aminok

This is one of the best questions here. It could even be narrowed down to why the dragnet method of combating money laundering is used. Subjecting the population to total financial surveillance, by requiring every financial transaction to be reported, to stop money laundering, seems like the type of bargain struck by the East German Stasi, and inconsistent with liberal democracy.

Other methods that might be perhaps less effective, could be used that would result in privacy being compromised much less in comparison.

They're pushing a racial injustice narrative using anecdotes, and will try to suppress anecdotes that contradict it.

The people using these tactics - downvoting comments that draw attention to the deaths of people who belong to the supposedly privileged white majority - are very dishonest.

Thank you for doing this IAmA, it shows a lot of open-mindedness.

I just really hope Bitcoin exchanges don't face any additional regulations that other money transmitters don't have to deal with. The only proposal I've seen suggested by your office that I find reasonable is that exchanges be required to disclose that Bitcoin transactions are irreversible and that the price of bitcoin is volatile. Simple, easy to comply with, and good for the consumer.

My question is, have you read any of the discussions in /r/bitcoin about the hearings you've been involved in and the talks you've given?

What if you were in a room with Toby, a space telescope, and a Mars Rover, and you could only send two of them into space?

Recovering stolen cash = uncovering private key controlling stolen BTC.

Not the same but similar. It's true that the private key could be encrypted with a passphrase only inside the thief's mind, but people can be held for contempt of court if they don't divulge that information.