[littlestymaar]

> As I said above, there are many traditional ways of bypassing laws/sanctions and big players actively use them. The cryptocurrencies and exchanges are just creating platforms for ordinary people to have access to it.

I love how casually you're bragging about “delivering money laundering and corruption to the masses”. I sincerely hope you end up in jail some day.

[amiraliakbari]

It is just normal consumers doing things that are already accepted, even if not explicitly declared. For taking any substantial amount of money out of a bank anywhere in the world, there are tight controls and nobody can sell oil or deliver large stolen money trough crypto. But how it is different that a person can directly buy an Xbox game with crypto instead of buying it from a reseller? The reseller already did the same thing - somehow move USD to another country, buy the game and sell it inside the country. I'm saying that the crypto is just removing some proxies and traditional processes and is not providing any new way of doing bad things that were not possible before crypto.

It's like saying that Uber is causing global warming. If you really care about global warming, just regulate using cars and force EV. If for whatever reason no one cares about regulating cars and everybody already uses them, disallowing an electronic method of renting cars does not fix any real problems.

If you think anyone cares about these use cases, why a company like Apple does not simply block Iranian network providers on iPhones to prevent any illegal selling of iPhones here? There are a many many people in Iran that are using iPhones and other products that are not supposed to be used here, all of which are imported using the same methods that I said exists and are being used. Does allowing use of such products "money laundering and corruption" and you are hoping for Apple managers to end up in jail? The services I said are being used are all of the the same kind, normal services used by normal people. That's not even considering the debate that does a country like USA has the right to define what is a crime in another country or not.

[littlestymaar]

There's a pretty big difference between “not actively policing your market to avoid money laundering” and “creating a business dedicated to money laundering”. We can argue that the first is irresponsible (because most of the times, the company is aware of what's happening) but the second one is in another league.

And I don't really know why you bring the USA here, this isn't harming them in any ways (Otherwise, you can be sure that iPhones would be bricked there for instance), this is harming Iran.