[alphanullmeric]

Yeah I’m sure one day those “suckers” will decide they don’t need financial privacy and have no problem with the state reaching into their wallets at will. Then they’ll go back to happily storing their money in a bank account that can get locked for having the wrong opinion, or restricted by alleged investor protections that aren’t even opt out.

[Twirrim]

Financial privacy on a completely open and visible block chain, that makes transaction analysis incredibly easy, that has resulted in the FBI etc. consistently being able to "de-anonymise" users?

That's a really weird definition of "privacy". Crypto currency makes it easier for them, not harder. They don't even have to go to the effort of getting warrants because you're literally giving them your data saying "Track me, please!"

[alphanullmeric]

The IRS says otherwise.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2020/09/14/irs...

[vimda]

Lol.

> will decide they don’t need financial privacy

The block chain is publicly auditable. That's the opposite of privacy.

> that can get locked for having the wrong opinion

Any actual evidence of this happening?

[alphanullmeric]

Canadian government did it last year.

[vimda]

Anecdotal stories are not evidence. Links?

[alphanullmeric]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60383385.amp

[vimda]

Soo... Not "the wrong opinion" but disrupting major infrastructure. Im not sure I agree with it, but it's not the laissez-faire process you are implying. It's also pretty trivial to see how they can equally do the same with cryptocurrencies through the major exchanges, given the hurdles or actually using your crypto outside them

[alphanullmeric]

It’s the wrong opinion because this is the only protest where such measures have been taken, but not the only protest that disrupted infrastructure.