is time to catch the fraud. In fact you can set up alerts here Property Alert to notify you if someone tries anything. But with a house NFT it gone

A Justice DAO is recognised by whatever DAOS decide to recognise it. Have you ever heard of the concept of "democracy" ?

 

[StakerOne]

Computers don't make complicated things easy. They just do maths fast.

Right OK pedant, computers in combination of layers of modular software, possibly with data depending on the app, makes complicated things easy.

 

[Storm Fox]

But it is likely the CBDCs will be the way it goes, if Crypto becomes mainstream. Big companies will want to be in on them as CBDC will have something backing them other than Math and Climate damage.

 

[BigTom]

Certaintly not the government. The government knows best and if they manage to get us all on CBDCs you'll can go and do one, the government will take what it wants and to hell what you think, they've got climate change, food rationing and an economy to run! Who needs an army of people complaing about taxes? The government has better things to do!

You are proposing that HMRC, the government, sets up the smart contracts that we all must accept and then you say something like this?

Can you not see the contradiction here?

 

[StakerOne]

You are proposing that HMRC, the government, sets up the smart contracts that we all must accept and then you say something like this?

Can you not see the contradiction here?

Through natural adoption, everything will eventually wind up on smart contract EVM blockchains even if you don't consciously use them.
Then HMRC will react to that. I don't have to beg or demand anyone to do anything. It's all inevitable.
You can try your best to change the course we're on, but it would be futile and I don't mean that in a nasty troll like way, I genuinely believe it will happen.

 

[BigTom]

Please. It's commonly accepted that tax inspectors around the world take most peoples tax returns on trust. You don't need to be an expert in anything to know that.

I'm an IT man. Computers make complicated things easy. If they can't do it today for a particular use, they will eventually.

And hmrc will have to take on trust that you have declared all your wallets to them, and will have the same uneven investigation issues as we do now because of that issue.

 

[Storm Fox]

A Justice DAO is recognised by whatever DAOS decide to recognise it. Have you ever heard of the concept of "democracy" ?

So what happens if someone refuses the accept the JusticeDAO authority?

 

[BigTom]

Through natural adoption, everything will eventually wind up on smart contract EVM blockchains even if you don't consciously use them.
Then HMRC will react to that. I don't have to beg or demand anyone to do anything. It's all inevitable.
You can try your best to change the course we're on, but it would be futile and I don't mean that in a nasty troll like way, I genuinely believe it will happen.

Do you want it to happen?

 

[StakerOne]

And hmrc will have to take on trust that you have declared all your wallets to them, and will have the same uneven investigation issues as we do now because of that issue.

That's a psycological thing. My probem would be that I have no way of knowing whether HMRC knows about all of my wallets. So at the very least, I would at least declare what I genuinely believe I owe them.
REMEMBER - HMRC uses blockchain intelligence firms who may have enough data to show what wallets I really own. It's not wise to commit any kind fraud or crime using blockchain tech because you are leaving an immutable evidence trail.
Anyone who deals with blockchains will eventually have to pay their taxes one way or the other - it's all out in the open.