BITCOIN

Hexane

darren232002 said:

darren232002 said:

Ah, I see. So when you said that confiscation of money and seizure of assets wasn't a problem in a first world country, 

I don't remember saying that.

You liked a Malthusian post that made this point. 

A Malthusian post!

Goodness me!

Thank you for drawing this to my attention! Quite shocking!

Zola.

I love this thread

Malthusian

darren232002 said:

You liked a Malthusian post that made this point.

Burn him at the stake!

Do you now, or have you ever liked Malthusian posts? Because every time you click "Thanks" on a Malthusian post, God kills a dogepup and makes number go down by 1,000.

As usual, your view is incorrect. This is not a matter of opinion as there is a quite extensive body of case law on this matter. Articles 6 & 9 ECHR are not subject to qualification on grounds of national security, they are absolute rights. Sure, Canada isn't subject to EU law but (1) its a commonwealth country, so its probably pretty close and (2) our law should determine the grounds by which we judge others, particularly a nation like Canada. Fully expect Trudeau's actions will be declared illegal by a court in 2 or 3 years and the state ordered to pay damages to most of the peoples accounts they froze.

This legal analysis is slightly undermined by (apart from the whole "Canadian law, EU law, whevs" thing) the fact that on the other page you were saying that Canadian lorry drivers (and everyone else) need Bitcoin so they can be sovereign citizens, i.e. above the law, and have the "freedom to transact financially" i.e. circumvent asset freezes.

By any stretch of the imagination, Canadian citizens being able to ignore the government is a threat to Canadian national security.

Avoiding allegedly unjustified and illegal asset seizures (leaving aside whether they are or not) by holding assets which enable you to ignore them is the same as avoiding wrongful arrest by kneeing the coppers in the goolies and running for the hills. Unless you're prepared to uproot yourself permanently and flee all the way to a country without an extradition strategy, which is beyond most of us (especially the innocent), it's impractical and will just make things worse.

Zola.

https://www.weforum.org/organizations/lightning-labs

Probably irrelevant...

User232002

Malthusian said:

This legal analysis is slightly undermined by (apart from the whole "Canadian law, EU law, whevs" thing) the fact that on the other page you were saying that Canadian lorry drivers (and everyone else) need Bitcoin so they can be sovereign citizens, i.e. above the law, and have the "freedom to transact financially" i.e. circumvent asset freezes.

Sovereign citizen does not mean above the law. Freedom to transact does not mean circumvent asset freezes. 

The post you quoted explicitly pointed out that such rights can be suspended, provided the government goes to court, presents evidence and builds a case first.

You should absolutely be suspicious any time rights are suspended without due process.

Malthusian said:

By any stretch of the imagination, Canadian citizens being able to ignore the government is a threat to Canadian national security.

Except it can't. It's your opinion and it is provably false. It is not a matter of opinion or degree given that there is a clear definition of 'national security' that has been cited - national security is a threat to the existence of a nation itself. Unless you are trying to argue the case that a nation state can be terminated because it is ignored to death perhaps?

Malthusian said:

Avoiding allegedly unjustified and illegal asset seizures (leaving aside whether they are or not) by holding assets which enable you to ignore them is the same as avoiding wrongful arrest by kneeing the coppers in the goolies and running for the hills. Unless you're prepared to uproot yourself permanently and flee all the way to a country without an extradition strategy, which is beyond most of us (especially the innocent), it's impractical and will just make things worse.

No idea what you are blabbering on about with the silly analogy.

The west used to stand for ideals. The thing about morals is that they don't change based on the facts in front of you, even if they are inconvenient. If they do, you didn't believe in them enough in the first place. That means sometimes its difficult to make the bad guys pay or that the bad guys (or even well meaning good guys ie. extinction rebellion) will take advantage. Such is the price of freedom.

"My idea of freedom is that we should protect the rights of people to believe what their conscience dictates, but fight equally hard to protect people from having the beliefs of others imposed upon them."

Justin Trudeau, "Common Ground" 2014

Malthusian

So if Canadians and other people in first world countries don't need to hold Bitcoin to avoid the threat of "confiscation of money and seizure of assets", as is being inflicted on innocent bros in Canada, why do they need it again? To hodl until number go up?

Nobody's rights are being suspended without due process. There is a legal process available to appeal an asset freeze. If a court imposes an unjust asset freeze on you, you can either file an appeal, or flee to Dubai and post "I use bitcoin muthafluffers" memes on Telegram.

The amusing thing about that Nunchuk raspberry to the Ontario Superior Court - "When the Canadian dollar becomes worthless, we will be here to serve you too" - is that they won't be. When the Canadian dollar becomes worthless, the clueless, impoverished noobs of the Ontario Superior Court won't be able to do any business with Nunchuk, because they won't have anything to exchange for crypto to put on Nunchuk.

Zola.

Topical

https://world.hey.com/dhh/i-was-wrong-we-need-crypto-587ccb03

I still can't believe that this is the protest that would prove every Bitcoin crank a prophet. And for me to have to slice a piece of humble pie, and admit that I was wrong on crypto's fundamental necessity in Western democracies.

Adyinvestment

Malthusian said:

Nobody's rights are being suspended without due process. There is a legal process available to appeal an asset freeze. If a court imposes an unjust asset freeze on you, you can either file an appeal, or flee to Dubai and post "I use bitcoin muthafluffers" memes on Telegram.

Not really of much help if your bank account is frozen with all your money, and you don't have the money to pay for a lawyer or food.

All this has done is convince me to get some Bitcoin on a ledger (and I am sure many others around the world), at the very least they would have to go to court first before they could get their hands on my Bitcoin.

I don't care much about the protest but do you honestly think it is correct for innocent donors to have their bank accounts frozen? take the case of the below single low wage working mum who donated $50 (while it was legal) who now has her bank account frozen.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/mp-mark-strahl-convoy-protest-briane-bank-account-frozen-1.6360132

Justin Trudeau is the new poster boy for Bitcoin self custody.

bugbyte_2

Zola. said:

Topical

https://world.hey.com/dhh/i-was-wrong-we-need-crypto-587ccb03

I still can't believe that this is the protest that would prove every Bitcoin crank a prophet. And for me to have to slice a piece of humble pie, and admit that I was wrong on crypto's fundamental necessity in Western democracies.

Interesting take. Clearly JT appears to be off on a tangent and its up to Canada's population to decide on his future.

I still believe that if you expect the Government to show tolerance then people protesting must also recognise their responsibilities, otherwise any dipwand group (stole the election) with a grudge could grind us all to a halt. I read an article on how America post Trump was now ungovernable as the population had been conditioned to show no tolerance or acceptance of others views, and are therefore in a constant state of conflict. This Canadian issue is just an extension of that. No one ever compromises or acts for the greater good anymore. Politicians including our own have a hell of a lot to answer for.

UK wise, Account Freezing Orders appear to be a quick and easy way to do roughly the same thing, and appear to be quite wide spread. https://www.kingsleynapley.co.uk/insights/blogs/criminal-law-blog/met-police-appetite-for-account-freezing-orders-undimmed-by-pandemic

I'm not passing judgement on whether this is good or bad BTW, just saying it already happens. Crypto won't save you, as it is treated as property and can therefore be a frozen asset. The only way out of this is to go back to an honourable code of conduct where if politicians lie or screw up they resign, and the rest of us care enough about our fellow humans that we don't intentionally make each others lives a misery. If we did that, then none of this would have happened.

Scottex99

The difference being that it can only be frozen during the on/off ramp with fiat (by the bank) or if you hold your assets in a centralised exchange and they embargo you with the help of Coinbase etc. 

To actually freeze your crypto they would need your seed phrase so I guess they could torture you for it or you could tell them it. If you don’t tell them it they can track your wallet(s) using blockchain analytics and follow the coins but once you use a mixer or tornado cash or something then the trail ends.

A bit pedantic but in reality nobody can confiscate your BTC/Crypto if you don’t want them to