SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bitcoin Price: Cryptocurrency Investors See Red As Market Value Drops:
Crypto investors are waking to sea of red this morning as the entire market took an absolute hammering overnight for the second time in just a few weeks.
The price of bitcoin fell sharply on overnight, approaching a dreaded $US30,000 ($A38,800) threshold it has not crossed since January and dragging other cryptocurrencies in its wake.
At around 2am, bitcoin fell 8.6 per cent to a value of $US31,501 ($A40,715), a level not seen since mid-May, when the volatile cryptocurrency temporarily lost 30 per cent in one session.
The second-largest cryptocurrency, ethereum, lost 11.2 per cent of its value, falling to $US2361 ($A3051).
Bitcoin's value has recovered slightly since the drop, rising to $US33,738 ($A43,606) at around 7am today – but, across the board, almost all of the smaller cryptos have been battered overnight.
[...] No concrete reason appeared to explain the price drop on Tuesday, but some analysts pointed to the seizure of $2.3 million ($A3 million) worth of bitcoin belonging to the Darkside hackers by US authorities as a possible factor.
[...] The US managed to recover almost all the bitcoin ransom paid to the perpetrators of the cyber attack on the Colonial Pipeline last month.
[...] It is being seen as a sign that law enforcement is capable of pursuing online criminals even when they operate outside the nation's borders – and, crucially, that crypto isn't beyond government control.
(Score: 2) by anotherblackhat on Wednesday June 09 2021, @10:09PM (5 children)
That's assuming the conclusion. Essentially claiming it's bad to allow anonymous cash transactions because that would allow for anonymous cash transactions.
I presume you want to make those things harder to do non-anonymously too. I.e. what does being anonymous have to do with it?
Your desire to make those things harder doesn't give you the right to monitor all transactions.
The problem is, anyone who has the power to stop murder-for-hire transactions also has the power to stop donations to unpopular political parties.
Historically, anyone with that much power has been corrupt -- maybe they didn't start that way, but they sure as hell ended up that way.
The ends aren't sufficient justification for the means.
Do you think the only way to prevent human trafficking is to monitor all transactions?
That we should just roll over and accept this level of intrusion because "child porn" or "terrorists"?
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday June 10 2021, @03:01AM (4 children)
Money laundering is the process by which "dirty" (i.e. criminally obtained) money becomes "clean" (i.e. legitimate-business) money. This is a problem, because it makes it easier for organized crime such as international drug cartels and the various mafias to operate and easily spend their profits.
And the reason I want them harder to do anonymously is that anonymity is one of the means by which people who are committing these crimes avoid getting caught.
And your idea that the government monitors all transactions is simply false: Banks monitor the transactions involving their own institution so that they can avoid being accessories to these sorts of crimes. Governments only get a look if they have reason to believe something illegal is going on.
But you've made your position quite clear: You don't care about any of that, so long as you can get your hookers and blow.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 10 2021, @04:07AM (1 child)
What do you have against hookers and blow? Independent enterprise is offensive to you or something? Unmarried women should stay indoors and keep their legs shut, amirite?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 10 2021, @06:34AM
Oh, dear, my dear AC. Not saying that prostitution is a completely immoral enterprise, but how much would it take for your to fuck Matt Gaetz? That cannot be consensual by any stretch of the imagination, so it is a case of coercion, involuntary servitude under duress, much like your own sex life.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 10 2021, @06:16AM
"But you've made your position quite clear: You don't care about any of that"
That seems excessive. Some amount of anonymity is important for society. Living with a camera following you around 24/7 that streams to some watcher should be a simple mental exercise to understand the point. Even when doing nothing wrong it adds a layer of mental anxiety that is unhealthy for society. There are better alternatives than mass surveillance, but they cost a lot more.
(Score: 2) by anotherblackhat on Thursday June 10 2021, @05:36PM
Pot, kettle, black.
I could just as easily say you don't care about privacy.
I do care about crime, I just don't think that making it impossible for everyone to spend cash anonymously is the appropriate response to criminals being able to do so.
Making it easier for law enforcement to enforce the law isn't enough of a reason to do something.
We don't mine houses so law enforcement can blow them up if they think it's necessary, and we wouldn't mine them, even if the law pinky swore not to blow them up without a court order.
That kind of power is simply too ripe for abuse.
Likewise, we wouldn't say a door that can't be opened with human-level force is illegal to make, even though kicking down a door is a standard police tactic.
The power to track spending is huge.
We only have a limited ability to do it now, and we've already seen gross abuse of that power happen.
(Even in places with laws in place to prevent that exact sort of abuse in place.)
Sure, law enforcement could do a better job of catching criminals if they had that power, but that's not enough of reason to give it to them.
We need protection from criminals, but we also need protection from "the authorities".
That's why there are things like the fourth amendment.