[stcredzero]

yes, it's achievable for folks with disposable income

People living in NC and TX generally have a lot more disposable income than people in CA at the same gross income level. (In that sense, those other places are more free.)

pay for the house in full. A mortgage was not going to be possible.

It's entirely possible for an LLC to lease property. I also know for a fact that there are people in Chinatown who, for a variety of reasons, can't get a mortgage, but they can get alternative financing to the tune of several hundreds of thousands of dollars.

> 9. Buy a boring car.

Very affordable. I just did this.

> 10. Buy a decoy house to fool the D.M.V.

In the Blues Brothers movie, I think one of the characters had Wrigley Field as their address. If you have friends at an organization like a church, you could use that address.

The subject of the article did it with money. There are other people who do some things like this through their connections.

[labster]

As someone who was a target of harassment just to reveal the identity of a friend, I can assure you that using friends is not a good way to secure information in the digital age.

[stcredzero]

The friend or the friendly organization needs to be prepared for the heat, and should have volunteered to face it. Volunteering a friend without their knowing what they're in for is pretty bad, of course.

[marcus0x62]

> People living in NC and TX generally have a lot more disposable income than people in CA at the same gross income level. (In that sense, those other places are more free.)

Sure, it's just more difficult to get to the same gross income level in those places.

[DonHopkins]

Except that he works his bitcoin shilling scam remotely.

Read the article: section 13.

[marcus0x62]

>>> I'd politely disagree, for most of the points yes, it's achievable for folks with disposable income, however I don't think the average reader (NYT or HN) can afford to buy 2 new homes and 1 new vehicle all in cash.

>> People living in NC and TX generally have a lot more disposable income than people in CA at the same gross income level. (In that sense, those other places are more free.)

> Sure, it's just more difficult to get to the same gross income level in those places.

I'm not sure how you would manage to read this comment thread and think my comment is about the person in the article specifically.

[DonHopkins]

I think the only take-away from this article is "Don't Shill Bitcoin".

And of course, step 16 of your not-so-easy plan to vanish to avoid the consequences of your actions should not be contacting the New York Times and having them write an article about you.

[marcus0x62]

> I think the only take-away from this article is "Don't Shill Bitcoin".

That's a pretty limited reading of the article. Another lesson might be about the difficulty ordinary people have in staying private in modern society. I can think of many reasons why a person might desire (or need) the sort of privacy outlined in the article that don't have anything to do with "shilling bitcoin."

> And of course, step 16 of your not-so-easy plan to vanish to avoid the consequences of your actions should not be contacting the New York Times and having them write an article about you.

Sure. This whole thing appears to be little more than a publicity stunt.

I still think it is harder to earn $100k per year in a place like North Carolina than, say, California.

[xnyan]

You're absolutely right in spirit, CA incomes are way higher in all senses as compared to NC. That said, for professionals working in the research triangle park (IBM, SAS, GE etc) or bankers in Charlotte 6 figs is not weird at all. NC is one of the better-off southern states (we gave up relatively quickly in the civil war and its still paying off).