pull down to refresh

Which I understand but what is the alternative to stoping the crime? I am assuming law enforcement must have some sort of evidence before going to tether and telling them to turn off the tokens.

Prevent the crime from happening to begin with, or find the criminals and arrest them.

By the way, if a thief stole some bitcoin, I wouldn't be against the forcible confiscation of their stolen coins so that they can be returned to the rightful owner. But that doesn't mean I support a centralized system where someone can just do that by the flip of a switch.

reply

And how often are forcibly-confiscated coins returned to their rightful owners? Seems me they're most often kept by law enforcement.

reply

This is true normally after Justice is served the asset should be returned.

reply

This post isn’t to support tether but to criticize how lazy bitcoin journalism can be.

Prevent the crime from happening to begin with, or find the criminals and arrest them

This is the ideal situation but it’s unrealistic. Even with all the KYC now scams are afoot. Plus bitcoin projects lead users to the kingdom of scams by having them download and use telegram to get tech support!!

reply

but what's the alternative? any kind of backdoor can be abused and besides doesn't really make sense in a decentralized system

reply

I am not sure. I don’t see much discussion about this. Just the constant complaining about KYC and chain analysis and the solution to stopping crimes is explained away as “good ol fashioned police work” but tools to solve crimes evolve with technology which is expected.

reply
57 sats \ 1 reply \ @siggy47 24 Apr

That's a big assumption!

reply

Indeed it is. Law enforcement also commits crimes. Power needs to be checked. No single entity should control the money. Period.

reply