Bitcoin on the rise

Ask your investment, budget, and other money related questions here
prudentelo
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:55 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by prudentelo »

Cryptocurrency or alternative currency generally (gold and bic lighters were such currencies) has more utility in a 'fall of USSR' scenario than complete collapse of the world in a dark age.

On a world scale, such scenarios are not that uncommon even in the past hundred years. The English-speaking world specifically has been stable for a long time.

Humanofearth
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Humanofearth »

@Slevin
Didn’t dig into the article but at first glance, it’s inaccurate because the hash rate dropped about 50% when the previously top mining country (China) enforced the ban on mining Bitcoin. This was a 90% drop. Top 10% of countries could have a 90% control of the mining but not 10% of miners.

@WFJ
It appears you were in the 2017 bubble without learning what multi-sig was. It invalidates attacking a single key holder to gain access to the funds. I recommend you research how to properly custody crypto.

Humanofearth
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Humanofearth »

This is an example of Canada’s monopolizer of violence attempting to freeze Bitcoin, as they did other financial accounts, but still being unaware that they cannot freeze or control it beyond participating as others.

This is a message sent to a multi-sig software provider based in Canada from the monopolizer about some “Mareva Injunction”, which I think is self granted permission to freeze/seize.

I count resistance to this as a use case but maybe others don’t.

https://twitter.com/nunchuk_io/status/1 ... 7577271299

chenda
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Nether Wallop

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by chenda »

Humanofearth wrote:
Sun Feb 20, 2022 8:17 pm
This is a message sent to a multi-sig software provider based in Canada from the monopolizer about some “Mareva Injunction”, which I think is self granted permission to freeze/seize.

I count resistance to this as a use case but maybe others don’t.
I suspect once the Nunchuk team are facing lengthy prison sentences and personal asset confiscation they will swiftly become a lot more cooperative.

Freezing the assets of those suspected of involvement in criminal activity is a long established practice and bitcoin should not be used to facilitate criminal activity and non-compliance with court orders.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 9344
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by 7Wannabe5 »

This might be a stupid question, but doesn’t the fact that crypto is mainly held by the young and wealthy somewhat mitigate the possibility of overall crash? Aren’t these currencies to some extent bolstered by the tech industry in general? IOW, isn’t the flow something like tech profits to tech salaries to crypto investments?

Humanofearth
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Humanofearth »

chenda wrote:
Mon Feb 21, 2022 4:17 am
I suspect once the Nunchuk team are facing lengthy prison sentences and personal asset confiscation they will swiftly become a lot more cooperative.

Freezing the assets of those suspected of involvement in criminal activity is a long established practice and bitcoin should not be used to facilitate criminal activity and non-compliance with court orders.
It appears you don’t understand. Nunchuk is incapable of complying with the order.

prudentelo
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2022 8:55 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by prudentelo »

"Personal asset confiscation" certainly is not an ordinary way Western Democracies have enforced laws against suspects for nuisance crimes, let alone in ever-expanding circles from the nominal accused.

It is a new development and it does have the potential to affect asset valuations.

chenda
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Nether Wallop

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by chenda »

A freezing order (previously called a mareva injunction) is an interim injunction that prohibits a party from disposing of or dealing with its assets... If a third party knowingly assists in or allows a breach of the freezing order, he may be held to be in contempt of court. The penalties for contempt of court are imprisonment, fines and seizure of assets [Emphasis added] .


https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters. ... tPage=true

Canadian law will almost certainly take the same view. Nunchuk may have a defence if they are unable to comply with the order for technical reasons, but that will raise further questions as to whether they are operating lawfully or should legally be allowed to operate in such a way.

Humanofearth
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2021 3:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Humanofearth »

@ Chenda

Nunchuk provides software to create multi-sig wallets. Imagine Nunchuk provides you with instructions to make a machine that allows you to create keys that are necessary to move your own money but you must provide them an email address.

You use these instructions to make 5 keys and 3 are required to move your money. You keep 1 key and 4 are given to family in Singapore, Dubai, Russia, and Antarctica.

Now, Nunchuk only knows your email address, which could easily be a throwaway. They make it illegal, what can you literally do? Even if they kidnap you and throw you in a cage, Nunchuk can do nothing. You can do nothing. It requires consent that is outside the jurisdiction of Canada. Canada has no domain in Singapore. Singapore is not Canada’s property. Those living in Singapore have 0 obligation to do what Canada wants. It requires the consent of 3/5 key holders. If 3/5 holders decide to comply, then it is their choice to move the funds to where Canada does have jurisdiction, like a Canadian brokerage.

Let’s say Canada makes multi sig wallets illegal, it cannot seize or stop anyone from making the keys or using them anyways. But code is likely freedom of speech and Nunchuk can likely move their entire operation within a day, which is longer than the courts take to pass laws so they have time to prepare. And then any Canadian can still go to Nunchuk’s website to make their own keys.

Actually, Cold Card, one of the best hardware wallets for Bitcoin, if not the best, is in Canada. They make it very easy to use your Cold Card as a key for multi sig wallets. Nunchuk is one of many, many such software providers. All of whom, have 0 control or knowledge over what their users do.

take2
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by take2 »

Good explanation. I read both articles and two things stand out:

1) Its a bit shocking that whoever sent Nunchuk that order doesn’t realise that they aren’t a fiduciary intermediary (aka a centralised entity that holds custody/control of crypto on behalf of their clients). Indeed their entire business model is the opposite of this

2) Nunchuk didn’t have any reason to be so snarky in their response. Whilst they can’t be forced to comply with this I’m sure the gov’t can otherwise make their lives difficult. However, I agree with @HotE that in the long run that will just drive them (and others) into friendlier jurisdictions.


@Chenda - the link you sent is applicable to fiduciary intermediaries (banks) who operate in a centralised way. A big point of [some] crytpocurrencies is to operate in a decentralised manner, such that there are no centralised fiduciary intermediaries that hold your funds. You are your own custodian, and as @HofE mentioned access keys can be left across multiple jurisdictions.

Your posts here and on others re: crypto give the impression that you think this is all used to fund criminal activity, evade lawful orders, etc. I’m not contesting that some may do that, but I would encourage you to consider a world where the state may not have your best intentions in mind. There are now talks of gov’ts creating programmable central bank digital currencies (CBDC). The programmable nature of these (like ether but unlike Bitcoin) could theoretically lock out certain users instantly from accessing their funds, or only allow the population to use funds in certain transactions. It doesn’t take an Orwellian expert to see the issues with giving gov’ts near instant and complete control over every aspect of the funds of their population.

The push for CBDCs are in part a response to crypto - using the blockchain from a technical point, but also a response to the threat of decentralised currencies that they are unable to control. The Nunchuk example is a great use-case for the importance of decentralised currencies to keep the power of central gov’ts in check.

User avatar
Jean
Posts: 1886
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2013 8:49 am
Location: Switzterland

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Jean »

Bitcoin might replace SWIFT. It does the same job, cheaper, better, and you cannot be unilaterally excluded from it.

chenda
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Nether Wallop

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by chenda »

@take 2 - I understand there is a difference, but I am not sure the law yet does. Yes the impertinent tone of their response isn't going to help them. I doubt it meets the test of contempt of court but I am sure a creative government official can respond to their little joke with some appropriately annoying legal obligations.
Humanofearth wrote:
Mon Feb 21, 2022 7:52 pm
You can do nothing. It requires consent that is outside the jurisdiction of Canada. Canada has no domain in Singapore. Singapore is not Canada’s property. Those living in Singapore have 0 obligation to do what Canada wants. It requires the consent of 3/5 key holders.
Worldwide freezing orders can and are enforced via local courts (and of course so are extradition requests) Singaporean courts incidentally have little judicial independence from the one party state, and if they decide to help their Canadian friends, they will do so very efficiently. Although pursuing multi-jurisdictional enforcement may not be worth the cost in many cases.

take2
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by take2 »

I think the larger point is the keyholders in @HotE’s example aren’t corporate entities or fiduciary intermediaries but rather individuals. No jurisdiction would have any way of knowing who holds these keys (or where the keys are located) or really be able to force them to comply. This is the whole point of decentralisation.

The cons of this are obviously difficulties with self-custody (lots of stories of lost keys to BTC that can never be recovered) but the main positive is exactly the ability to prevent seizure.

chenda
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Nether Wallop

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by chenda »

take2 wrote:
Tue Feb 22, 2022 8:35 am
The cons of this are obviously difficulties with self-custody (lots of stories of lost keys to BTC that can never be recovered) but the main positive is exactly the ability to prevent seizure.
It strikes me as somewhat analogous to bearer bonds, which have long been made mostly illegal due to the frequent use in criminal activity. I'm sure most users of bearer bonds were not criminals, but bad apples and all that.

I expect cyptocurrency and associated services will go a similar way. I'm not saying that's necessarily right- but it's very likely.

take2
Posts: 317
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 8:32 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by take2 »

We can agree to disagree on the point of whether you think BTC has any valid use cases, or the extent it’s used in criminal activity, etc.

But I fail to see the analogy to bearer bonds. In bearer bonds there is no registered holder so seizure is as simple as physically seizing the bonds. In BTC you can’t do that without the private key so it’s not really the same at all.

In terms of an analogy to bearer bonds eventually being phased out I also don’t see how that works. Bearer bonds were issued by a central entity (gov’t or corporation) so a decision to stop issuing is as easy as that entity deciding to stop. That doesn’t apply to BTC in any way.

In terms of an analogy for the gov’t to stop accepting it as legal tender that’s already the case for BTC. You can’t pay your taxes in it (in the US/U.K., though some countries have established this) or exchange it for dollars in any retail bank (note you also can’t do this for gold anymore). The value is in what the wider market attributes to it. That value is driven in part by speculation, and in part by the inherent value of having a decentralised currency, precisely for such use cases as @HotE outlined.

The argument that crypto currencies will go the way of bearer bonds doesn’t really make sense. If there was ever a time that BTC in particular would fail it would have happened c. 2014 when Mt. Gox (crypto exchange) was hacked. The fact that it’s survived the past 12+ years, including that disaster, plus has grown in users indicates to me it’s not going anywhere. Add to that that it skews heavily towards the younger population and thus as their wealth grows it will likely go disproportionately into crypto vs other asset classes.

chenda
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Nether Wallop

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by chenda »

take2 wrote:
Tue Feb 22, 2022 9:12 am
But I fail to see the analogy to bearer bonds. In bearer bonds there is no registered holder so seizure is as simple as physically seizing the bonds. In BTC you can’t do that without the private key so it’s not really the same at all.

In terms of an analogy to bearer bonds eventually being phased out I also don’t see how that works. Bearer bonds were issued by a central entity (gov’t or corporation) so a decision to stop issuing is as easy as that entity deciding to stop. That doesn’t apply to BTC in any way.
Bearer bonds could be kept in a safe deposit box, hidden abroad, or stuffed under a mattress in a mountain shack. Or they could be lost, stolen, physically eroded or burnt, just like a multi-sig wallet. Or the value could become worthless if the issuer went bankrupt. In many ways crypto is just a digital version of bearer bonds. Governments could easily ban or heavily restrict there use, just liked they did with bearer bonds. I think we will see a move to digital currencies, but it will be firmly under the control of central bankers.

I am not sayings it necessarily right or it should happen, I'm just predicting it will.

jacob
Site Admin
Posts: 15859
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 8:38 pm
Location: USA, Zone 5b, Koppen Dfa, Elev. 620ft, Walkscore 77
Contact:

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by jacob »

Transacting with other humans basically comes down to transacting with other humans.
Transacting with other humans is a societal construct.

In terms of practical consequences to consider:
What-if the next generations collectively decide that equities or economic growth is no longer the secular religion per se? Losing this faith would render existing faith in various security-holdings somewhat ... dubious. Always remember, when speculating, it's not what you think it's worth, it's what future people think it's worth.

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 6352
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Ego »

I didn't want to clutter the other thread with bitcoin issues so I will ask here.

You live in Ukraine. Russian tanks are rolling in. You are a remote worker and have converted your wealth to bitcoin which you hold in your own wallet. You can cross borders without worry that it will be confiscated. You drive to Portugal or Germany and need to begin setting up a new life. What is the most effective mechanism for transferring your wealth to spendable Euros?

User avatar
Chris
Posts: 773
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 2:44 pm

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by Chris »

Transfer to an exchange wallet, then sell to Euro.
If you want to go the P2P route, there is LocalBitcoins.com.

chenda
Posts: 3281
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 1:17 pm
Location: Nether Wallop

Re: Bitcoin on the rise

Post by chenda »

People around the world are using bitcoin to fund and support the Ukrainian military (just an observation not a criticism)

Post Reply