[Brainstorm] Implications of Blacklisting DPR's Seized Bitcoins

[niniyo]

If this ever happened, I think I would lose faith in the human race for all eternity.  Words cannot express how fucking retarded this idea is.

[1714094314]

1714094314

[1714094314]

1714094314

[1714094314]

1714094314

[tvbcof]

If this ever happened, I think I would lose faith in the human race for all eternity.  Words cannot express how fucking retarded this idea is.

I'm sensing certain level of trepidation among some in the community when it comes to the general concept of BTC taint.

[drawingthesun]

Output scripts are contracts. The contracts precisely specify what conditions are both necessary and sufficient for an output to be spent.

If the Bitcoin network ever stops honouring these contracts, then the currency and the network have a value of zero.

Correct. This idea of blacklisting bitcoin addresses is the most stupid idea ever, including even the stupidest ideas in the stupid film Dumb and Dumber.

The $2,200 million valuation of Bitcoin would be flushed down the toilet if the stupid idea of blacklisting ever got any traction.

This is what I was trying to say, said with fewer words.

The value of that Bitcoin in your wallet, you all want to know where that comes from? It comes from the ideals and foundations Satoshi laid down and that is the reason we all got into Bitcoin.

To come along and try to change Bitcoin to something else, a paypalcoin of sorts, will forever erode and destroy all value in Bitcoin.

[Rez]

Like i said, i guess there will be very few independent agencies who will take care of the blacklist.  Trust and reputation has to grow over the years I'm afraid. And yes if a member of this agency decides to screw you over, you can do nothing about it.

Sounds like a terrific plan.   

But it will be very unlikely that you will be affected by such a corruption. As soon as the corruption spreads and public becomes aware of it, people will start using another agency.

What if that agency - which will have a lot of money at that point, and with money comes power - decides you don't get to break the contract? What if that agency decides that you're not worth the potential negative publicity that may result in additional customer attrition? What if that agency decides you might sleep best at the bottom of the river? A little corruption after all. Nothing big. 

Most people are willing to pay that small price (of possible corruption) to have a working legal system (forced right now in the real world or unforced in libertarian & Bitcoin society) that takes care of the bad guys.

You realize that what you're describing here is essentially a protection racket, right? Replacing one large corrupt Federal mafia for smaller mafias for hire.

As market participants are unable to track down and bitcoins can be easily laundered the only way for the real world legal system to cope with bitcoin-criminals is to shut down Bitcoin completely.

You mean like the record industry managed to cope with copyright infringment by shutting down Bit Torrent completely? Your faith in cryptocurrency is weak, young Jedi.

The first criminal, who stole 144K coins and will probably use parts of it to kill civilians in  just another innocent country, just recently entered the market :-)

It's just a little corruption, you know. As soon as the corruption spreads and the public becomes aware of it, they'll vote it out of offic- ... oh wait, that doesn't really work.

(Cheers!)

[Rez]

I don't WANT any of this.  I'm saying, Bitcoin might fail to become widely accepted without some kind of supervision.

If Bitcoin fails to become widely accepted because some centralized agency doesn't exist to slam down the iron fist ... then it deserves to fail on its own merits.

I don't think it will.  Which is why I don't think it needs anything like this.  AT ALL.

[gamer4156]

I would first like to see how the trial plays out. If the evidence they presented all is backed up without a reasonable doubt, then there would be no right to the coins. If it turns into a kangaroo court, I say why wouldnt we? Would this not be a perfect opportunity to tell the government no. Tell them enough of this bull shit. If they are not going to play fair then we have too.

[drawingthesun]

I would first like to see how the trial plays out. If the evidence they presented all is backed up without a reasonable doubt, then there would be no right to the coins. If it turns into a kangaroo court, I say why wouldnt we? Would this not be a perfect opportunity to tell the government no. Tell them enough of this bull shit. If they are not going to play fair then we have too.

The case is not going to go in DPR's favor. Dealing drugs or facilitating such transfers are illegal in the USA. I know many of us disagree with the law but we are too tame to actually do anything about it. We elected our leaders and as such must reap what we sow.

Anyway, DPR decided to stay in the United States whilst being a drug lord and made all his money from drugs. If you think there was a moment he was acting legally please tell.

He will never get those coins back.

He knew the law and decided to run the site anyway (whilst making various huge mistakes).

If they are not going to play fair then we have too.

You are mistaken, the FBI worked within the legal framework that DPR was fully aware of. They both played the game and the FBI won.

If they invented a law just to catch DPR then perhaps you have a point.

[Dabs]

Send your coins to me. I will keep them safe. Offshore. Cold storage. Paper wallets. My so called "virtual" physical bitcoins. If you are being tortured, you can't reveal what you don't know. Your bitcoins will be safe.

[Wary]

You realize that what you're describing here is essentially a protection racket, right? Replacing one large corrupt Federal mafia for smaller mafias for hire.

Right. But could you name a political system that is not a protection racket? We should compare not with a dreamland, but with the real world. And the read world is ruled by mafias. The only real choice we have is between competing mafias and monopolistic mafia.

The first criminal, who stole 144K coins and will probably use parts of it to kill civilians in  just another innocent country, just recently entered the market :-)

It's just a little corruption, you know. As soon as the corruption spreads and the public becomes aware of it, they'll vote it out of offic- ... oh wait, that doesn't really work.

And why exactly that doesn't really work? Because there is no competing mafia you can switch to.

[crumbs]

You realize that what you're describing here is essentially a protection racket, right? Replacing one large corrupt Federal mafia for smaller mafias for hire.

Right. But could you name a political system that is not a protection racket? We should compare not with a dreamland, but with the real world. And the read world is ruled by mafias. The only real choice we have is between competing mafias and monopolistic mafia.

The first criminal, who stole 144K coins and will probably use parts of it to kill civilians in  just another innocent country, just recently entered the market :-)

It's just a little corruption, you know. As soon as the corruption spreads and the public becomes aware of it, they'll vote it out of offic- ... oh wait, that doesn't really work.

And why exactly that doesn't really work? Because there is no competing mafia you can switch to.

But IRL there are competing mafias, they're called "nations."  Sometimes the competition is peaceful (politics), sometimes not so peaceful (wars).  Just like any protection racket, it's not always convenient to take your business to the competition when your local thugs charge too much (immigrate).  This really is the best of all worlds

And in this world
The best of all worlds
Why I'm the best of all short-order fry cooks --Killdozer

[Wary]

But IRL there are competing mafias, they're called "nations."  Sometimes the competition is peaceful (politics), sometimes not so peaceful (wars).  Just like any protection racket, it's not always convenient to take your business to the competition when your local thugs charge too much (immigrate).  This really is the best of all worlds

Yes, this is not binary (one mafia or many). It is gradual and could be measured in cost of switching. The current world is not the best, since the cost of switching is pretty high, but it is not the worst, since it is not prohibitively high. Snowden have paid a lot, but he have found a place to go. What we should strive for is to reduce the cost of switching mafias. To the world where swithcing thugs should be as easy as swithcing your ISP. Then the competition would force thugs to actually serve and protect.

As for bitcoin, monopoly is bad. Do we want to become the hostages of one single cryptocurrency? There should be many, so if one will get rough, we would have a chance to flee/switch to other one.

[revans]

1) What are the implications of Bitcoin as a protocol as a whole if the seized coins are blacklisted?
2) How does this affect the pending legal status of Bitcoin and its uses?
3) If they were blacklisted how would this be done? Would miners simply refuse transactions from these coins? Or could they be returned to the network in the least disruptive way?

Not actually advocating this, but its just been a thought that has been on my mind.

And here ladies and gentlemen is why this little monetary experiment called Bitcoin is doomed to fail.

[tvbcof]

Yes, this is not binary (one mafia or many). It is gradual and could be measured in cost of switching. The current world is not the best, since the cost of switching is pretty high, but it is not the worst, since it is not prohibitively high. Snowden have paid a lot, but he have found a place to go. What we should strive for is to reduce the cost of switching mafias. To the world where swithcing thugs should be as easy as swithcing your ISP. Then the competition would force thugs to actually serve and protect.

As for bitcoin, monopoly is bad. Do we want to become the hostages of one single cryptocurrency? There should be many, so if one will get rough, we would have a chance to flee/switch to other one.

Outstanding points both!

Basic market forces can serve as a powerful impulse to provoke evolution in governance, cyrpto-currencies, and practically everything else.

This is the main reason lock-in and mechanism that promote and prolong monopolies are so popular.  Evolution is the last thing that someone who has found power (e.g., a politician, a corporate leader, or a large BTC holder (like me in the interest of full disclosure)) wants or needs.

[solex]

1) What are the implications of Bitcoin as a protocol as a whole if the seized coins are blacklisted?
2) How does this affect the pending legal status of Bitcoin and its uses?
3) If they were blacklisted how would this be done? Would miners simply refuse transactions from these coins? Or could they be returned to the network in the least disruptive way?

Not actually advocating this, but its just been a thought that has been on my mind.

And here ladies and gentlemen is why this little monetary experiment called Bitcoin is doomed to fail.

Wrong.

>50% of the mining network will always accept transactions from all utxo, ignoring any attempt at blacklisting because >50% of the miners will accept fee payments and want to retain as high a valuation as possible for their own btc holdings.

Blacklisting has already been attempted by a mining pool for SatoshiDice addresses, and yet this site continues to stay in business just fine.

[haightst]

It would go against the whole your coins can't be "frozen" line.

Coins weren't frozen, coins were stolen.

my wag those dudes are playing dice trap games with the coins as we speak? lol  anyone wanna bet?haaa