|
|
|
|
|
by hn_throwaway_99
2072 days ago
|
|
I don't necessarily disagree with you that the specifics of this case may not be exactly applicable to Monero. However, I think people are being woefully naive if they think that the US Government will be OK with people sending large sums of money anonymously. Whether it be through finding existing laws that can be applied, or just flat out changing the law to explicitly ban these types of transactions, I can guarantee that when people think they have found a technical loophole the law usually comes down on the side of "does what you're doing constitute behavior that the original legislation was meant to prohibit". Just look at what happened with Aereo [1], I think the same thing will (at least eventually) happen with cryptocurrencies where the ledger isn't fully traceable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aereo |
|
We would be kidding ourselves if we denied the geopolitical implications of that reporting burden. For Taiwan for example every single international transaction is proxied through a US bank.
I believe the geopolitics behind it is to ensure that the US is able to enforce their international sanctions. Anything bypassing that definitely a thorn in their eyes.
However we shouldn't forget that there are those that would like to reduce the reliance on those systems. So while US banks may cut off access other countries may not.
EDIT: yes, the US is not the only country doing that. Iran for example while bartering with China also completely banned cryptocurrencies for the longest time. Then finally allowed blockchain applications but only if they are used for non payment purposes.