🇬🇧A draft EU Parliament report published today would ban anonymous payments and donations in #cryptocurrencies such as #Bitcoin & #Ethereum. The stated aim to tackle money laundering and terrorism is only a pretext to gain more control over personal data.
@echo_pbreyer I usually agree with you. Not this time.
This is not as clear-cut as it seems to be.
Cryptocurrencies (especially the "privacy coins") are not a cash replacement, the power dynamics are different because cash has friction when used in huge amounts that cryptocurrencies lack.
This makes cryptocurrencies (and esp. "privacy coins") way more useful for organized crime, corrupt politicians, and the superrich, than cash could ever be.
The power dynamics are *opposite* to those in case of cash.
@echo_pbreyer let me say this differently: where cash is a boon to private citizens in preserving their privacy from the rich and powerful, cryptocurrencies (esp. privacy coins) are a boon to the rich and powerful in making it more difficult to hold them to account.
The "cryptocurrencies = digital cash" false equivalence is a sham. Be careful what you support.
@rysiek @echo_pbreyer Nonsense. Electronic cash is the same as cash for all intents and purposes, and it's much easier to have HSBC launder your fiat money than it is to launder billions of EUR in cryptocurrency. You do actually have to get in and out of something like Monero if you intend to do that, because you're not going to be able to spend that in XMR or want to keep that in XMR. Which means it *is* perfectly detectable for the worst offenders, while this law would violate privacy for all.
@raucao @echo_pbreyer "cash" and "HSBC laundering" are two different things. You have to get that cash to HSBC somehow first, and that's exactly where the friction of hauling huge amounts of cash hits the hardest.
It then becomes traceable, even if with considerable difficulty. Consider: Panama Papers, Paradise Papers, and other such leaks.
(disclosure: I worked for an investigative journalism organization that was involved in publishing these leaks)
@raucao @echo_pbreyer the wet dream of cryptocurrency people is that you pay directly in your cryptocurrency of choice. The idea is that they become actual currencies. And if that happens, esp. for "privacy coins", there will be way less traceability and transparency than even today, even with our current opaque banking system and money laundering schemes.
I skimmed the paper (will read more attentively later), it makes points that are familiar to me.
Most importantly, however, it seems to acknowledge the *need* for anti money laundering regulation, and the need to improve it. Neither surprising, nor something I disagree with.
So, again, not sure what your point in linking to this paper was? If we are both arguing for better quality anti money laundering regulations, cool, high-five!
And made it very clear that it is "not as clear-cut as it seems" that such regulation should be outright opposed.
But I asked what *your* point is. Is it that anti-money laundering regulations are needed, but currently bad, and so need to be improved? Or is it that such regulations should be completely dismantled? Or that they should be left the way they are today?
mastodon.technology is shutting down by the end of 2022. Please migrate your data immediately. This Mastodon instance is for people interested in technology. Discussions aren't limited to technology, because tech folks shouldn't be limited to technology either!