Bitcoin discussion and news

[Rob Ray]

The fact their "perfect competitive environment" logically and in every case simply means big business dominates more ruthlessly, and that the State is vital to keeping capitalism even remotely socially stable, is the bit they utterly refuse to hear.

 

[NoXion]

People will take the bribe. The government won't be offering GBP as a bribe as GBP will be worthless. It will be a new national currency and people will have no choice but to take it as they will have fuck all else to buy the shopping for the next week.

Assuming that we don't need to ration food at that point.

You obviously haven't read the Bank of England's paper which I linked to earlier. The digital pound isn't a replacement for GBP, it's a new form of it, to be introduced alongside physical cash and the current system of private bank transfers. If GBP is worthless then so will be the digital pound, which the paper quite clearly states is intended to be a digital version of the physical coins and notes which are directly issued by the Bank of England (public money), as opposed to the electronically accessible retail/commercial bank deposits (private money) that most people use when making payments online. Trying to bribe people with digital pounds when GBP is worthless would be like giving away digital monopoly money at that point. So it seems pretty obvious to me that the intention here is to fill a perceived gap where there is currently no way of having digital currency that is directly issued by the Bank of England. As opposed to whatever nefarious fantasy you've decided to hallucinate about instead of actually reading.

 

[StakerOne]

You obviously haven't read the Bank of England's paper which I linked to earlier. The digital pound isn't a replacement for GBP, it's a new form of it, to be introduced alongside physical cash and the current system of private bank transfers. If GBP is worthless then so will be the digital pound, which the paper quite clearly states is intended to be a digital version of the physical coins and notes which are directly issued by the Bank of England (public money), as opposed to the electronically accessible retail/commercial bank deposits (private money) that most people use when making payments online. Trying to bribe people with digital pounds when GBP is worthless would be like giving away digital monopoly money at that point. So it seems pretty obvious to me that the intention here is to fill a perceived gap where there is currently no way of having digital currency that is directly issued by the Bank of England. As opposed to whatever nefarious fantasy you've decided to hallucinate about instead of actually reading.

Yes that's what they've been told to get on with. That's what they are saying they will get on with.

I repeat. The pound will be trashed and made worthless.

The ONLY way for the government to function would be to issue a CBDC called the "New pound" and that's what they will do.

 

[StakerOne]

The fact their "perfect competitive environment" logically and in every case simply means big business dominates more ruthlessly, and that the State is vital to keeping capitalism even remotely socially stable, is the bit they utterly refuse to hear.

That's some imagination you have. We believe in decentralised energy.

 

[kabbes]

This is just fantasist conspiracist stuff. The pound is the abstraction of the state’s power. The idea that they would want to destroy it is just the ravings of a lunatic.

 

[gosub]

Exactly the problem. That’s a massive power asymmetry. How to judge whether an individual “delivers” will be buried in the coding equivalent of a 50 page contract, completely impenetrable to 99% of the population. And yet if the non-delivery clause triggers, there is no way to challenge that judgment. It just happens, and the individual is compelled by the coercive corporation to behave on rails. That’s anti-society. It’s the opposite of trust because no trust is required. It destroys the notion of trust.


You do like to go in about DAOs but nice cuddly collectives don’t rule the neoliberal universe — corporations do. And something like this, which increases information and power asymmetries — will exacerbate that process, not disrupt it.

Aviva are not going to be replaced with an insurance cooperative. This technology is not going to dismantle the house of neoliberal capitalism — it is neoliberal capitalism. No, Aviva are going to use this technology to force individuals to behave as they want those individuals to behave, and thus increase their capital, not decrease it. When your car simply won’t start because your phone has detected something that Aviva doesn’t like, that’s good for them and not good for you. You won’t even know why you’ve been prevented from driving. You won’t need to know why.

Except that won’t actually happen, because real-world financial industries are heavily regulated by the state, with consumer needs placed at the centre of that regulation. The regulator would stop the kind of power asymmetry I have described from being packaged into an insurance product. The regulator, who is authoritarian and gets in the way of individuals and corporations just agreeing to do any old thing. Thank goodness.

A lot of what you are saying is happening anyway irrespective of CBDCs. Cases of people hiring cars exceeding speed limits and having money debited from their account by the hire company. And if you lease a car (as a lot of people whom 'buy' new do) fail to keep up payments and they lock you out remotely might give a couple of hours grace if lucky....

As I said these things are already happening but has limits right to repair movement is interesting and even on the car insurance example yes you can have car insurance but want cheaper premiums? Install the app on your phone and carry it with you...

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Yes that's what they've been told to get on with. That's what they are saying they will get on with.

I repeat. The pound will be trashed and made worthless.

The ONLY way for the government to function would be to issue a CBDC called the "New pound" and that's what they will do.

Good grief

 

[gosub]

This is just fantasist conspiracist stuff. The pound is the abstraction of the state’s power. The idea that they would want to destroy it is just the ravings of a lunatic.

Tbf and fwiw am still trying to get my head round Diego Avila's coin

 

[NoXion]

Yes that's what they've been told to get on with. That's what they are saying they will get on with.

I repeat. The pound will be trashed and made worthless.

The ONLY way for the government to function would be to issue a CBDC called the "New pound" and that's what they will do.

What kabbes said. Do you even listen to yourself? You're making confident prognostications of unprecedented events based on absolutely zero evidence.

Fascism isn't really compatible with cryptocurrencies and would require the fascists to betray many of their values to particpate in, because crypto is about decentralising power for things to happen from the ground up rather than top down.

No it's not. Crypto is about fucking making money. Even if we ignore the fact speculation is why cryptocurrency took off in the first place (to the moon!), you also gave away the acquisitiveness which permeates crypto culture when you boasted about the six grand you got for producing fuck-all of value.

I don't see how any fascist would have a problem with getting funding by minting a bunch of NFTs and selling them for stupid prices to people with more money than sense. Remember you're talking about a technological tool, not some kind of ideological analysis. You don't need to subscribe to the Soviet brand of socialism (or even be left-wing at all) in order to effectively operate an AK-47. The AK can be repaired with pig iron and baling twine, and while this does make it useful for left-wing insurgents, that's also useful to right-wing insurgents. Why should fascists give a fuck about the decentralised nature of crypto? That just means that there's nobody within that technical space with the authority to comprehensively shut them out. Which gives them opportunities to operate. Especially when they can anonymously acquire work and funding for their projects, because as you said: "In a permissionless blockchain, unless programmed otherwise, you don't know the chraracteristics[sic] of the other parties involved, ergo, it's impossible to discriminate."

 

[littlebabyjesus]

That's some imagination you have. We believe in decentralised energy.

Ah the e word again. My woo detector's started spinning.

 

[Rob Ray]

The currency of the far-right: why neo-Nazis love bitcoin | Julia Ebner

For extremists cryptocurrencies are a political statement as much as a means to make money, writes researcher and author Julia Ebner

www.theguardian.com

Pro-Russian neo-Nazis’ Telegram campaigns raise $5m in crypto – but it’s ‘significantly harder’

Blockchain audit firm CertiK reports evidence that neo-Nazi and pro-Russia hate groups are working together on Telegram to raise crypto funds for Moscow's invasion of Ukraine.

www.dlnews.com

How Cryptocurrency Revolutionized the White Supremacist Movement

White supremacists embraced cryptocurrency early in its development, and in some cases produced million-dollar profits through the technology, reshaping the racist right in radical ways, a Hatewatch analysis found.

www.splcenter.org

There's really no shortage of evidence that fascists absolutely love crypto and have done from the beginning.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Devils Advocate : Nonces are indeed scum, which is why children should be seperated from all adults and taken in by the state, to be taught by AI, just like out of that film "Mother". If children have no contact with adults, then nonces can't possibily get at them.

"Because nonces" and "Will somebody think of the children!!!!" are not arguements for restricting the freedoms of normal law abiding citizens.

Someone caught producing child porn has their internet access restricted, including mobile phone use.

People would be using fentanyl without crypto.

Besides, crypto has always been a stupid means of payment for criminals because the evidence is left online forever and that evidence eventually comes home to roost.

Fuck off.

The fentanyl epidemic is fueled by Chinese imports paid for in crypto.

Last paragraph is brilliant. First it was discrimination proof due to anonymity. Now it turns out the opposite is the case and the open leger means everyone knows what everyone's doing and stupid criminals or something.

You're spending hours upon hours posting on here. What do you hope to achieve?

 

[SpineyNorman]

You do have a platform. This one.

A web forum viewed by about 12 cynical middle (and older) aged lefties isn't what I had in mind.

I do look forward to the urban files where crispy selectively releases PMs to show editor removing posts by communists at the behest of liberals though.

 

[StakerOne]

Fuck off.

The fentanyl epidemic is fueled by Chinese imports paid for in crypto.

Last paragraph is brilliant. First it was discrimination proof due to anonymity. Now it turns out the opposite is the case and the open leger means everyone knows what everyone's doing and stupid criminals or something.

You're spending hours upon hours posting on here. What do you hope to achieve?

If it's paid in crypto then there's a much bigger chance they will get caught.

And open elder gets you caught, if you're doing serious crime.

It's much easier, more secretive and far safer to be launder drugs money through the traditional financial system.

 

[Storm Fox]

So in the glorious crypto future. I assume people will have to interact will government services such as bin collections etc. So you will have to have some sort of blockchain ID. Now what's to stop that ID being tied to your vaccine status. So if you don't have a vaccine you don't get any council services? IIRC even being asked by ones own family to be considerate of their health cause slight consternation if a number of posters on this forum.

 

[Rob Ray]

Huh, turns out 46% of crypto activity involves illegal activity - I always thought it was less than that, like a third or whatever.

https://freepolicybriefs.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/freepolicybrief_jan212019.pdf

The report notes:

This staggering number is close to the scale of the US and European markets for illegal drugs and suggest that cryptocurrencies are transforming the black markets by enabling “black e-commerce.”

That's presumably separate to people fucking each other over in paradise, which as has been noted repeatedly, is basically so habitual it has its own jargon. Most recently there's been a major uptick in crypto's use for people trafficking, with this report noting that the ease with which tracks can be covered makes it ideal for such a purpose. How lovely.

As Virtual Currency Use in Human and Drug Trafficking Increases, So Do the Challenges for Federal Law Enforcement

Federal data indicate that virtual currencies—for example cryptocurrencies—are increasingly being used in illegal activities, such as human and drug trafficking. The use of virtual currencies has added to the challenges federal law enforcement face when trying to prevent and discover these...

www.gao.gov

 

[moochedit]

Isn't this fella also the weird freeman type who was saying lots of disturbing stuff about the Constance Marten and Mark Gordon case?

Is that the couple that were on the run with the baby (that eventually died)?
If so that was "seventyseven" that was saying weird stuff about it. "Stakerone" was here before him so i don't * think * its the same person.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

You've missed out by far the most important thing that stops you stealing. I'm not surprised by this omission, because it sums up the whole dystopian cryptoverse representation of humanity.

Whats that? Morality?
The assumption was that Bob wants to steal, cos Bob is a wrong'un.

As q_w_e_r_t_y states upthread. "Not your keys not your bitcoin" and that's a major problem. Most people will not care about that. Most people want to work* get paid and have easy access to money to spend it on things they enjoy or need to live. They don't want to spend hours organising it.

To research a wallet on bitcoin.org, download it, transfer some btc to it, then delete and restore it takes around 15 mins. Lets say 2h for a newbie.
To secure a private key can take anywhere from 1 min to several weeks depending how secure you want to make it. Anything over an hour is only for the ultra paranoid. So for the non-technical and moderately paranoid user, a max of 3h

To set up a bank account in the UK takes a couple of hours of form filling, then waiting for days for approval, then potentially a couple of phone calls. If you want similar payment functionality, you can add in an hour or so downloading the bank's app and all the faff that goes with it. To set up a bank account in rural Afghanistan, means finding a sponsor who will vouch for you, travelling to a city to go to the bank, having several meetings with bank officials, potentially hiring someone to complete the Pashto documentation, then probably getting turned down.

Just because you dont need bitcoin doesnt mean it isnt needed.

If q_w_e_r_t_y and StakerOne you want to spend loads of time doing that great. We all have our hobbies. I don't, I probably spend less than 1 hour a month on financial transactions, and the includes the time tapping my credit card or putting my PIN in. Until crypto is that easy it is never going to have mass adoption and that is going to require regulation and trust in a banking type of organisation.

Paying on lightning is basically the same as applepay. The only added element is the transfer from mainnet to Lighting Network.

But you have to trust the Argent are not a scam and even if they are not, if there is a bug in their software you say goodbye to your coin without recourse as there is no regulation or backstop. Unlike banks.

Argent is an interesting example as they are a smart contract wallet, so its one of the few wallets out there where these concerns are justified.
You dont have to trust that they arent a scam because you can see the smart contract on the ethereum blockchain and read it for yourself if you like, but you can also take a look at the audit reports.

Argent is a bit of an odd wallet as they work on social recovery, rather than seed phrases and are aiming at non-technical users. While I believe they are secure if used as intended, I'm not convinced their whole approach is desirable, and - as you point out - an undetected flaw in their smart contract could see all user money flowing out the door. They do have a pretty large bug bounty, but yeah, gonna give you this one Storm Fox

You've got zero chance of making me read that but fuck Jordan Peterson - he's a borderline fascist himself.

And people like me don't get cancelled because we don't have a platform to begin with.

Jordan Peterson. For fucks sake.

Your eagerness to virtue signal your dislike of Jordan Peterson has made made the whole point whoosh over your head.
1. People who are not well known are more likely to be silenced (/cancelled) than those who are, because they didnt have much of a voice in the first place.
2. Bitcoin exists, it cannot unexist.
You can boycott bitcoin all you like because the fash use it, but all you are doing is handing over power to the fash in some kind of twisted holier than thou arrogance. Bitcoin is a tool for liberation, everyone is free to use it, including the fash. There is a limited supply of bitcoin in the world. The more bitcoin that is not in the hands of the fash, the less bitcoin is in the hands of the fash.

He’s also simultaneously agitating for something that would stop a centralised ability to prevent something (namely, transactions) but also agitating FOR something that allows precisely that (smart contracts, which embed corporate power over individual behaviour)

Why do you think smart contracts embed corporate power over individual behaviour (or was it a typo meaning collective)?
Smart contracts can have DAO governance parameters, but its not strictly necessary. If you do not want to engage with a smart contract which has modifiable parameters, you dont sign one. Simples.

DAOs are not corporations, some DAOs do have corporations attached to them, because when they were set up there was a mistaken belief that an LLC format would protect them from state persecution, which has proven not only not to be the case, but that the LLC itself is a vulnerability. Sushi is the latest one to fall foul of this.

Want to buy bash laced with fentanyl that you can sell on the streets as smack?

Now here you really crossing a line.
The whole reason silk road grew and so quickly was because for the first time people who wanted or need access to illegal substances were able to get it from a trusted peer reviewed source, who was incentivised not to lie about their product. Ross Ulbright has done 10 years in prison for his part in promoting the safety of drug users.

You can donate to the #freeross trust here. They even take fiat.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Exactly the problem. That’s a massive power asymmetry. How to judge whether an individual “delivers” will be buried in the coding equivalent of a 50 page contract, completely impenetrable to 99% of the population.

"pages" Lol.
I can just imagine you printing out a smart contract, signing it with a fountain pen before popping it in an envelope and mailing it to the Ethereum Foundation.

Anyways, no - thats not how it works. I can explain, but I think I'd be wasting my time. Anyway, look up "oracles"

And yet if the non-delivery clause triggers, there is no way to challenge that judgment. It just happens, and the individual is compelled by the coercive corporation to behave on rails.

Oracles. Verifications, nodes, disputes, challenge periods, Start with Kleros, then take a look at UMA and Chainlink.

That’s anti-society. It’s the opposite of trust because no trust is required. It destroys the notion of trust.

I dont trust my bank, they are cunts. Is that really so contraversial? I thought everyone knew that banks were evil cunts. I dont trust a whole load of people that I do business with - my car insurance company - bastards. My electricity company - mega bastards.
What destroyed the notion of trust was that they are basically untrustworthy, because they have been proven over and over again to be lying cunts.

Am I alone in this?

You do like to go in about DAOs but nice cuddly collectives don’t rule the neoliberal universe — corporations do. And something like this, which increases information and power asymmetries — will exacerbate that process, not disrupt it

Aviva are not going to be replaced with an insurance cooperative.

Aviva, a company that has roots going back 425 years and was established in its current form 25 years ago is currently valued at about 40x Nexus, a DAO set up 30 months ago. with roots that go back 6 years.
Have you thought about applying for Aviva CEO?

• "There's no chance that the iPhone is going to get any significant market share. No chance." - Former BlackBerry CEO Mike Lazaridis
• "Smartphones are a niche market. It's not a market that we want to be in." - Former Nokia executive Anssi Vanjoki
• "Digital imaging is just a fad." - Former Kodak CEO Dan Carp
• "There will always be a need for paper." - Former Xerox CEO, Ursula Burn
• "Google's not a real company. It's a house of cards." - Former Yahoo CEO, Terry Semel
• "I've been frankly confused by this fascination that everybody has with Netflix." - Former Blockbuster CEO, Jim Keyes

This technology is not going to dismantle the house of neoliberal capitalism — it is neoliberal capitalism. No, Aviva are going to use this technology to force individuals to behave as they want those individuals to behave, and thus increase their capital, not decrease it. When your car simply won’t start because your phone has detected something that Aviva doesn’t like, that’s good for them and not good for you. You won’t even know why you’ve been prevented from driving. You won’t need to know why.

Now you are understanding why a CDBC is such a bad thing. This obscurity is only possible with a centralised ledger.

Except that won’t actually happen, because real-world financial industries are heavily regulated by the state, with consumer needs placed at the centre of that regulation. The regulator would stop the kind of power asymmetry I have described from being packaged into an insurance product. The regulator, who is authoritarian and gets in the way of individuals and corporations just agreeing to do any old thing. Thank goodness.

Lol - you what?!
Do you remember the PPI scandal which was exposed in 2006 and is still ongoing nearly 20 years later, spawning a multibillion scam industry in the process?
kabbes you seem to live in a world with trustworthy institutions that place the consumer at the heart of of the business dealings all watched over by a benign, benevolent authoritarian state who will champion the plucky little guy if these big bad corps ever get out of line. You are sounding like some kind of propaganda mule from the 50s at this point.

You obviously haven't read the Bank of England's paper which I linked to earlier. The digital pound isn't a replacement for GBP, it's a new form of it, to be introduced alongside physical cash and the current system of private bank transfers. If GBP is worthless then so will be the digital pound, which the paper quite clearly states is intended to be a digital version of the physical coins and notes which are directly issued by the Bank of England (public money), as opposed to the electronically accessible retail/commercial bank deposits (private money) that most people use when making payments online. Trying to bribe people with digital pounds when GBP is worthless would be like giving away digital monopoly money at that point. So it seems pretty obvious to me that the intention here is to fill a perceived gap where there is currently no way of having digital currency that is directly issued by the Bank of England. As opposed to whatever nefarious fantasy you've decided to hallucinate about instead of actually reading.

But the risk is that people wont have access to commercial bank accounts once the CDBC is introduced. Lots ofpeople have a hard time accessing even a basic one now.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Good grief

 

[Rob Ray]

Oracles. Verifications, nodes, disputes, challenge periods, Start with Kleros, then take a look at UMA and Chainlink.

Funny how quickly your "anyone can get going in no time" turned into a whole masterclass in jargon and obscure names, isn't it.

Am I alone in this?

Certainly not. But the thing is, if the choice is between a regulated capitalist and a totally unregulated capitalist most people will choose the former. Because banks are not uniquely untrustworthy.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Huh, turns out 46% of crypto activity involves illegal activity - I always thought it was less than that, like a third or whatever.

https://freepolicybriefs.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/freepolicybrief_jan212019.pdf

The report notes:

That report is 4 years old. Thats a lifetime ago in crypto terms
Its also full of nonsense, but I cant be arsed pulling apart a 4 year out of date paper by some no-body.

That's presumably separate to people fucking each other over in paradise, which as has been noted repeatedly, is basically so habitual it has its own jargon. Most recently there's been a major uptick in crypto's use for people trafficking, with this report noting that the ease with which tracks can be covered makes it ideal for such a purpose. How lovely.

As Virtual Currency Use in Human and Drug Trafficking Increases, So Do the Challenges for Federal Law Enforcement

Federal data indicate that virtual currencies—for example cryptocurrencies—are increasingly being used in illegal activities, such as human and drug trafficking. The use of virtual currencies has added to the challenges federal law enforcement face when trying to prevent and discover these...

www.gao.gov

Did you actually read the article. There is precisely one nebulous claim of human trafficking in there which is "Specifically, in a June 2021 report, we found that 15 of the 27 online commercial sex marketplaces that we examined accepted virtual currencies". Thats it.

Now, crypto is unquestionably used in the interface between asylum seekers and human traffickers, and I wouldnt be surprised if there had been an uptick in its use recently given the situation in the Ukraine. However if you are going to argue something ffs read the article first rather than just the headline.

 

[Rob Ray]

That report is 4 years old. Thats a lifetime ago in crypto terms

Lol you really are absolutely hopeless. Fingers in ears, head in sand, lalalala hopeless. In one breath "I don't trust banks" and in the next it's refusing to believe wonderful bitcoin could be a major method of untrustworthy people moving money around. You think you're a cynic, but you're actually a hopeless romantic, goodies outwitting baddies. It'd be funny if it weren't so sad.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Funny how quickly your "anyone can get going in no time" turned into a whole masterclass in jargon and obscure names, isn't it.

Yeah, its like fiat in that regard.
I can teach a 4 year old to go to the shop hand over £1 and get a chocolate bar, just like I can show a 4 year old how to use bitcoin.
But its going to take a whole lot more background learning to do options trading on derivative future markets.

Certainly not. But the thing is, if the choice is between a regulated capitalist and a totally unregulated capitalist most people will choose the former. Because banks are not uniquely untrustworthy.

Who is regulating? Why should we trust them?
Why are the regulators uniquely trustworthy?

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Lol you really are absolutely hopeless. Fingers in ears, head in sand, lalalala hopeless. In one breath "I don't trust banks" and in the next it's refusing to believe wonderful bitcoin could be a major method of untrustworthy people moving money around. You think you're a cynic, but you're actually a hopeless romantic, goodies outwitting baddies. It'd be funny if it weren't so sad.

This is a much better and far far more comprehensive source from a reputable organisation (if still a little out of date). Fill yer boots.

https://go.chainalysis.com/rs/503-FAP-074/images/2020-Crypto-Crime-Report.pdf

 

[maomao]

Is that the couple that were on the run with the baby (that eventually died)?
If so that was "seventyseven" that was saying weird stuff about it. "Stakerone" was here before him so i don't * think * its the same person.

It all happened while staker one was on a temp ban. The similarity is striking. Same nutty beliefs, same winning personality.

 

[Rob Ray]

Yeah, its like fiat in that regard.
I can teach a 4 year old to go to the shop hand over £1 and get a chocolate bar, just like I can show a 4 year old how to use bitcoin.
But its going to take a whole lot more background learning to do options trading on derivative future markets.


Who is regulating? Why should we trust them?
Why are the regulators uniquely trustworthy?

I doubt you could teach a four-year-old to do either thing, you'd get bogged down in tortuous rationalisations of ill conceived opinions.

Regulators aren't inherently trustworthy. No-one is. But the motivation of a regulator is primarily to maintain trust that the system will remain stable. It achieves this by enforcing rules. Not always fairly, or without corruption, but in enough cases to allow for a degree of certainty in trade and production. This is in fact the entire basis of first world capitalism, and most of why the major financial centres are so successful - stability and security with a (relatively) high degree of fair dealing.

Now the thing is, I'm among those who genuinely despise this system. It screws over the weak, and I'd love to tear it down. But you're struggling to convince me. Why? Because your "solution" is to give these people even more fucking power. No regulation of the people who are fucking us even with regulation is a short path to hell. You can't see it because you're a cultist, but the rest of us, lefties by background, can see it a mile away.

 

[Rob Ray]

a reputable organisation

If a firm backed by venture capitalists which puts the motto "building trust in blockchains" on its literature is your idea of a reputable source for critical analysis of crypto you really need to take a look at the state of yourself.

"Our research found that hardly any leopards eat faces"
- Spotty Clauses Ltd
working to build trust in leopards.
(proudly owned by Faceeaters Inc and Bellyfulla Faces)

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's an odd mix of magical thinking (storing energy), conspiracy (govt out to get us, China here we come, the Pound is going to cease to exist), romanticism (we'll all be included) and self-serving concepts lifted uncritically from conventional economics (arbitrage performs a useful role in making markets efficient).

It appears that being a crypto-nut requires all of the above.

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

Oh lord, give me strength!

Rob Ray On the one hand you are institant that regulation is the way to go, on the other hand you dismiss the organisation that the regulators rely on for their data.

Chainanalysis is a go-to source for onchain data for the following organisations.

• Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) in the United States
• Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the United Kingdom
• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the United States
• Financial Supervisory Authority (FIN-FSA) in Finland
• Japan Virtual Currency Exchange Association (JVCEA) in Japan
• Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) in Malta
• Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC)

Additionally they also work with the following law enforcement organisations.

• U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
• Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
• U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
• Europol (European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation)
• Financial Action Task Force (FATF)
• Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC)
• New Zealand Police
• Singapore Police Force
• United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)
• South Korean Financial Services Commission (FSC)

So our trustworthy regulators are enforcing their rules based on data from a dodgy company set up by evil venture capitalists?