[astrange]

> Laws from what country?

The US.

> OP's comment was trying to argue that "the country of jurisdiction has veto power". My question was "which country has jurisdiction over a distributed application running in thousands of independent computers spread around the world?"

The US. No, it doesn't matter where you live, it's the US. As Bandit Keith says, every country in this world belongs to America. (Except for a few like China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.)

> It's not about the individuals, what I am arguing is that the service itself can not be stopped.

It can continue, but this is a Pyrrhic victory, ie there's no way this could work out in the real world that anyone would be happy about.

Imagine if someone puts child porn in your immutable distributed database. Is anyone getting away with it merely because it can't be deleted? No, now the service is illegal for everyone, forever.

More mild real example is crypto exchanges banning coins that were transferred out of a coin mixer in the last few transactions. Which is something they have done, and will do more of:

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy0768

> There is no one who can remove a contract that is deployed on a blockchain, so there is no way that a judge "can find someone to do something about it..."

But they can! Judges are more powerful than you and more powerful than computers. The mere fact that you can't technically fulfill the order makes everything /worse/. Whoever they find is in contempt until they find some way out of doing something impossible; better to have had admin capabilities in the first place.

Tornado Cash seems to have the ability to do something though: https://www.cryptonewsz.com/lazarus-gets-banned-by-tornado-c...

> The main reason so many developers are attracted to "web3" is because of its "permissionless" nature.

Well, or because a16z is giving them money to do it. I don't agree that not getting prosecuted is proof it's fine; you need to get prosecuted and be found not guilty, get an SEC no-action letter, etc.

[rglullis]

> Is anyone getting away with it merely because it can't be deleted? No, now the service is illegal for everyone, forever.

We could extend that "logic" to the Internet itself. Let's then just declare that because there are illegal things done in the Internet, all of it is illegal. Also, the only reason we are not suffering any repercussion is because Uncle Sam doesn't care about us (yet).

This is nothing but a cheap rhetorical trick. Hasn't anyone called you on your bullshit before?

[smcl]

> Let's then just declare that because there are illegal things done in the Internet

The difference is that the various law enforcement agencies across the globe frequently succeed in taking sites offering child porn down and prosecute those involved. The point being made was that once it's on your immutable blockchain you can't do that.

[rglullis]

> The point being made was that once it's on your immutable blockchain you can't do that.

And? it's not because something is on a blockchain that you have to host it, much less interact with it.

[smcl]

Right but someone has to host it though, otherwise your blockchain ceases to exist doesn't it?

[rglullis]

Yes and no.

You certainly need to have people validating incoming blocks, and currently you need to have at least some nodes archiving all the data if you want to be able to reconstruct the whole history. But there is a lot of research going on in regards to state pruning, which would let nodes discard parts of the chain that are not interesting.

[astrange]

I agree if you can find a way to delete things then it's fine. That's not exactly immutable, but it may be workable, maybe.

But currently all blockchain users have to download the entire thing unless they're just accessing it through a web API, which would be "centralized" and makes them not really blockchain users.