zlacker

[return to "Feds arrest couple, seize $3.6B in hacked Bitcoin funds"]
1. fxtent+35[view] [source] 2022-02-08 17:11:20
>>mikeyo+(OP)
Shouldn't all true crypto believers hate this news?

It's the government trying to enforce their opinion of who should own those Bitcoins, thereby taking power away from the owner that the network has decided on, which would be "whoever has the cryptographic keys".

◧◩
2. kelsey+Ob[view] [source] 2022-02-08 17:35:16
>>fxtent+35
As a crypto unbeliever I hate this too. Legal enforcement legitimizes crypto as property. It expands the definition of property by institutionally conferring the status of "owned" to a functional configuration of bits distributed over thousands of computers. Do we have this concept for other things? yes. But I'd rather like to contract the space of property rather than expand it.
◧◩◪
3. mbesto+9p1[view] [source] 2022-02-08 23:10:21
>>kelsey+Ob
> Legal enforcement legitimizes crypto as property. It expands the definition of property by institutionally conferring the status of "owned" to a functional configuration of bits distributed over thousands of computers.

9/10ths of law is property ownership. I find hilarious that anyone would want less of this concept, not more. My interpretation is that crypto enthusiasts want the "trust of the crowds" not a centralized government. Which doesn't mean the trust system becomes contracted per se, but rather under a different set of rules (i.e. purely direct democracy vs centralized republic).

◧◩◪◨
4. kelsey+ls1[view] [source] 2022-02-08 23:29:55
>>mbesto+9p1
It's simply that people who begin thought experiments with one island, two people, and three cows tend to reach absolutely unhinged conclusions about how the society should work. Not wanting to live in a world governed by those systems is why I intent to frame them as such. Before we get to the part where some responder concludes, "you should go live in the woods then", I'd rather they did.

Another way of putting it is this. Expansions in the legal concept of property are consequently expansions in the dominion of the state.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. BLKNSL+QT1[view] [source] 2022-02-09 02:47:35
>>kelsey+ls1
> consequently expansions in the dominion of the state.

So your concerns are about restriction of liberties? or society moving away from small government?

Are you a supporter of cryptocurrencies?

[go to top]