Bitcoin Forum

If you have not heard the news yet, Liberty Reserve has been shut down http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22680297 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22680297)

This is bullish news for Bitcoins. Not only is there now one less competitor to bitcoins, but this shows one more time why a decentralized payment network is much more resilient than a centralized one. This also shows how aggressive governments can be, so it is even more important to have your money in a place you control, one which will not get shut down by police.

Is this as big as the Cyprus thing? No, because it affects fewer people, but it is just one more thing in a long line of acts which the government is doing which will ultimately push people into using Bitcoins.

Not fewer people dude, too many. Total 6 billion dollars got seized and yes people will move to bitcoin for sure.

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/May13/LibertyReserveetalDocuments.php

Not sure if it is a plus or a minus.  There is a lot of room for competition, but if they are guilty of something bad enough, maybe it is good that they are stopped?  Bitcoin and all the other alternative currencies put together are still a very very small fraction of the marketplace.

You are trying to say that more people used Liberty Reserve than live in Cyprus? A country with over a million people and an economy of over 20 billion dollars?

But even if they are being stopped for cause, there are innocent people whose funds are now frozen. Should I be punished just because my neighbor does something bad?

Liberty reserve was always the shadiest of the shady. The VERY shadiest. INCREDIBLY EASY to move money anonymously and frankly, prime pickings for this. At some point, I become less able to sympathize with people who trust their money to those they don't research. If one stopped to look at how money moves through LR, it was clear to see that it was built for laundering money. If one is cool with that -- fine -- if not... probably should have done some sniffing around.

Right, that was basically my point, you shouldn't.  But it is a part of the counter-party risk of using any institution.  Closing the shop peremptorily strikes me as a misplay of the interests of justice, unless the authority was being stonewalled and had no other choice.
Once the authority gets evidence, they can either go for the selective fire, or the carpet bombing, but the selective fire typically will take the compliance of the leadership of the organization.
Once they get stonewalled, they have fewer choices.

This is complicated by the forfeiture laws, which can give seized wealth to the prosecuting authorities organization and lead to big career advancements for the government employees who capture it.  The forfeiture laws lead to much sloppy law enforcement.

I didn't compared it with cryprus  ;D

Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying? I said it affects fewer people than Cyprus, you said "not fewer", which implies "larger", so to me you are saying that this is larger than Cyprus?

Ah sorry actually i didn't knew what cyprus thing is that time.  ;D.

Bitcoin used to be funded with a lot of funds from LR :-\

It's a shame how the whole business was seized without any warning from the authorities.

This is bad for bitcoin. Very bad.

It shows that the US goverment is fed up with virtual currencies that can be used for money laundering. And bitcoin is even MORE anonymous than LR was.

I think this is a bad sign and bitcoin is in trouble.

Look at the trend:

- US govt freezes dwolla account of MtGox
- LR shut down by US govt
- OKPay announces it will stop working with bitcoin (US govt involved??)

That's three less ways you can exchange US dollars for bitcoin.

What comes next?

- US stops international bank wires to bitcoin exchanges
- US shuts down campbx and bitinstant
- US cracks down on local bitcoin sales through localbitcoins
- US companies are banned from accepting bitcoin as payment

Bitcoin crashes and goes away.

The more US government is trying to crackdown on bitcoin related services the more bitcoin will flourish. They know that very well.

I wish I could agree with this, but as long as bitcoin stays underground it will be used for silk road and nothing else.

We need to be accepted by the mainstream, by large companies like amazon.com in order to succeed. That is just beginning to happen now but if bitcoin is made "illegal", those companies are going to run, far, far away and bitcoin won't be used by anyone but the techies, the libertarians, and the crazies on this forum ;).

I wouldn't say so. The remarks mgio makes are genuine concerns for the future of Bitcoin. (Well, i.e. a future in which it might be widely used by the general public, instead of being used by just the geeky early adopters. A very dim future is also a future, you might say, but I think we'd all prefer a really bright future for BTC).

Should recent developments be all part of a bigger scheme, then you'd better not be "stuck" with your bitcoins. [Yeah, start bashing me now :) ]  Worst case I'm afraid one day we'll wake up, noticing that the Japanese have shut down MtGox's bank accounts alltogether - this being just a "friendly gesture" towards their US counterparts in Government. They simply wouldn't care a bit.

Not seeing the risks that are mounting indeed, is not being wise IMHO.

No, I bought most of my coins at about $10 and I have plenty. I'd love for it to go back above $200 and higher, but I am seriously considering selling earlier if I see more bad news on the horizon from the US govt.

Like WackWilly said, yes, it's just concern for the future of bitcion. What bitcoin needs now is acceptance more than it needs fewer competitors.

Agree with you mate, They closed LR because cyber criminals were using it, they all know that bitcoins are getting used in deepweb and they have a eye on it.

Well it's important for Exchanges and Bitcoin companies to comply with regulation and we will be fine. it will be a struggle but we will come out on top.

The more of these shady exchange businesses get closed down the better. The government can't shut down bitcoin, and they can't stop some people from doing shady business with it (just like cash) but they can make the legitimate business act in a legal manner and this is a good thing.

They are guilty of NOT being Obedient Snitches.
A grave sin in the eyes of the Government and some commenters on this thread...

Right now, Bitcoin is accepted at Amazon through Gyft.  I bought a large gift card today, cashing out a few coins around $129, mostly because I'm bearish on the LR news, and it was time to cash out 10% anyways.  (side note: Bitpay gives a reasonable exchange rate, apparently at the point where enough btc are available on the bid side at MtGox to cover the sale of the card's btc).

The LR news may push the former LR users into bitcoin with whatever money that wasn't seized, but as you correctly pointed out, businesses are less likely to send money to an online currency exchange with front-page NYTimes headlines like "A case against Liberty Reserve, an online currency exchange, is believed to be the largest global money laundering prosecution ever, the authorities said." link (https://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/29/nyregion/liberty-reserve-operators-accused-of-money-laundering.html?hp)

Already, the LR news has had a chilling effect with the voluntary cutting off of OKPay to bitcoin exchanges. Also, because of the recent FinCen action against MtGox, Bitfinex voluntarily stopped using MtGox citing the risk of a MtGox seizure, which is why Bitstamp and MtGox exchange prices have diverged.  The feds are taking action, and are having a measurable effect on bitcoin already.

The feds have shown that they
1) have very long arms that can reach even into Costa Rica and grab a former American that had renounced citizenship, and start extradition proceedings.  Japan isn't too far.
2) are willing endure the collateral damage of hundreds to thousands of legitimate users of LR

The Feds may not be able to shut down bitcoin, but they know the mantra "follow the money", and I think they might start coming down on exchanges. The justification won't be that bitcoin itself is illegal.  What they'll do is say that the exchanges are not stopping money laundering, online drug sales, weapon sales, or child porn.  At least, that's what the headline will read, regardless of factual accuracy.

Best case scenario for Bitcoin is that MtGox is working with US feds to identify SR vendors, and announce a mass bust of them.  This would mean that the feds are working _with_ the exchanges to identify lawbreakers, rather than trying to shut down the whole damn thing like they did with SR.  No one likes the strict MtGox AML rules, but that might be the difference between the exchanges getting shut down LR style, and being allowed to exist by the Feds. 

Why would the US government want to crack down on SR?
I don't think they care too much about who's smoking what. What they do care about is their own power. People leaving the dollar is a threat to their power, so they are going to try and make it hard for people to leave the dollar. Terrorism & drugs are actually good for those in power, since they can profit from fighting them. So, no, the exchanges are gonna be targeted anyway, compliance or no compliance.
The good thing is, they probably can't do too much about the exchanges in Russia / China / Argentina / other areas not quite entirely under their control. Another good thing is, they have other issues apart from fighting Bitcoin, and any new war is going to speed up the incoming collapse.

Well get ready because I'm pretty sure that a lot of that shady business is now heading directly towards Bitcoin which will make it a real target.

$6 billion didn't get seized, that's the estimated amount of transactions they're being accused of laundering since 2006.

LR was almost nonexistent on the shady side of the internet. It's a hassle to get, and a hassle to turn into bitcoin. For them to affect crime in any substantial way they have to shut down virtually every currency that has an exchange that lets you withdrawal to Poland. The anonymous polish cards are what makes crime happen, it enables the bitcoins they earn to be worth something while staying anon. Otherwise, they have to mostly use their own bank accounts, and with the gigantic sums of money traded, won't fly.

Shutting down bitcoin would at least slow silk road down immensely while they converted to litecoin or something, but unlike with LR, legitimate people have hundreds of thousands of dollars invested into bitcoin. I wrote an essay that persuaded my teacher to buy some.

Plus, I think we all realize how near impossible it is to shut down. If they wanted to do any damage they would contact the two banks in Poland offering the cards and remove those. I have $50,000 worth of bitcoins that I have no intentions of paying taxes on, somehow I doubt localbitcoin will work for that much. It could take months to move all of that, with 10% fees potentially.

"Fighting" the "shady" businesses is mostly a cover-up for increased spending, which allows certain people to profit.
Bitcoin is, potentially, a real threat (though some people in government might view it as an investment vehicle - who knows?).
So, no, shady businesses won't change anything in government's attitude.

The indictment states that "a sum of money of at least $6 billion" will be forfeited (plus amounts in many other accounts)

https://i.imgur.com/tCR9s6r.png

Hmm, this story just keeps getting bigger

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/it-pro/security-it/westpac-caught-up-in-worlds-biggest-money-laundering-sting-20130529-2naa8.html?google_editors_picks=true

RE:  US companies are banned from accepting bitcoin as payment

I think that would require statutory action - a new law.  I don't know what authority regulators would have otherwise.

BTW, it seems overreaching to shut down a payment system because someone does something illegal with it.  By that logic, the secret service should go after the U.S. treasury for printing paper bills... because, there's a lot of illegal commerce done using U.S. paper dollars.

It's a blanket statement to seize all of their funds commensurate with the amount allegedly to have been laundered.  LR doesn't have $6 billion in funds stashed in some account (or in aggregate).


http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/28/net-us-cybercrime-libertyreserve-charges-idUSBRE94R0KQ20130528

I used LR a couple of years ago to transfer money between MtGox and another account.  The site always seemed a little dodgy in that no customer information was required.  Glad I pulled everything out years ago.


What kind of warning should be given?  'Guys, we're going to shut you down next week, but we don't expect any criminals and regular customers to clean out their accounts in the meantime.  Shady Operator, you have a few days to flee before we look for you'

This appears to be hitting the mainstream press now :

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/05/28/why-bitcoin-enthusiasts-should-pay-attention-to-liberty-reserves-shuttering/

ive been saying this. LR was huge in the underground world. Those transactions are going to go somewhere. PerfectMoney will take a big chunk of them. But with PerfectMoney saying NO to americans opening accounts then Bitcoin is the only alternative. As people figure this out and send their money in we will see a rise for sure IMO.

No it wasn't, lol. It was used seldom, not even 1% of the bitcoin transactions. People withdrawal to the anon polish cards, not their own bank accounts.

Fortunately, the tards who think government regulation of bitcoin exchanges/businesses/etc will "crush" bitcoin to nothingness, are in the minority. Were they even a significant portion of holders, price would have CRASHED to sub-$100 on the LR news.

What, are we so misinformed as to think that making it HARDER TO GET bitcoins will reduce DEMAND? I'll tell you what; it will have a CONCRETE effect on SUPPLY. It might make certain types of people more afraid to use bitcoin but it's virtually impossible to shut down the protocol/network so for that reason it will flourish. The only concrete effect we can determine from regulation is that it will reduce supply, and we all know how that works.

Drugs - government intervened, regulated, prices and popularity went up
Prohibition - prices went up
AK-47 - illegal where I live; price to get one is much,much higher than it is in jurisdictions where it is legal. But some of you would think that the regulation would make the AK-47 less desirable - because you are errantly assuming that reduced supply automatically leads to reduced demand which is not the case in most situations involving government intervention.
BITTORRENT - decentralized protocol; even has a weak front-end like bitcoin (websites/centralized infrastructure that offer .torrent downloads), government completely impotent and unable to do anything; torrents wildly increase in popularity despite illegality and risk of massive fines/imprisonment.

BITCOIN ("nah this time is inexplicably different, government intervention/regulation will cause price and popularity to go DOWN, here is some illogical FUD to support my position")  ;D ;D ;D

Who said the government had to be logical? They aren't going to make computers illegal either just because they are used to pirate music and movies.


Look what happened to Liberty Dollars. They weren't even really breaking any laws but the founder was made out to be a domestic terrorist.

There are already laws on the books that prohibit creating a currency that competes with the dollar. The gov just has to decide that those laws apply to bitcoin.

I think there was a case about a pizza place near the Mexican border that decided to accept pesos instead of dollar and they quickly put a stop to that.


My big fear with bitcoin is that it is pretty much impossible for it to actually be used legally. When you buy that gyft card with bitcoins, do you declare the appreciation of the coins relative to when you bought them to the IRS? I'm willing to bet most people don't, but you are supposed to. And there is no way to enforce because bitcoins are anonymous. The govt is going to become more upset that they aren't getting their cut as bitcoin grows and will start to cause more and more problems for us. I don't see any easy way around it.

All of those have an inherent value outside of their market price. Bitcoins only value is it's use as a currency. If it is harder to exchange your dollars for bitcoins, it is less useful as a currency and thus it's price will drop.

The point is, demand WILL drop. The LR announcement might not scare that many present investors off but it definitely will scare some potential investors. And serious govt crackdown on bitcoin will scare current investors, pretty much all of which are speculators off. SUPPLY will continue to go up too, considering more bitcoins are mined every day. Limiting access to exchanges willl reduce volume, but people won't be able to either buy or sell bitcoins so it won't make the supply change at all.

I don't claim to know what they are guilty of, if anything, and quite surprised if you do.  I am merely looking at what is alleged.  The US has a 4th Amendment which offers privacy protections against unreasonable search and seizure.  Not being qualified at all to judge whether this constitutes a reasonable search or not, I merely offer that IF what is alleged is accurate, willful complicity with ongoing criminal activity, then a little sunshine might disinfect.  I don't know the answer to what is happening to them and don't see it as a good thing on any level.  If it is true, I have done enough work for RAINN.org charity to understand the damage that child pornography can cause to victims, and would be very OK to have a good bit less of that happening.

For those of us who do not commit crimes with Bitcoins and use them for the fostering of legitimate business activity, and pay our taxes, and etc.  The accountability features of Bitcoins are more advantageous than the potential anonymity features.  Your mileage may vary.

I may not agree with all the laws, but I still must abide by them.
Fortunately, being very careful to not be engaging in any criminal activity allows for a good defense against probable cause for search, and so also protects my customers from this sort of seizure.  Like it or not, white market operations are bulk of the future of Bitcoin, if it is going to have a future.  If you sleep with dogs, you had better have a pretty damn good flea collar.  

I am also not one that is rooting for any systemic collapse of any economy.  The resulting human suffering is not worth ANY amount of personal gain I may have through my own economic resilience.  Big changes have big social cost and strain the ethical tolerance of the people that suffer under those changes.  Who want's to rule the ashes of a fallen society?  I would much rather see our little experiment continue, thrive and grow.  The more it is used for good, the better chance that has of happening.

AND, Bitcoin is such a good.  Technologies such as this that create common interests among people across government borders is one of the factors that helps prevent war and conflict between the governments that hold power.  People don't start wars, governments do.  So when there are people doing mutually beneficial business with those across borders, they can each put influences on their respective governments to NOT engage in hostilities and have a built in incentive to do just that.

This is VERY bad for Bitcoin but also another fully telegraphed warning shot across the Bitcoin bow.  Comply or die.  It's really that simple.  The USG doesn't have to shut down Bitcoin, so please spare me the Bitcoin bible thumping.  The USG has once again proved that it can seize any bank account, nearly anywhere in the world and turn out the lights of any exchange at any time.  They can block the flow of money from US banks as easy as turning off a light switch.  And as you see, they are going to get the cooperation of most world nations.

Submit immediately to regulations is the message.  Comply or die is the ultimatum.  They are not joking, they do not bluff, this is not FUD.  This is reality.  

That assumes everyone shares your faith in bitcoin's indestructibility. They don't. I see many posts here and elsewhere nervously asking whether "bitcoin is safe" in the wake of the LR bust.

You are correct that the Liberty Dollar was not illegal, and yet has caused much trouble for those that were involved.  I believe the Liberty Dollar case will prevail in the end (remember that BVNH has yet to be sentenced after more than two years).  Nevertheless, it remains a cautionary tale.  That case is fundamental to how and why I have to operate in the way that I do with offering the NEW LIBERTY DOLLAR.  It took a very deep study of that case, reading all the testimony and evidence, and LOTs of lawyer time.  
The laws on the books prevent STATES from issuing competing currencies.  They do not prevent barter, or the Article 1 right to contract.
Bitcoin is really very easy to use legally.  All the accounting is kept for you in perpetuity in the block chain and this provides legitimate business with the best backup of irrefutable accounting records yet devised.
So yes, you can declare the income from appreciation when sold, just like you might do for a stock sale.  
There can be some very easy ways around the problems.  I predict that as it grows it will become much easier to comply with the basic laws, addons to accounting software to automatically pull your records from the block chain and do your taxes more easily than ever before.  I am almost surprised that it hasn't already been done.  It would be a quick programming job and would benefit the community tremendously, and the programming team tremendously x2.

If that, I prefer "die".

But, Coinseeker, I rather prefer another phrase: "Fight or die". Or Russian version: "Die, but fight".
We all need to shut up the corrupt governments. Who said it will be simple? But we need to fight. We need to develop new, greater technologies to win. And we'll do it.

BTW, if the U.S. founding fathers thought like you ("comply or die"), America could be a slavish British colony today.
So, you are not a patriot of your country. True Americans think not like you. IMO.

Then forget about Bitcoin! The US government will stop at nothing defending the dollar. "Whatever it takes" - so often we listen officials saying these words at both sides of the Atlantic. Expect everything from people so desperate to defend their power whatever the cost.

You're comparing surrendering to a foreign government to the rule of law of our existing government?   ???  Not a really good comparison.  Regulations are a good thing when done right.  I'm not here to change the world...I'm here to make money.   I told you, save your Bitcoin bible thumping...I don't care.  Just giving you fair warning of the seriousness of the situation.  


No, we just like things like roads and bridges.  Schools and hospitals.  Healthcare and feeding the poor.  Oh and lights...kind of important.  Can't have those things without taxes and can't have taxes without regulations.  It does suck to pay bills, I know but hey, that's life.  

The problem of any regulations is that they can't be absolutely right. And it doesn't depend on which government do you mean.
Every centralized system will be corrupt when it becomes huge and when it have a lot of power.


Your children and grandchildren will "say" thanks to you  ;)

Such is the truth of humanity.  Nothing is perfect but that dosen't mean you toss out the baby with the bath water.  You just work to improve the system.  I think a regulated Bitcoin will do wonders to force banks into acting right because there is an alternative.  A true competitor...finally.  As long as it's unregulated the banks can keep demonizing it and they'll win.  Regulate it and you level the playing field, so us little guys/gals can get a fair shake by taking the power back and utilizing currency how we want to, not how they want us too.  You don't have to be black market to accomplish these things.

Current governments are not babies. They are adult mafiosos. So, if we can, we need to toss them.

Regulate Bitcoin, and regulator will change the protocol and start printing new BTC soon. So, what will be the difference from USD?

And replace them with who?  You?  No one?   ;D  You're gonna have to come with a better plan than "toss them".

Read the libertarian principles. Good government is a minimal government with total control by society. So, our plan can be "toss and build the minimal new".

You obviously haven't looked at the FinCEN requirements, thus have zero clue what you are talking about. You're just spewing FUD based on you're own paranoid delusions.  It's really not that complicated to comply.  Expensive, yes...complicated not really if you've got the money.

Yes, the kings and queens of delusion.  Thanks but no thanks.  Like I said, we like roads, bridges, lights, hospitals and all that stuff people take for granted.  Going back to the stone age, is not my idea of a good time.

Today... But tomorrow the situation will be different... Mark my words.

America is going to socialism/totalitarism gradually, because if it becomes socialistic in no time, people will make a revolution.


Libertarian system is not a stone age. It's a truly free life.

Are your "roads, brdges, hospitals" actually free? really? You pay taxes. But what if you don't use "roads and bridges"? Why do you need to pay for them via taxes?

Libertarian system means that you'l pay for real using of civilization goods and services. But wait... As I know, a lot of roads and bridges in US are paid. Why? You pay taxes and pay for brigdes???  You still need to pay for medicine and insurance (it's very expensive in the US). But you still pay taxes... Why??? Okay, you need to pay for military security. But not 50% of your income!

We have plenty of socialist programs and they are awesome.  Always could use improving but we love em.  



LOL...so you don't use roads.  How about electricity and the infastructure that makes it possible.  Suppose you're talking this nonsense on a solar powered computer.   ::)



No one pays 50% of their income and why we are still paying for healthcare is a national tragedy.  The ACA is a big step in the right direction but still, what we need is universal healthcare.  Healthcare is a basic human necessity.  You've still provided no valid reason to switch to an alternative.  Your alternative is selfish and says, "only the strong survive."  What we have now, is compassionate and says, "We're in this together."

It's a moral choice.  It's a no brainer for me.

I see this as bad news for bitcoin because its demonstrating exactly what power the US government has in the world.

The US Government want everyone to use the US Dollar for any kind of trade that involves international movements, its good for the dollar.

If we think this latest action is bad, think of what happened when a certain middle eastern dictator decided to start selling his oil in Euros rather than dollars?  He's dead now!

I really don't think the price is going to shoot up much until all this uncertainty is removed, and that isn't going to happen until the US Gov gets what it wants.  We are going to be here for a while! ;)

I pay for electricity by the way. I pay for Internet. Full price. Okay, without taxes these prices may be a bit higher. Anyway, that price will be more right. Because in this case if I didn't use electricity and the Internet, I don't need to pay for it.

And by the way, free roads and bridges are still possible in a libertarian system. Compare it with free software and web services. Owner of road and/or bridge still can sell advertisement places on his road.

You are probably right.  Guess it's good for those who like stability though.  ;D

I don't have to pay for it either.   It's just going to be dark.   ;D  But I like lights and thus I understand that electricity is not beamed to my home without infrastructure.  Honestly, I don't really think you know what you're talking about.  I think you're just regurgitating libertarian talking points and you're not doing a very good job.  I think you follow this "movement" just to belong to something. Because you're bored and maybe lonely.  You have the luxury of taking for granted that which makes it possible for you to speak what you speak.  To "vow" to tear down the very society that gives you the comfort zone to even suggest such things.

In the end, I think most people who say these things would be terrified if it actually came to pass. A world like a giant prison yard, without guards.  Who will protect you from the strong?  Who will shelter and feed you when the strong take everything you have by force?  No police, no rules, no law...only the strong survive.  My suggestion, is to really think about the reality of such a world, should it ever come to pass.  It's all good sitting in the comforts of home.  But when it's time to stand at post, that's when we separate the men from the boys.  That's when the strong prosper and the weak perish.

Thanks for the chat bro...gotta hit the sack.  I'll check back in the morning.    8)

Yeah, living under the limey yoke like Australia and Canada!

Still, I like your revolutionary Russian spirit.


Why should only rich people be allowed to do business? It is naive to suppose that the current requirements are the end. They are not. Complying with them doesn't really help the state much. They will need True Names to be associated with bitcoin addresses. What are the requirements on bullion dealers? is bitcoin more or less portable and fungible than bullion?

Infrastructure pricing must be included in prices of the final product. Otherwise, the final product must be free. And electricity must be free this way.



No. I have a pretty nice, smart and beautiful girlfriend. We will be married next year.


Libertarianism is not anarchy. Libertarian system has police and law. But no more.

Without American "example", Australia and Canada could be slavish...

Like casino gamblers, the libertarian uneducated kids always think they will be the strong ones  ;D

American govt is crossing their limits, They just want to control whole world.

For those who are comparing bitcoin with American dollar (cash) and saying it's a p2p and US govt won't do anything are fool.
If Libertyreserve was hub of criminal payments, Bitcoin is heaven. It was also designed for high anonymity like LR.

The US Government is not a person, its about 22 million people, and doesn't think with one mind.  Not even close.
There are quite a few in that government that really love Bitcoin, imagine that!  Think again before you pretend to speak for that population, or for the population of Bitcoin users.

If you see it as a battle, it may be one of those battles that you win by giving in, unless you would prefer that the victory go to some successor of Bitcoin rather than Bitcoin.
Not being naive, we can assume that there are some that will make their personal quest to fight all government, flaunt the laws, and find themselves sharing bunks with the Liberty Reserve folks.  Then we will have another thread about whether and how that prosecution was "bad for Bitcoin".

This sort of prosecution IS bad, because it will scare honest law abiding folks away.  They do not want to be associated with criminals.  If in the hearts and minds of the common person Bitcoin is nothing but druggies, pedos and dissatisfied revolutionaries, then the average person will have nothing to do with it.

There is far less than 1% adoption.  We may not even have 1% awareness, and those that are aware, are reading news like this.  So consider well how your messages are heard by the world of people that may someday read them.

they DO control the whole world. or at least most of it. i agree with your statement, though.

(i did post this in another thread, but it applies:)


i fear the LR bust will have bad consequences mid term. the guys that took LR down will make some big career improvments now. they are getting all this media coverage worldwide. they are heros. their self esteem will skyrocket. they are on the trip of their lives. soon the LR guys will be locked up forever. but the feds want more. they don´t want to sober up, they want more of this. they will look out for more prey. yep bitcoin. they don´t care if it´s decentralized. they will go for the exchanges instead. feds always get what they want. always. (always!) the merit will only be greater when they take down bitcoin, since anyone told them it´s impossible. never underestimete over-eager feds.

i think karpeles surely didn´t like the LR bust. he will contact kim dotcom soon...

So BTC was up around $1 Billion and LR was around $6 Billion?

If all those people migrate to BTC could we see BTC increase by x6?

Then when the US Government makes it 90% impossible for Americans to exchange, will the value crash to nothing?

Japan (where MtGox is located) their economy ain't doing that well either, probably ahead of US for economic collapse and could probably get shut down there by Japan Government if not cockblocked by US Government already. Most of the BTC exchanges are in USD not GBP or Euro, right?

Lots of non US exchanges are refusing to service US customers.

I wonder if this is going to be the future for MtGox - kick out all the Americans ?

I don't think so, because peoples don't have those funds, they are seized and yes that's true.

They are refusing US customers because if they want to do business with americans they need to register their business in america and comply with their rules and regulations.

So if MTgox worked according to US law and regulations nothing will happen, otherwise they had to refuse US customers or probably they can get seized by US govt.

Americans can wire any amount of money they want into MtGox once verified so they aren't being refused.

Yes, and that is a joke, but a bad one. Either you're free (self-sufficient Anarchy) or enslaved (Patriarchy). Patriarchy (state/religion) is by definition expanding (always and by definition financed on credit an organised violence).

Because having only black and white is so helpful.
Being 100% free doesn't exist. Physics is a regulator you cannot defy.

I hate how the major news sites report the incident, they seemed to be instigating that Bitcoin is in cahoots.

Ya :/
A lot of people will think, "Oh Bitcoin!? Wasn't that mentioned with drugs/as ponzi before? Will be down next most likely"

I remember reading the same old crap about 18 years ago when the internet started becoming popular.

First they'd talk about the availability of porn on the Web, then a couple of sentences later they were blurring the lines by mentioning underage porn. Of course underage porn is already illegal but that didn't matter.

I notice that every article on the LR thing talks about underage porn - is there really any proof of this or is it intended to induce condemnation by readers ?

What I've noticed over the years is that in order for something to be 'tarnished' it needs to be linked to something nefarious. One way is to put out stories which start talking about one thing and then associate it with something completely different and much worse. These days it's still underage porn but terrorism has been added to the list.

I expect that some day soon a 'terrorist' will be caught using Bitcoin attempting to buy weapons or fund some atrocity. This will probably be an FBI 'sting' operation like the many similar incidents over the past few years whereby some complete 'retard' has been groomed on facebook to buy imaginary weapons from undercover FBI agents. It's only a small stretch to involve Bitcoin in the next bust.

They were linked to child porn among others, I guess this will be something totally unacceptable to the public.

Yes i know, i was talking about other non US exchangers.

Who LR?
probably but, bitcoin is more popular on TOR Deepweb (The hub of child porn).
and yes cp is unacceptable but still peoples are running TOR nodes and helping them.

Cool. Let's them try. They will fail HARD. And we will laugh.

Well HSBC and others was done for similar if not the same things but yet do their customers give a shit.

this is the guy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preet_Bharara

he took down LR and he will aim towards bitcoin.

1) Assuming LibertyReserve was *actively* and *knowingly* engaging in money laundering or whatever illegal activity the government wanted to drum up, then yes, I presume they deserve to be shut down for operating under the guise of a law abiding business and are easily attackable as a consequence.

2) Bitcoin though? What law is being broken by Bitcoin? Why would he 'come after' bitcoin, and much more importantly, how would he? Through the exchanges? See #1 above.

There is no proof of libertyreserve's owner or LR as a currency directly being involved in cp and other illegal things. Peoples are using it for illegal things.

Peoples are using bitcoins too and i understand that you guys have too much blind faith in bitcoin but hey are you forgetting about silkroad and other sites on TOR and don't forget that those peoples who were doing  illegal deals with LR will move to bitcoin now.

They don't have another choice.

There is a big difference between btc and LR, one is the visible head of a technology and philosophy and the other one is simply a business.
I don't care about LR, but if they crack down into cryptocurrencies maybe is time to start to fight for our rights. Because there is no way I'm gonna allow anyone to rule my life. Or crypto, or dead.

A quote atributed to him on the wiki page :

According to Bharara, after 9/11 “as crime has gone global and national security threats are global, in my view the long arm of the law has to get even longer. We can’t wait until bombs are going off.”

So this guy :

1 Wants to prosecute people outside of his jurisdiction
and
2 Doesn't want to wait until they've commited the crime

To sum it up, he's a prick.

This reminds me of the saying 'First they came for the......'

I believe this may apply here.

Nobody's doing anything as there is adequate justification for seizing bank accounts based on some spurious petty minded regulations.

When they come for the Bitcoin related services there will be a well established track record enshrined in case law built on seizures like the Dwolla accounts and this Liberty Reserve case.

For a preview of what comes next just watch the movie "Minority Report"...you can't spell pre-crime w/o crime.

Agree with you and all the peoples who are thinking bitcoin is untouchable will might cry in future.

I bet all those peoples who are saying "LR deserves to get shutdown, bitcoin case is different" probably doesn't even ever used LR before.

They think only legit peoples are using bitcoins and US govt won't do anything. They are forgetting "Bitcoins" untouchable thinking will attract more cryber criminals and one day US govt will Ban bitcoin related everything in america.

Yes, helpful. Stateless tribes have been free of organised violence. People who accept this type of organisation are not.



That's wrong. The stateless are (and have been for a million years) free from police/state/mafia. Some are still stateless and therefore free,
because of their resistance to the mission of the missionaries, the henchmen of the Organised Violence (aka Church and State).

They also live in huts and wear leather thongs.  No thanks...I'll stick with "tyranny."   ;)

http://www.lbsafaris.com/LB%20images/Namibia%20images/Sandune/SanDune%20Bushman%20Village%2001%20(21).jpg

A Libertarian Society

You didn't understand my statements, did you?
I didn't even argue anything about stateless being better or not, I've only argued that your view is 100% one-sided.
Everything got good and bad aspects, advantages and disadvantages.
You are just continuing to preach your words.

But this is a different topic and I don't really want another pagelong discussion about states right now, so I will let it pass.

This is not a Libertarian Society. This is an autark, self sufficient Community. Society is organised violence and anonymous collectivism. A government-enforced economic war, all against all. Cheers!

From another thread 
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=134390.0 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=134390.0)

http://ct.fra.bz/ol/fz/sw/i50/5/3/30/frabz-Libertarian-What-Society-Thinks-I-Do-What-Democrats-Think-I-Do-W-c656dc.jpg

 ???

Bushmen don't worship cash nor fiat, they can't be libertarian.

Press conference of Bahara and his sheriffs:
At 28:30, guy talks how they are not targeting virtual currencies as long as they comply with Fincen rules.

http://www.davidnews.com/2013/05/liberty-reserve-laundered-6-billion.html

nice one! thx

(but i still think all this glamour of being in worldwide news will be tempting for bahara. but this will take a while. he killed an elephant and gets the trophy. he will want that again. but not directly after the first one. once it got boring again, once the first trophy isn´t shining that golden anymore - then he will want to hit another one. 1 or 2 years from now.)

And BTC exchanges, including Gox despite of its amateurism, ate trying hard to comply with regulations.... Something that LR blatantly didn't.

There is no case about "Bitcoin", and the sheriffs know it.

You mean, state violence got some good aspects?
War in Iraq got some good aspects?
Drone strikes got some good aspects?
Direct theft, like LR seizure and taxation, got some good aspects?

Well, there surely are good aspects for you, if you are profiting from all of this. But overall, killing is killing, theft is theft, violence is violence. There is no good theft. Theft is 100% evil, even if you "only" steal 50% of monthly income of a person. There is no good killing, apart from that of a criminal posing an immediate threat to another person's life, killing is 100% evil.

Meh, he headed the multi-year investigation and bust of Pokerstars / FTP / Absolute Poker. Who knows if SDNY will even be working any cases related to virtual currencies in foreseeable future?

If it's not him it will be one of his colleagues who doesn't already have a trophy.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=87.msg807#msg807

Seems like satoshi have used LR in past.

One aspect I hadn't thought of until just now: Many of the news reports are mentioning bitcoins in one way or another while talking about the Liberty Reserve bust. Some talk about their similarities (anonymity, worldwide transfer of funds), while others talk about their differences (bitcoin does not have a central authority to arrest and shutdown the system). But as they say, any publicity is good publicity. There are people who are either hearing about bitcoins for the first time, or heard about them a while ago and are saying "WTF, bitcoins are worth $130, ten times what they were when I read about them in 2011, I should invest now before they go up another 10x!" So we might just see a "publicity bump", with another big bubble forming very soon!

In other words, "BUY! BUY! BUY!"

+1

Of course not. Conversely. It closed the big gate to the real black market.

wow, that was him ?! which supports my reasoning. so it went this way:

bahara: all that glamour after we took down fulltiltpoker... it is fading away. i need to get on stage again. i want to become ny mayor or president. let´s atomize ... bitcoin!

minor clerk (holding bitcoins): uh.. boss... that is difficult. it is atomized by design.

bahara: i don´t give a f*ck. i am hungry.

minor clerk (googles desperatly): why not take down a more promising player ?

bahara: i don´t give a f*ck as long as it is worldwide media coverage.

minor clerk: how about liberty reserve...?

All I can do is laugh when I read stuff like this.  As if regular people are falling all over themselves to be associated with something that continues to be grouped with crime, drugs, kiddie porn, human trafficking and worldwide seizures and arrests.  Any new bump is coming from more criminals, looking for a new safe haven. 

Bewm. The elephant in the room of cultists. Bitcoin has a lot longer to go than WordPress accepting it. It needs a billion dollar company to see it's potential and take a huge reputational risk on it by receiving payments through it for an extended period of time. That will create the demand that drives the production that drives the interest that drives the change.

They don't need that, they have the banking system.

Obviously that's a moronic statement or they wouldn't have needed Liberty Reserve.  All that forehead and so little common sense.   ???

Oh wait! Nobody was using LR for legit purposes! They were all child-porn-drug-dealer-assassins!

With the size of the black market, LR was nothing but a drop in the ocean. Banks are involved.

As is Bitcoin, smaller even, so you still have failed to make a valid point.  Here I actually thought you were one of the smart ones. 

Coinseeker: bad guys need a new refuge and they come to bitcoin.

Me: They don't need to, they already have what they need.

Coinseeker: Yes, but you are wrong. Herp derp.


Did I miss your point?

Coinseeker, think before you type. Fiat currency is used for child porn, human trafficking, guns, violence, etc far more than BTC or LR are, yet people flock to it like blind idiots. You think people don't make that argument constantly despite its complete invalidity? Keep saying it over and over again "Bitcoin is for criminals," it might become true ;)

LR being shut down is great news for bitcoin. ;D

The protocol of bitcoin can't be easily shut down by the state but the front end can - however, black market criminals don't care about the ability to KYC and ACH funds to Gox or whatever, since they don't do that anyways. You know, just like how people don't care that you can't walk into a nice, safely furnished corner store to buy heroin, and great-Grandma didn't mind having to remember the password for the Speakeasy (and risk arrest) in the 1920s when she was a college girl. If you think a billion dollar company is going to embrace bitcoin and that is the only thing that will make it "successful", you are full of shit, and more irrational than even the most irrational bull on these forums ;D

As with any currency or payment system, there are criminals that will use it and there are normal folks that will use it. We can argue all we want about the ratio of "normal folks vs criminals" that use it and how that fares for either adoption or price but that is a useless, irrelevant discussion. The red herring of red herrings in the Bitcoin world.
If only criminals use it but use it en masse, price will go way up and Grandma won't like it, but the government won't be able to shut down the protocol/network. If only Coinseekers use it, Grandma still won't like it but only because she just can't understand it, and the government still won't be able to shut it down, and price will still go way up. Either way everyone wins except the banksters and Coinseeker's Grandma.

Apparently because you're saying that "criminals" from Liberty Reserve don't need bitcoin because they can just use the legacy banking system.  What you seem to fail to understand - why I don't know - is Bitcoin, like Liberty Reserve provides an anonymous safe haven.  You don't get that with legacy banking, so you're point is ridiculous.  

Didn't say any of that...try reading before you post.


Of course it is.  Bitcoin caters to criminals.


tl;dr


More of the same....tl;dr

No, you implied that LR was used by criminals, because "otherwise they wouldn't need LR".

Then my point was that criminals don't need LR, because they are already using the legacy system.

After which you declared victory.  ???

You just take for granted that (A) those using LR were criminals, and that (B) their needs would be better served with Bitcoin than with any other usual financial instrument.

Prove A, then B, and then I'll be able to take you seriously.

No, you assumed that's what I said.  Big difference.  My statement was about their desire for anonymous transactions.  Exactly why they were involved in LR, in the first place.


Because your point was moronic, as it was based on your flawed assumption.


The fact that you even offered A or B, tells me there is no way I can take you seriously.  I mean, really?   ???  You're actually a smart guy with markets and what not.  You can't possibly be this blind.  This is the whole ideological point of bitcoin.   ???

Well, my apologies if I assumed you were implying that, but I didn't have many other choices, did I?


I understood this as follow:

LR (criminals) ---> criminals go to bitcoins ---> price go up because of criminals


Now, if you didn't really mean the first two steps, we are left with this:

?? -----> ?? ---->  price go up because of criminals.

Actually the moment bitcoin has received the biggest increase of new users has been after cyprus. For many people bitcoin is just an hedge against a financial system that is totally rotten and don't want to lose the money they earned. Most people are not drug dealers but still decide to invest in gold/silver/bitcoins to avoid a possible future collapse coming to a cinema close to you very soon. The number of newcomers after cyprus has been so big that after them came the speculators and from there to the bubble/correction. I doubt the crime money is a big percent on bitcoin. If that is not the case why didn't the criminals use bitcoin before the bubble or during 2010/11?

One question: Why are you in this forum? You don't seem to like bitcoin too much and also seems you are not here for the money either as bitcoin will be a disaster if one believes you.
Are you a terrorist?

Guys look at silly coinseeker, back-pedalling, tl;dr'ing, denying his way out of a corner.  ;D ;D ;D 

The tl;dr is a amateur pro move; I didn't expect him to pull that one out, I'm soooo offended ;)

 ::)
Please, do not confuse co-incidence and causation ...


An hedge against what???
For many people since april, bitcoin has been the best way to give away money to market manipulators and/or rogue trade service.
They just came From Charybde to Sylla  ;D


What exactly does make you think that criminals didn't use bitcoin before the bubble ?

A hedge against never ending money printing of central banks and puppet governments. People need sound money for their retirement and health insurance.

Criminals most use dollars for their criminal activities. Using bitcoins or Liberty Reserve for criminal activities is just a fraction of the criminal activities whose turnover is in dollars. Why don't you suspend all transactions in dollars?

In fact, a recent research found out that on every second pound bill in the UK there are traces of cocaine. Will you burn half of the banknotes in circulation?

Only 50%?  In the US it is closer to 97%.

Those who bought 200$/btc certainly agree with your last sentence...  :D

 
If you've just discovered that criminal use money, good for you, but where did you read I want to suspend/burn anything?
The real question here is not "can criminal use btc?" but  "how much does dirty money flow influence btc price?"...

Imagine what kind of mistake did those who bought coins at $32 in 2011, to then sell at a loss when they witnessed the slow decline to $2.

$200/BTC are cheap coins in the long run, if you didn't understand that you really don't know much about Bitcoin.

This is not a get-rich-quick scheme, it will be a bumpy ride but in the long term BTC will go either to +5 figures or to 0.

Don't you think you mistake wish for knowledge ?

You justify shutting down LR because it was used by criminals. All I'm asking is why don't you apply same logic to $$, because the dollar is indisputable leader as the currency of choice among criminal?

The real question is if you regulate the dollar as a currency why did you allow some of the dollars become dirty dollars? If you can't prevent some dollars become dirty dollars how do you expect to prevent some bitcoins from becoming dirty bitcoins? And why are you so upset of bitcoin price appreciation?

No, I don't.

Can you start learning to read, or stop eating magical mushroom: I've never justified anything of this kind.
Quote me if you can...


 ???
You have the bad habit to argue with your own imagination.

So, no,  I'm not upset, and I've never stated to be the (big) one that can allow (or prevent) money to become dirty  :D
I just asked how much dirty money flow impact btc price
Does this question upset you?

Very good argument  :D

As much as I love Bitcoin, it isn't all just sunshine and rainbows. You are running a risk it will decline in not only the short term, but the long run. Who's to say a far superior crypto currency won't take over tomorrow? What if the US government some how found out a way to shut down Bitcoin next week.

My argument is based on a) past history, and thus facts and b) hard math about the growth potential of Bitcoin.

If you think $200/BTC is expensive... Then you do not know enough about both past Bitcoin history and its potential.

Hope you are not going to be the weak hands that tremble in case we suddenly cash below $30. If you sell you will regret your move in just a few years.

Fine. So, enjoy your profitable investment!

If clean money are ahead of the dirty money, there is nothing to worry about. If dirty money are ahead of the clean money, well then the dirty money proved to be clever than clean one and the latter should have learned their lesson. Either case is good for Bitcoin!

A wise man should know one thing: the limits of his knowledge...


I don't think (and never said) it's expensive or cheap.
I've just asked if those who bought 200$/btc can really feel they've got "sound money for their retirement and health insurance".


Hope or wish?

Your question was answered several times. Yes, they can!

Maybe you think so.
Unfortunately, you often seems to hear imaginary voices  ;D

At least you have understood what people do hedge against while buying bitcoins. That is a progress too.

+1000


As the balance of power continues to shift towards the elite, one must attempt to protect their own interests.

Not really  :D

Can you try again to explain me with your own words (I mean words you can understand the meaning)?

As long as you don't let a third party hold your bitcoin keys without having a backup in your control, bitcoins can not be seized by any government entity.

It seems you're having hard time understanding even the simplest among simple words. Are you sure you are on the right forum?

Government can't neither seize my dreams of fortune (even if I  share them with the police).

Unfortunately, it's difficult to buy something with my dreams of fortune...

Unfortunately, your dreams are very different from bitcoin because you can buy 130 dollars for 1 bitcoin. Anything else you don't understand?

You mean "fortunately" I think...

Whatever, AFAIK,  I can buy 1000$ for one dream of fortune too.

Try again...

It is "fortunately" for all people that do have bitcoins, but it is "unfortunately" for you.

Ok I see...

You know the future worth of bitcoin and you know how many bitcoin I own.

Hmmmm!
What else did your inner voices tell to you?

Hmmmm!
You seem to be very familiar with what inner voices can tell you?

If those people who bought at $200/btc had any sense, then they would also have bought at least as many bitcoins soon thereafter at $50/btc, thus their average cost of bitcoins would be no more than $125/btc, so they could sell right now for a profit. Even if they did not grab the dip, the price of bitcoins was under $100/btc for a while, so they could definitely have lowered their average cost by now.

Pretending to not understand the allure of Bitcoin, isn't really helping move this conversation forward, because I know it's not true. You know very well why criminals would come to bitcoin.  It's what bitcoin is built on.  Criminals and illegal activity.  You're trying to play the devils advocate as if somehow, Bitcoin is attractive to legitimate individuals, but it's only attractive as a commodity for those folks, like myself.  

You know that...you simply thought your statement was cute and quickly found yourself in a jam trying to explain, the unexplainable.  To prove your point, you have to argue against the very libertarian aspect of Bitcoin that you espouse.  Please stop wasting my time and go back to the kiddie table with the other ideologues.  

Take Ashley with you too.  Since I've been on this forum she has never once said anything remotely intelligent, interesting or edifying.   ::)

Maybe, but....
If those people bought @266 according to the bullish hard math shit we read from some hero members around april, they have no money to spend until they sell @60  ;D

But they can be happy: this was not govt nor inflation who dicounted their health insurance :D

Still waiting for the punchline. Shall I immediately notify wordpress, bitspend, bitcoinstore, and foodler that BTC is only useful for criminal activity?

I've not a clue what your typical LR user was into, nor do I care, but it's pretty clear the term "criminal" is a pretty fluid concept in Amerika at this time.

I've bought at $140, $200, $225, and then at $60, $70 and more in between that and the current price. Right after the crash I had 'lost' more than 60% of my investment, now I could sell at a profit if I wanted to. I will not ofcourse, I'm in this for the long run. :)

And your assumption is based on what facts? Inner voices?

I never said it's only useful for criminals.  The reading skills on this forum are really pathetic.  I guess that means you'll find your punchline when you look in the mirror.   ::)

No you said...


...and now that you've been called on your ridiculous comments you're resorting to childish insults and petty blather instead of intelligent discourse. Welcome to ignore...troll.

If they invested all their money at once based on what some people said on an internet forum, then they deserve to have lost a bunch of money.

Twisting my words doesn't make your point any more valid. We all know what Bitcoin is and so does the USG.  Doesn't mean it can't be used for legitimate commerce, it simply means that the majority of business that is Bitcoin is not legitimate. Sorry if the facts hurt your feelings.  Guess you should have thought about that while everyone was running around saying "f**k the government", and supporting any business that would deal in Bitcoin.  Legality has been irrelevant to this point and apparently remains so.  Deal with it.  You reap what you sow.

And your assumption is based on what facts? Inner voices?

Two words:  Silk Road

I like how you guys are trying to play dumb.  As you see, the USG isn't fooled either.   ::)

Maybe you should not, considering the cumulated revenues of all those megabusiness involved in bitcoin...

Silk Road? They move aprox. $1.2M per month (http://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7139).

Trading volume at Gox in the last 30 days is $238,479,686.66 (http://www.bitcoincharts.com/markets/)

So, come on, who are the other "criminals" using Bitcoin and moving twenty times more than Silk Road monthly? Please let me know, and please include figures, facts and sources to your groundless speculations.

And BTW, you may be tempted to say that the rest of volume in BTC's economy is just speculators trading? Well, AFAIK trading is a "legit" business - isn't it?

I protest vigorously, becoin's rethoric tryout was adressed to me, not to you...
He is pointless, but he's mine !!!!

Wasen't it you who was just arguing that Bitcoin will survive because of how big the black market is?   ;D ;D  Do you want me to pull up the posts??   ;D ;D  You might wanna go back to the "up, up, up" speculation thread, son.   ::)



Your honor...I rest my case.  

http://www.fataldownflaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/obama-laugh.jpg



[/quote]

WTF are you talking about? What I tried to explain you is that BTC will survive even if it's banned - because it was designed to be resilient to prohibition/banning. Secondly, I explained you that black market's economy IS HUGE - actually is worth $1,800 billion/year, which means that BTC's would rise in value even if it was only based on black market's economy.

And now pull up the posts, FUD-spreader troll, and try to demonstrate that I said something different to what I just explained above - or STFU and GTFO.

EDIT: and BTW, now is YOUR turn to demonstrate with facts, figures and sources that "the majority of business that is Bitcoin is not legitimate" (quoting you literally). Came on, "son", show us your cards.

He's got off suit 7 & 2. He's a trolling drama queen.

Simply spewing the silly rhetoric mass media pukes out to scare soccer moms and control the masses doesn't make it so.

Highlighting what I was attempting to write out.  The fact that your words were taken completely out of context quickly made the entire discussion nonsensical.

[/quote]

And so? I explained you that even if the US bans BTC, its economy will still grow and expand. Even if you edited very well my posts to try to prove your points, you just made a fool of yourself, because my point still stands: BTC will grow in price and will survive even if its banned GLOBALLY, because black market's economy is much bigger than you seem to believe.

That said, this has nothing to do with "the majority of business that is Bitcoin is not legitimate". Now, grow some balls and show us some figures about how "the majority of business that is Bitcoin is not legitimate". I showed you some hard figures that demonstrate that Silk Road is a tiny drop in BTC's ocean.

It's your turn, troll. I'm waiting.

http://content.presentermedia.com/files/animsp/00000000/222/pop_singer_moon_walk_md_wm.gif

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/oooh.gif

 ;D

I think he obviously means that there no such thing as real bitcoin business.
And I think you will have hard time proving he's wrong.
In fact you have already demonstrated he's right  ;D

In case you don't know how to read (it seems that you noobs, including our good Coinclown registered less than 1 month ago, have some problems with reading comprehension):


And now show me your figures.

I'm younger than you in this forum, but my dick is much bigger than yours, so...


What figures?
You've just provided them  ::)

Bitcoin actual value = Drug Deal + Speculation + 0.0000001%

You are forgetting gambling, my friend. Which may be illegal in some third world or fascist countries, but is a LEGAL business in most of the western world.

And BTW... You just discovered that 90% of BTC's economy is mostly based on speculation? Well, that's how it is currently. You don't have to be a genius to realize that. But... Is trading/speculating a "criminal" activity? At least in my country is legit.

Last but not least, we all known Coinseeker is very butthurt for not being smart enough to buy coins when the price was $1 (or $10, BTW). Are you feeling the same pain, so you feel the urge to fill these forums of FUD?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323687604578469012375269952.html?mod=WSJ_StartUpJournal_LeftTopNews (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323687604578469012375269952.html?mod=WSJ_StartUpJournal_LeftTopNews) (Forum warning: Possible phishing link!)

$5 Million in VC to Coinbase.

"In April, the Coinbase co-founders said the company had about 116,000 members who converted $15 million of real money into Bitcoin, up from $1 million in January. Mr. Ehrsam said its dollar conversions are increasing by about 15% a week, and its user base is growing at a weekly rate of about 12%."

This is one example, and notably the largest VC investment to date - but if you don't see this as a sign of which direction Bitcoin is moving, then you haven't been paying attention.

IC you didn't get the memo. The newbie crew says Coinbase, Bitpay, & Bitspend don't exist. ;)

These are not the droids legitimate Bitcoin enterprises you're looking for...

You're right
Bitcoin actual value = Gambling + Drug Deal + Speculation + 0.0000001%


No, please, you must learn to understand what you read, really
I didn't discover it since I mention it in my equation  :D


Another very good argument, indeed.
Could you show me a figure or is it just another wishful thought?

Woooooow !
That's quite impressive!

Not as impressive as my dick, but quite impressive.

Coinbase + Bitpay + Bitspend !!!! And tomorow, the world....

You're messing up trade volume on an exchanger with sales between two people.
Forex is doing $3.98 trillion /day  more than the revenue of the 10 biggest companies in the world /year.

Besides , I can say for sure that there were at least4 orders over 50k usd  SR:) , this month.

Time cost averaging is a very good strategy for investing in volatile commodities with high beta, such as Bitcoin is currently.
It works even better than your example, (if we assume as you do that the time interval intersects with both 200 and 50).  The investment strategy works by using an equal amount of the buying currency (USD$ here) at discrete time intervals.
So for each share bought at 200, 4 would be bought at 50, making the average cost 400/5 or 80 each, rather than 125.

This is a built in strategy for all wage earners who are paid an equal amount per any given period of time.  If I am paid a salary in bitcoin/dollars, I will get more bitcoin on the weeks that the bitcoin price is low, and less when it is high.  


For the folks playing the "I want to win this argument game" in this forum.  We win when we all gain a better understanding, please waste less of our time.

I'm not messing that up. Sales between two people is one thing - trades between two peoples (or bots) is a different thing.

But still, Gox is a legitimate business - and their turnover is probably bigger that the one of Silk Road. BTC's economy is not based at all in Silk Road, trading/speculation (which is not "black market", but a legit business) is much bigger and moves more money that "black market" operations in BTC.

Comparing Gox trade volume with the sales on SR is just stupid.
Let me make this easier for you:
Forex ( In our case Gox) is doing almost 4 trilions a day,  in order to match those numbers the people in this world would have to spend 1000 usd /day (Like SR).

DO you see something wrong here?

ps:
http://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd?daysAverageString=7 (http://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd?daysAverageString=7)

Then compare the turnover of two businesses - Gox and SR. Which do you think is higher?

Answering like you with a stupid question , what do you think is bigger , the turnover of forex or the GDP of the US?
If you like so much to compare honey with condoms!

The point is that trading/speculation is a much bigger business than anything else - both in BTC and the FIAT economy. And it's a legit business.

Or maybe you are suggesting that Gox or Forex are not businesses?

THIS is what I'm telling you , that no legit bussines or ilegit or what do you want it to call can match in turnover the volume of an exchanger!!!!!!!!!
So , there is no point in comparing Gox volume with anythink else besides bitstamp.

I can go to gox , sell , buy , sell , buy 1000btc , do this 10 times a day , then withdraw my btc and spend them..
I have 1000 and something (my tarde profit)  to spend but on the trade volume I left a mark of 10 000.


If you want to prove SR  is not the core of bitcoin economy match it with bitpay numbers.

Niothor, I get what you say - what I'm trying to explain to the FUD-spreader trolls is that BTC is not just black market and illegal businesses. In fact, SR's turnover is a drop in the ocean compared to BTC's market capitalization, which is 99% driven by speculation and trading. Which is, AFAIK, a legit business. Probably Gox generates more legit operative profit than SR, and even if they are two different kind of businesses, Gox it's still a business. Do you agree?

Then, apart from Silk Road you have gambling - SatoshiDice counts for 50% of all the BTC transactions. And gambling may be illegal (or semi-illegal) in the US, but is a legal business in many other countries, including the vast majority of western world.

I never had a problem with your reasoning , just with the numbers , that enourmous trade volume wich eclipsed the whole bitcoin economy.

But ,as a sidenote ,  until we get some numbers from bitpay (which they have to make public at leats at the end of the year), I bet that SR beats the crap out of them.  ;D ;D

Yeah. Except when Avalon releases their shit. The month with highest volume (by far) for Bitpay was March 2013, with +$5.2M... 95% of that volume was people paying BTC to Avalon for their batch #3 ASIC miners.

And BTW, that's another legitimate BTC business that may very well kick SR's ass in the near future: the sale of ASIC mining equipment.

Not solar panels and windmills? :)

Brilliant retort. Clearly you've been spending too much time espousing the virtues of your own dick and far too little time in maths class.


Don't worry, nobody expects complex or accurate maths results from you as everyone understands you only have one free hand to contribute.

ASICMiner's market cap is 400k * 2.48432 = 993,728BTC = $130,059,120.64

...I know...a drop in the bucket compared to SR. ::)

Good point, I didn't thought about that.

Maaaan, you can see how crazy BTC is. These "anonymouz guyz of the interwebz", with funny names as "friedcat", built a $130M company in a few months, completely from scratch.

And they are redistributing wealth to their cheerful shareholders, which do not own a single piece of paper - only satoshis sent to their BTC addresses to confirm the amount of shares they own.

Really can't understand how the trolls do not see the revolutionary magic in all this. As I said earlier, IMO they are just butthurt and resented because they did not discover BTC earlier ;)

I have a rational hypothesis about this: the so-called trolls don't have bitcoin, so they can't buy drugs on SR, so they can't hear your inner magical revolutionary voices.
And they miserably miss the point.
Fortunately, that's not your case. ;D

That is a valid distinction. The forex trade exists because of the real economy. If there were no real economy in USD the forex trade in the USD would not exist. (OTOH the USD real economy could exist without the forex trade) You and I could invent a new currency. Say we both chip in $10k fiat and then forex trade the fiat against a new currency between ourselves a thousand times a second. The nominal value of these trades could exceed the US GDP, but it would not be real economic activity.

Another fine post...bravo. ::)

Please also consider those that have some Bitcoins, don't use drugs, don't give a crap about SR, AND still engage in Bitcoin commerce on a daily basis. I can assure you these people exist. Try to step out of your box and look around. The Bitcoin economy is in it's infancy, but it clearly exists...yes even beyond the borders of SR.

Maybe you should apply to yourself this fine advice and step out of your bitcoin cult.
Have you ever noticed how stupidly agressive you and all your bitcoinbull friends become as soon as someone post anything critical about your beloved coin ?

Stand in front of a mirror and you'll see the stupidly aggressive bitcoinbull fighter!

You're not saying anything. You spout off statistics that have been pulled from your posterior and therefore you cannot back up. Now you say Bitcoin is a "cult" with "stupidly agressive" something. What does that even mean? Even after translating to proper spelling I don't know what you're trying to say.

Fiat sucks, because centrally planned and controlled currencies are always abused by governments. I like Bitcoin because it is not controlled and diluted everyday because someone at FRBNY wants a bigger boat, but I hardly think that qualifies me as a "stupidly agressive" "cultist". Perhaps you could explain your sensationalism?

Your assertions that Bitcoin exists only to serve the deep web has been debunked to my satisfaction. There's clearly a legitimate economy growing up around Bitcoins, so how are people that engage in this economy "cultists" exactly?

Apart from your ventriloquy and your compulsion to call "troll" anyone who disagrees with your own views, your last post is the perfect illustration of your paranoid fanatism.

Pro. Now could you address my comments?


Please note the conspicuous absence of the word "troll" in my posts above ^^^. I've already put the person I was referring to at the time on ignore. If he's your bud and I hurt your feelings by putting him on ignore...well tough.

Bitcoin price is not fixed unlike LR, so most likely boost for webmoney, yandex money and so on :)

Do criminals put money into stocks? If they do, maybe we should shut down stock market as well.

The stock market engages in KYC.  Accounts take taxpayer IDs etc.

I heard they even use roads!

Roads are also more monitored and transparent than LR is/was. 
Cameras with OCR scanning licenses and shoot photos of speeders and red light runners.

Bitcoin is distinct in that the software includes transaction tracking and serialization so governments may use it for enforcement of their laws.  It arguably takes willful effort to create anonymity, which can be used to point to intent, or knowledge if these methods are uncommon.  Intent or knowledge being a prong in most criminal cases, and all of the really serious ones.

The foregoing is not to be construed as a legal opinion.

So, a willful effort to create anonymity is a crime? Hmmm, very interesting.

No, but willful misunderstanding should be one.

There are elements of crime.  To be guilty, all of the elements must be proven.  In the realm of tax fraud, there are innocent mistakes which get things like late fines, and there is willful fraud, which gets things like jail time, and multiples of financial damages.  The difference here is the provability of intent.

Some examples may illustrate:
Al Capone and Heidi Fleiss both ran criminal enterprises according to the government in which they resided.  Both were caught and charged for tax fraud.
They were not able to claim it was an innocent mistake because of the evidence of willful intent, they took steps to separate the money transferring from their taxable identity.

The wisdom of the founders of bitcoin is evident in that they did not themselves take the steps to separate taxable identity from the transactions.  In fact it provides some very strong logging that does precisely the opposite.  They left that step to others.  So bitcoin has survived and will survive this legal test. Individual users of bitcoin may not fare so well depending on their behavior.  Being anonymous is quite fine in itself, however when someone is caught wiping fingerprints from a crime scene, they are in hot water.

So, anonymity in general is bad because the whole world is a crime scene?

I also think curtains are for the criminals.

Those pesky women... they must have something to hide, otherwise they wouldn't need them.

yes. that is the ENTIRE reason why the majority of the world is anti bitcoin

I don't know where you get these ideas, but they aren't from me.  You even chose to ignore the first half of the sentence in order to get this free education.  So here it is:

Anonymity is neither good nor bad.
Anonymity is not necessarily done because you have something to hide, it may also be done because you have something to protect.
A person can do something anonymously or publicly.  However, when someone is committing a crime, and they chose to do so anonymously, and take steps to do so.  This can be used to show intent in court, which is an element of most financial crimes, and all of the serious ones.
To find someone guilty of one of these crimes in a court of law, two things need to be proven.
1) The bad act
2) The guilty mind
The guilty mind is typically the harder one to show unless there are statements on record to show it, or actions that indicate it.
The prosecuting attorney will certainly bring up the fact that there was an attempt to act anonymously as evidence indicating the guilty mind.
A defendant facing a jury of random people who can show that either everything they do is anonymous and that everything they do is legal may have a good defense against this, however proving you do all those legitimate things anonymously is also going to be difficult without revealing a lot of things that you might rather keep private.

This is the challenge the LR folks are facing currently.

anonymity is bad when most financial systems are exploitable

if the world was a very secure place then we wouldnt need things like social security numbers and forms of ID

I remain in the not good / not bad grey areas with respect to anonymity.  It is a tool, it has purposes and uses.  Just like a hammer, you can build a house or hit someone in the head, just don't blame the hammer.

Arguably there are ways to not need things like social security numbers and forms of ID even in an insecure world.
Anonymity is not necessarily meaning you have something to hide, it may also mean you have something to protect

Consider the plight of the wealthy bitcoin hoarder.  They do not want to be a target for evil hacking, so they choose to do most transactions anonymously and use multiple wallets, tor to hide IP addresses, and other means to obscure their wealth.

right, and im sure the wealthy celebrities and athletes in the world also remain anonymous with their wealth

that is a completely irrelevant side of anonymity

unfortunately crime is so rampant that its impossible to say being anonymous is really a "good" thing from a government and LE position. from our position yes im sure all of us would like to remain anonymous regardless of what we do with it

Celebrity has many costs.  It is also a currency, but one that depreciates rapidly.

Governments also use anonymity.  Much of what governments do is kept secret.

I don't know that crime is so rampant as you suggest.  Most people don't commit crimes with any regularity, maybe 3%?  Those that do get a lot of attention so it seems more rampant than it is, and many of those are the non-violent type without victims.

The average American adult commits 3 felonies per day.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574438900830760842.html

The only man in this thread with the correct answer goes ignored...

I doubt anyone ignored alex_fun for this.

But 6 Billion is serious money, compared to the size of the Bitcoin economy, anyway. Some criminals who's funds have been taken by the feds might wonder if another centralized service that can be taken out the same way is such a good solution. If only 10% of that money went to Bitcoin, we should see a serious boost. But we don't. In fact we don't see evidence that any money at all is flowing into Bitcoin atm.

And why should we? Moving money around with LR, Webmoney, WU or Bitcoin is not helping making it appear legitimate, just as carrying a bag of banknotes from one country to another is not helping a criminal in the least. To launder money, you need to have legitimate business and you add to the revenue they actually have.

I think LR's turnover of illegitimate money was orders of magnitude smaller than the official numbers. Govt had other reasons for taking them down and they simply lie to us.

This should give you a better opinion of what cybercriminals think about LR. http://krebsonsecurity.com/2013/05/underweb-payments-post-liberty-reserve/

I suggest you read the article you link to yourself. The poll at the bottom says 13.83% think Bitcoin works best for them. If that translates into 13.83% of the 6 Billion of alleged criminal volume (around 1 Billion / year), that means we should see an additional $300K volume per day. Which would be perfectly visible. Apparently it doesn't translate. Which means that 6 Billion is grossly overexaggerated.

Other than that, I have my issues with the article and the apparent lack of knowledge of the author. Saying that LR was "insanely redundant and secure" as opposed to Bitcoin is not very accurate, as you undoubtedly will agree.

The author does know what he is talking about when it comes to cybercrime, even if he does get a few facts wrong. The majority of cybercriminals do not want to use Bitcoin because of volatility reasons. Feel free to try to prove me wrong.

Sooner or later they will be forced to realize that they have only three choices:

1) Use a centralized payment system and get shut down
2) Completely stop their operations and don't send payment to anybody
3) Use bitcoin and live with the volatility. Obviously the most profitable option. 

Sure, another option is to start a legitimate business and launder that way, but many criminals either don't have the resources or that is practically impossible due to their particular business. In fact,  laundering money using a cryptocurrency is probably less risky than laundering money using a "front business."

13.83% is plenty to support my point, which is that the 6 Billion is grossly overexaggerated. There is no need for 51%.  I think at lower than 3% the impact on the market would be too small. Thanks for the source, BTW.

What I am wondering is, how did the feds come by their numbers? Blunt lie? Or does money laundering require multiple transactions and they simply summed it up? Or....?

More important than the loss of the money by users of LR is the demonstration of power by the empire state court.  A few folks proved they can take money from any bank accounts around the world (20 accounts in Cyprus, 10 in costa rica, accounts in China, Hong Kong, Latvia, Russia) based solely on unproven accusations.  They showed they can take domains based solely on accusations.  They showed they can shut down amazon web services based on accusations they make.  That is big news I think and will affect the market. 

Speaking of accusations, does anybody understand why "money laundering" is claimed?  I was under the impression that laundering had the implication of cleaning.  This means showing a clean exit for money, for example as restaurant earnings (though not many people went to that mafia restaurant), construction company earnings (hey wait what did they build), etc. etc.  Why do these warrants bother claiming that LR was a "launderer" of money when in no case do they ever provide clean taxable income for anyone? 

Laundering, IMO, is based on concealment. It's about whether or not you conceal the source of (ill-gotten) money.

So, for instance, if you were able to move funds from hacked bank accounts to anonymous re-loadable credit cards, without the ill-gotten money being tied to you, that would be laundering. That is exactly the type of service that LR was able to provide. It's simply mixing, and it is definitely laundering.

No. Laundering is every financial transaction if Big Brother has no information about how much money, from whom, and for what are transferred. If they don't know EVERYTHING about your money then you're dubbed money launderer.

Well, cash is mixed in every cash register in every shop. Does it mean that every cash register in every shop is a money laundering machine? Fungibility is one of the key functions of real money. If you can't mix them then you're not using real money but some substitute.

No, that's some tin-foil hat definition.

"Money laundering is the process of concealing illicit sources of money." -Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_laundering)
"money laundering (concealing the source of illegally gotten money)" -Princeton WordNet (http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=money%20laundering)

Mixing here is not simply "to combine" as you are using it. It is the act of specifically mixing dirty money with clean money to conceal the original source of the dirty money. See the Bitcoin wiki for "Mixing service." (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Mixing_service) I don't know on what scale this was actually happening with LR -- we are not privy to that information.

Hacked credit card money, for example, and "real money" are fungible; you simply wouldn't want that trail leading back to you. Is it not simple to see why AML laws would be used to prevent mixing of these types of funds?

So, if I'm concealing the source of legally gotten money everything should be okay?!

AML laws get you then, too!  :D

So, my "tin-foil hat" definition is correct!

Then the presumption is that at least some of it is ill-gotten, and it may be up to the defendant to show otherwise if there is probable cause for indictment and some evidence against them.

No. Violating AML laws doesn't mean that you have laundered money.

No. The presumption always is "not guilty unless your guilt is proven"! Or, are you saying that AML law is an exception to this universal principle in every judicial system? You're guilty by presumption and you have to prove you are not guilty?!

...if there is probable cause for indictment and some evidence against them.

Please accept my apologies for putting an important part of the sentence near the end where it can be neatly chopped off.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause

Probable cause is like probable pregnancy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy

Is the probable pregnancy a pregnancy or it isn't?

So, please accept my apologies I should have modified the universal principal to suit AML laws. It should read - "not guilty unless you're probably guilty"

Or to put it more accurately, once prosecution shows evidence of all the prongs of the crime, the burden is on the defense to create doubt and one ignores this at their own risk.

Further, when probable cause is established, and the prosecution convinces a judge that the crimes are continuing and the only way to stop them is to hurt innocents, sometimes a judge agrees! 
They think of it as blocking traffic on a block where there is a violent crime occurring.  Lots of folks suffer but they think that maybe they stop something worse from happening and make an injunction judgement on that risk.

I can't say who is right and who is wrong in this LR stuff, but the legal system is working as it was designed.  Disagree with the design if you like, but it is not good to ignore it.

Not at all. You seem to forget the definition of money laundering you pointed out? You don't have any evidence of illegal money because their source is concealed. To have any evidence of money being illegal you have to know the source. Simple as that.

Your arguments are the same the Holy Inquisition used during the dark ages. Inquisition agents selected their targets on "probable cause" based on "some evidence". During the interrogation the "defendant" has to prove he/she is law-abiding citizen and that he/she is not guilty. If the poor victim died during the "indictment process" this was the ultimate proof that they were guilty, because God won't allow innocent people to die.

I'm not endorsing anyone's arguments, but the fact that sources are concealed (or perhaps more suitably, that attempts were made to conceal the sources) doesn't mean there is no evidence of illegal proceeds. That's a very strange assumption. Criminals fuck up all the time.

Well, answer my question then. What evidence would you have of money being illegal if you don't know where they come from?

You made the same assumption again. How do you know that I don't know? That attempts were made to conceal the sources does not necessarily make it so.

So anyway, back on the original topic.

I'm not even a regular on localbitcoins.com, but I recently posted an ad to sell a few coins. The person who bought them from me told me that they got $#$$!% because of the LR shutdown, and that his business partners have now switched to using BTC instead. I also had to help him with his wallet setup, explain a few Bitcoin concepts, and give him some advice about security.

The boost to Bitcoin due to the LR shutdown might already be happening on a grassroots level...

I don't have any evidence of anything, and am not involved in the case in any way.  The evidence was presented to the judge who processed the warrants.  If this is anything like most criminal cases, the evidence has been piling up for a long while and they don't pull the trigger on prosecuting until they are pretty sure they have what they need, or they aren't likely to get anything better by waiting. 

And yes, modern law is based on some pretty archaic and ancient principles, though the frequency that they blame god for things since the inquisition has decreased.

To be clear, you are arguing against someone who is a strong advocate of 4th amendment protections, and is more or less on your side.  All I have been doing is explaining the process.  It is not so unusual.

As to what evidence the prosecution might have there are all sorts of possibilities irrespective of where any particular transfer originated.  According to the public reports, this was the combined effort of 17 countries.  For AML, usually it is some criminal that gets caught on something more serious that cooperates with their local authorities and explain to them their process.  Sometimes they get a lower penalty when the give the state evidence against others.  The electronic transfer record is not the only evidence that can exist, so even if you are acting anonymously digitally, you may not be anonymous in other ways.
=-=-
...from a recent theft of some $45 million from two Middle Eastern banks. “The complaint against one of the Dominican Republic gang members allegedly involved in the theft states that thousands of dollars' worth of stolen cash was deposited into two Liberty Reserve accounts via currency centers based in Siberia and Singapore,” the AP reported.

Again, you avoid answering my question. The reason you avoid answering is obvious. There is no way to claim my money are illegal if you don't know where they come from!

So, LR can't be indicted for money laundering since there is no way they knew where their customers money were coming from!

Again. How can you prove that it is unknown where any of the funds come from? Why would you assume this? This is silly. The fact that I can't prove anything doesn't mean US attorney's office can't. Show me that US attorneys have no evidence, please.

There are very many ways to determine the flow of funds.  Those may not be the most difficult part of the criminal allegation. The electronic record is only one of many pieces of evidence that can be brought to a court.  Testimony, affidavits, confessions of others who did buisiness with them.  All of those can be problems for the accused.

I don't know all the specifics of what they are being charged with, but I suspect it may include:

26 USC §7203 - Willful Failure to Keep Records
Willfulness will also be inferred if a concealment motive is part of the failure to keep records. However, an important factor in the probability of conviction in these investigations may be a substantial deficiency attributable to the failure to keep records.

The "willfulness" may require evidence of statements they made, or other communication records.  That may prove a more difficult thing than "knowing where the money came from".  It is very likely that the prosecutors won't have detail on all the transactions, (reportedly there were about 55 million transactions) but they likely have details on more than just a few.

This is laughable. Again, as I said, you want from me to prove that I'm not guilty. This the Holy Inquisition approach as described above. Your only evidence is that I'm concealing or try to conceal the source of my money. I'm not concealing or trying to conceal anything. I just don't show the source off because I don't owe you anything, do I? Your perverted logic is saying that privacy is a crime. But it isn't! Moreover, privacy is a Constitutional right! This is why you have to break the law to prove that I'm breaking the law.

The only "crime" that LR did is that they refused to spy on their customers.

Not at all. I simply want you to prove that it is not possible (as you suggest) that the US government could have evidence of money laundering here. I am quite sure you cannot do that. You assert it is not possible; please prove it. I'm not asking for you to prove anyone's innocence, and I'm not implying anyone's guilt -- I'm asking you to back up your statement. You say the source of funds is (always) concealed, therefore proof of money laundering is impossible. So in this situation, the US government could not have obtained sworn statements from those who worked with LR, and corroborating evidence of such, against the indicted. Likewise, they could not have ascertained the flow of illegal proceeds for even a handful of strings of transactions out of many millions. I find it hard to believe that you could prove this to be the case. You simply go on repeating that proof of guilt is impossible.

And I'm not sure where you got the idea that I endorse this shit, or that I think "privacy is a crime". You're on a bitcoin forum ffs -- what do you think I am, a Leninist? The fact is that I don't cling to a meaningless piece of paper that is shown to be useless time and time again, ad nauseum. Here in the real world, the constitution doesn't apply. I am not against privacy -- I simply live in the real world. If one is going to flagrantly flout AML regulations, I should hope they aren't so stupid so as to argue that their constitutional rights are being violated when they get nicked.

You seem to be suggesting that AML laws should not exist. Perhaps you should take that argument to a forum not filled with libertarians, crypto-anarchists, and assorted anti-government types.  ;)

OK, so maybe I'm not familiar with the term in a financial sense but to me "launder" implies cleaning.  Switching one pair of dirty socks with another pair of dirty socks seems hardly like doing laundry. 

The sock analogy might be useful but here's a summary of what Money Laundering means to the US IRS
http://www.irs.gov/uac/Federal-Statutes---Money-Laundering

Knowledge of the laws in your own geography may be helpful in avoidance of trouble for yourself and those with whom you do business.

I'm worried about bitcoin for accusing money laundry in future. Just like liberty reserve !