Risk of jail for developers. Should you be anonymous?

[takuma sato]

I was looking at Christine Lagarde's latest remarks on CBDC's and it seems pretty clear to me that the agenda of banning cash and then replacing the euro with the "digital euro" is now unstoppable, which will for sure make the Bitcoin price go up. However, it basically means that if you are supporting BTC, you would be developing a tool that "enables money laundering, terrorism, etc" and challenges the CBDC monopoly.

How realistic is it that public figures would be facing charges in the future? As a developer, should you remain anonymous? At the end of the day satoshi knew he was going against the status quo and managed to stay safe, however, what about all these doxed developers? I can see how they'll look on github and try to hunt contributors. We are facing a scary future. It's better to say steps ahead and plan accordingly. Someone with resources probably could move jurisdictions before it's too late but what about the rest. And even if you could move you could see yourself in an Assange situation trapped in some embassy. I would like to know if developers here think about this at all and what is your escape route if shit hits the fan.

[n0nce]

The problem with  BTC and other currencies will be that you will no take any $$ - > banks are already starting to refuse transactions.

after 2025 BTC , ETH and so on will be worth real 0.

How so? First of all, think outside the box: you can earn and spend Bitcoin directly, without touching a bank. That was actually its main idea.
Furthermore: you can definitely buy and sell Bitcoin peer-to-peer - again: how it was intended. Peer-to-peer electronic cash.

I personally recommend Bisq as a platform to facilitate securely buying and selling Bitcoin (even through banks) peer-to-peer. As far as the bank is concerned, you just bought or sold something from / to someone.
They won't refuse a regular sized transaction from a regular other random person. The funds will not come from a centralized exchange's bank account.

[Hispo]

The problem with  BTC and other currencies will be that you will no take any $$ - > banks are already starting to refuse transactions.

after 2025 BTC , ETH and so on will be worth real 0.

How so? First of all, think outside the box: you can earn and spend Bitcoin directly, without touching a bank. That was actually its main idea.
Furthermore: you can definitely buy and sell Bitcoin peer-to-peer - again: how it was intended. Peer-to-peer electronic cash.

I believe he is talking about the fact banks and traditional financial institutions still play a role when comes to provide liquidity to the Bitcoin market, mostly in the form of people trying to buy Bitcoin and other alternative cryptocurrencies with FIAT on exchanges which allow to do so, like Binance or Coinbase.

It does not sound impossible banks would block such purchases in the future, in my opinion (debit and credit card). On Binance P2P it is already advised not to tag or add any crypto-related description to the transactions to avoid flagging by banks.

[pooya87]

agenda of banning cash

Is that even possible? Do you have any reference to support this being in the "agenda"?

However, it basically means that if you are supporting BTC, you would be developing a tool that "enables money laundering, terrorism, etc" and challenges the CBDC monopoly.

This FUD is nothing new. They have been spreading it from early days that bitcoin was created and challenged the centralized banking system that was corrupt. CBDC is part of that corrupt system.

How realistic is it that public figures would be facing charges in the future? As a developer, should you remain anonymous?

A good question. It depends on how spread the developers are in the world. For example if the top devs are all living in one jurisdiction then we are facing a real risk (similar to if all hashpower were from the same jurisdiction), but the more spread they are the lower the risk. After all one government deciding to crack down on developers in their own country would not halt bitcoin development in other countries.

Someone with resources probably could move jurisdictions before it's too late but what about the rest. And even if you could move you could see yourself in an Assange situation trapped in some embassy.

They don't have to move, they have to already be elsewhere. As I said like mining. For example when China banned mining, none of the miners in other countries cared about it and the Chinese miners also moved their equipment abroad.

Assange situation is different though since they attached "national security" to that, it is going to be pretty hard to do the same with the globally recognized Bitcoin.

[DaveF]

.....after 2025 BTC , ETH and so on will be worth real 0......

Nope, many places have flat out banned all crypto transactions and the holding / using of crypto. And wait for it.....nothing happened.
The EU can ban it, and wait for it....nothing will happen.

It's like banning anything else, people will do what they want to do.
Unlike banning something like drugs, having a piece of software on your phone / PC is a lot easier.

-Dave

[Accardo]

Doxxing developers and arresting them over building or helping the  existence of a digital currency wouldn't get too effective till everyone goes anonymous. The profile pictures you see on GitHub may not be their actual faces and could be the only picture they've uploaded online and it'll be difficult to doxx them. Though the Government have got advanced technology to track down who they wish. But, I don't see any crime in working on an open source program, and the digital currencies are not nefarious to anybody. Except that the government want to engage in an imposible mission of getting rid of digital currency developers.

[ABCbits]

As a developer, should you remain anonymous?

Some people contribute to open source software to fill their resume/CV, so i expect some developer chose not to be anonymous.

agenda of banning cash

Is that even possible? Do you have any reference to support this being in the "agenda"?

OP probably refer to discussion of cashless idea or ban of transaction using cash above few hundred/thousand euro.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I think you should, especially if you're designing something that emphasizes on privacy. We're moving towards a more oppressive regime, all of us in Europe, no doubt.

Is that even possible? Do you have any reference to support this being in the "agenda"?

There's indeed tendency to repeal cash, and switch to completely digital money. I don't know what kind of reference you want, though. One where Lagarde makes such tremendous statement?

banks are already starting to refuse transactions.

after 2025 BTC , ETH and so on will be worth real 0.

Seriously, that's your conclusion? You haven't understood bitcoin well, buddy.

[HeRetiK]

after 2025 BTC , ETH and so on will be worth real 0.


I do not know - what about USA, CHINA and so on. I'm talking only about EUROPE.
or perhaps the European Union will fall apart.

In case of a ban within the EU the BTC price would be much higher within the EU than outside of it. Black market prices always come at a premium.

Either way I don't think CBDCs will become much of a thing within the foreseeable future. Sure, governments will dabble in it and some people will use it but I don't think it will replace cash any time soon. Even for societies that are already cashless the incentives to switch to CBDCs seem to be rather limited.

[NotATether]

Developer here.

However, it basically means that if you are supporting BTC, you would be developing a tool that "enables money laundering, terrorism, etc" and challenges the CBDC monopoly.

Bullshit. We would challenge such a notion in EU courts on antitrust grounds if they bring an iota of monopoly on the table.

That is how you use their own weapon against them.

How realistic is it that public figures would be facing charges in the future? As a developer, should you remain anonymous? At the end of the day satoshi knew he was going against the status quo and managed to stay safe, however, what about all these doxed developers?

They can't go after developers of open-source projects because the no-liability clauses protect them.

For example, if Tornado Cash developer was not involved in money laundering himself then the Dutch would not have a valid reason to arrest him (OFAC sanctions do not count).

[PrivacyG]

How realistic is it that public figures would be facing charges in the future? As a developer, should you remain anonymous? At the end of the day satoshi knew he was going against the status quo and managed to stay safe, however, what about all these doxed developers? I can see how they'll look on github and try to hunt contributors. We are facing a scary future. It's better to say steps ahead and plan accordingly. Someone with resources probably could move jurisdictions before it's too late but what about the rest. And even if you could move you could see yourself in an Assange situation trapped in some embassy. I would like to know if developers here think about this at all and what is your escape route if shit hits the fan.

Public figures facing charges is probably the ultimate solution they have in store for us.  Fear of ECB is the last thing they want us to have.  For now, one strategy works very well.  The money laundering excuse to do all of this.

I really believe things will become worse and more severe the more resistance they meet.  If they get enough people out of Cryptocurrencies by a certain deadline, next plan is up.  Will it be public charges?  Will it be calling Bitcoin once again a currency used in crime?  I have no idea.  But if they impose through fear, they will meet too much skepticism and they do not want that.

They want to outlaw us slowly and only call declared addresses and transactions lawful.  This way, people will easily bend over and obey.

Think about it.  If I pointed a knife at you while telling you some body is bad, you would not know that person is bad.  You will first question why the pointed knife.  If I told you some body is currently investigated by the FBI and repeated this to you every week for an year, it is probable you will avoid interacting with that person.

They are playing mind games.  Do not fall for them.  I know for a fact that using Bitcoin the way we are using it today will be outlawed in the future by ECB calling it a support of crime.  They want to know every thing.  And they will at one point do whatever it takes to find out.  Yet there will be people like me who will not care.  To me, I rather rot in prison than obey their twisted plans.  At that point, prison will offer you more freedom than being 'free' will.

-
Regards,
PrivacyG

[fennic]

I was looking at Christine Lagarde's latest remarks on CBDC's and it seems pretty clear to me that the agenda of banning cash and then replacing the euro with the "digital euro" is now unstoppable, which will for sure make the Bitcoin price go up. However, it basically means that if you are supporting BTC, you would be developing a tool that "enables money laundering, terrorism, etc" and challenges the CBDC monopoly.

How realistic is it that public figures would be facing charges in the future? As a developer, should you remain anonymous? At the end of the day satoshi knew he was going against the status quo and managed to stay safe, however, what about all these doxed developers? I can see how they'll look on github and try to hunt contributors. We are facing a scary future. It's better to say steps ahead and plan accordingly. Someone with resources probably could move jurisdictions before it's too late but what about the rest. And even if you could move you could see yourself in an Assange situation trapped in some embassy. I would like to know if developers here think about this at all and what is your escape route if shit hits the fan.

As we all know that there are some people who want to control the woord world and also it's economy. And as a world is going upward and moving towards digitalization, there are will be some flaws and also some pros and cons.
As for as digital euro or other currency is developing and that it could be a major problem too. And also there will be some famous developers might get charges and for those who are anonymous and wants to be decentralized than they can be saved from this types of scandals.
As still there are some governments think that Btc and other crypto are source of money laundering and it could be a true too. Cause a lot of many people are depositing money into Cryptocurrency and they are saved.

[Mr.right85]

I would like to stray a little in bringing up an analogy that could explain responsibility as per producer and user.

Let's Let's guns for an example. It is used for peace as much as war and spreading terror. Its not up to the producer to decide what purpose its user would be using it for. User defines purpose and is held responsible for that.

Anonymity in cryptocurrency has been some means to ensure there isn't any centralisation to it on the part of the developer and that's part of the reasons why Satoshi stayed completely clear of the network and not staying clear of issues with the government.

The development of all these CBDCs only points to one fact, the importance of a digital currency but for CBDCs, the are centralized and tide to a government still.

[bettercrypto]

The upcoming changes in the financial area in Europe - more precisely, the introduction of the digital euro is planned for 2025 yr.

The problem with  BTC and other currencies will be that you will no take any $$ - > banks are already starting to refuse transactions.

after 2025 BTC , ETH and so on will be worth real 0.


I do not know - what about USA, CHINA and so on. I'm talking only about EUROPE.
or perhaps the European Union will fall apart.

How did you say this dude? I don't believe that by 2025 the value of bitcoin and Ethereum will be zero, this is just your speculation and I don't know where you got this opinion from.

    Don't you know that there are many ways to get bitcoin or Ethereum huh? It is very clear that bitcoin is called a peer-to-peer currency, you should know that here. So, meaning Bitcoin is far different from the banks.

[Lida93]

I would like to stray a little in bringing up an analogy that could explain responsibility as per producer and user.

Let's Let's guns for an example. It is used for peace as much as war and spreading terror. Its not up to the producer to decide what purpose its user would be using it for. User defines purpose and is held responsible for that.

Anonymity in cryptocurrency has been some means to ensure there isn't any centralisation to it on the part of the developer and that's part of the reasons why Satoshi stayed completely clear of the network and not staying clear of issues with the government.

The development of all these CBDCs only points to one fact, the importance of a digital currency but for CBDCs, the are centralized and tide to a government still.

To buttress on what you have just said mate, I think the CBDCs as a centralized entity are just scared of loosing total control in the coming years as digital currency is gradually taking a centre stage all over the globe and this threaten their whims and caprices as it were before the coming of decentralized digital currency. And the anonymity of developers like Satoshi is one astute technique I must say that has outsmart the centralized systems (government) for sure and there has been no loophole to trace bringing an end to it.

[mindrust]

It is pretty hard to stay anonymous on the internet. Especially if you are a dev that has to work on a project all the time. Fixing bugs, creating updates all the time, sooner or later you will make a mistake and lose your anonymity. Hell, even if you do everything right, you still may lose your anonymity because some clever bastard may hack you.

That’s one of the weaknesses of crypto imo. Crypto itself is bullet proof but their devs aren’t.

[NotATether]

It is pretty hard to stay anonymous on the internet. Especially if you are a dev that has to work on a project all the time. Fixing bugs, creating updates all the time, sooner or later you will make a mistake and lose your anonymity. Hell, even if you do everything right, you still may lose your anonymity because some clever bastard may hack you.

That’s one of the weaknesses of crypto imo. Crypto itself is bullet proof but their devs aren’t.

Without people, crypto is defenseless [it can be taken offline or banned, it's not The Terminator].

But people have weapons they can defend themselves with. This includes devs.

We're not talking about firearms here, but rather legal (your licenses, jurisdiction and international law) and popular support (public opinion, empathy, demonstrations & consensus).

The above's for if its a nation state. If you're up against a bunch of internet stalkers then running some more handles usually does the trick in throwing them off.

[ABCbits]

It is pretty hard to stay anonymous on the internet. Especially if you are a dev that has to work on a project all the time. Fixing bugs, creating updates all the time, sooner or later you will make a mistake and lose your anonymity. Hell, even if you do everything right, you still may lose your anonymity because some clever bastard may hack you.

That’s one of the weaknesses of crypto imo. Crypto itself is bullet proof but their devs aren’t.

Such problem could be partially migrated with security/privacy oriented OS such as Qubes OS. With proper usage separation between VM/Qube, it's less likely you'll make a mistake. Even if you're hacked, the hacker most likely only have access of the hacked VM/Qube. And considering cryptocurrency is bulletproof could trip you up in the future.

[Smartvirus]

We're not talking about firearms here, but rather legal (your licenses, jurisdiction and international law) and popular support (public opinion, empathy, demonstrations & consensus).

Speaking of popular opinion and jurisdiction,
Is cryptocurrency or projects anything close to having those?
For the most we know, the population that aren't hooked up with the cryptocurrency or its derivative projects are far less compared to the few of us that have anonymously adopted the system today. How does that go for popular opinion and the government as we all know a several miles away from anything cryptocurrency or its related projects adoption.

The most we've seen is there development of the CBDC as a way to combat cryptocurrency which isn't going so well with them as we know it.

Although, government in the ne of jurisdiction shouldn't make slave or inhibits a person's freewill to 8nbest when it doenst hurt nobody. The harms that might follow from cryptocurrency investments are often due to an investors inability to DYOR.

I don't see developers to be at any risk for putting something out there. That's no crime.

[NotATether]

We're not talking about firearms here, but rather legal (your licenses, jurisdiction and international law) and popular support (public opinion, empathy, demonstrations & consensus).

Speaking of popular opinion and jurisdiction,
Is cryptocurrency or projects anything close to having those?
For the most we know, the population that aren't hooked up with the cryptocurrency or its derivative projects are far less compared to the few of us that have anonymously adopted the system today. How does that go for popular opinion and the government as we all know a several miles away from anything cryptocurrency or its related projects adoption.

At the moment, a lot of crypto projects have done a good job casting themselves in the devil's light (like Luna and OneCoin and BitConnect and literally any pump & dump scheme) that the public would like to see the developers behind them jailed.

Unfortunately, this concept is generalized to all crypto projects including the ones that have no intention of hurting anyone, such as Bitcoin.