Bitcoin criticizer, 'Black Swan' author, admits BTC isn't useful for 'bad guys'

[Darker45]

This isn't a breaking argument for Nassim Taleb. This isn't new. This has been repeated over and over again, not by Bitcoin critics but by Bitcoin advocates themselves. So Nassim Taleb is not scoring a point against Bitcoin with this.

As a matter of fact, on the contrary, this is a point for Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a technology which offers transparency in the world of finance. The more reason, therefore, that it should be the preferred currency. In the age of severe corruption happening around the world, Bitcoin offers a great solution. At a time when fiat manipulation and questionable money printing is an issue, Bitcoin is the answer. With Bitcoin, everybody can do his/her verification.

And this is probably one of the reasons why so many politicians are against Bitcoin; because they are thieves.

[Ucy]

In an attempt to discredit and disdain Bitcoin once again, 'Black Swan' author Nassim Taleb, ended declaring Bitcoin isn't useful for the 'bad guys' (thieves), due to its transparency and traceability nature which is visible in a public blockchain at anytime, which can't be forged or adulterated.

So much angry against Bitcoin put one of the strongest arguments of the critics in contradiction. Now they have to decide, is Bitcoin bad because it helps thieves, or is it good because it can't benefit thieves?

'Black Swan' Author Destroys Bitcoin (BTC): 'Cult-Like, Useless, and Dangerous'

In a scathing critique of the crypto industry, Nassim Taleb, the renowned author of "Black Swan," launched a blistering attack on Bitcoin (BTC), dismissing it as a useless and dangerous phenomenon, reports Business Insider.

Speaking at the Bloomberg Invest conference, Taleb denounced Bitcoin, asserting that it offered no haven and failed to serve even the purpose of money launderers.

He debunked the notion that Bitcoin facilitated money laundergging, arguing that its traceability made it unsuitable for such illicit activities.

Sounds like he is saying "it's useless and dangerous for the bad guys". That probably explains the contradictions in the post.
Thieves and the bad guys would hate it as is useless and dangerous for them. A thief would quickly sell or mix a stolen coin knowing how "dangerous" and transparent the system is for his survival.

Evil is exposed to all in the Transparency of Bitcoin system and hidden to most in the darkness of Fiats'

[hugeblack]

Is this supposed to be praise or defamation of bitcoin? An argument that the possibility of tracking it makes it not suitable for money laundering means that the percentage of use in money laundering, drug trafficking and other activities is much lower than banking systems and with the high transparency that you enjoy, all accusations of bitcoin are that it is used for illegal purposes is wrong.

Most of the people opposing the idea of bitcoin come from being colliding with their convictions that they studied and therefore the problem they have not accepting something new without even looking at what this new thing is, it is similar to the rejection of communist ideas because it is its Communists without even analyzing it.

[Z390]

How is this claim a bad thing? I don't get it, Bitcoin is really useless for criminals because every transactions are traceable, unless they use mixer services and that's why the government doesn't like mixer services.

Are we supposed to feel bad that criminals can't use Bitcoin? I have always believed that Monero is the most fitted one in this angle than Bitcoin, because Bitcoin was never a anonymous digital currency and that's the job of of XMR aka Monero.

The past claims by Bitcoin haters was that Bitcoin is used by criminals for the illegal movement of money, and if what this fella is saying is that Bitcoin is no place for criminals I don't see anything wrong here.