Author: prabhat 2015-08-27 17:33:19
Published on: 2015-08-27T17:33:19+00:00
The discussion revolves around the topic of online privacy and its implications on life and liberty. The author mentions that government agencies are aware of everything related to this subject but they take a passive approach which results in post-incident actions instead of pre-emptive measures. This poses a risk of ticking time-bombs that may require intervention from someone like Jack Bauer or James Bond. However, the author clarifies that the proposed solution does not breach decentralization but is not like Swiss democracy either.The author argues that while most online privacy advocacy focuses on liberty, money is attached to life, and this needs to change. The appeal is for people to become more active in addressing these issues. The author acknowledges that they do not own many bitcoins, but any disruption would affect them in some way, even if in the farthest part of the world.In response to the author's question about a solution, Gavin Andresen suggests that high-level policy organizations like Coin Center should be approached. He mentions that competent law enforcement organizations are capable of tracking down criminals using Bitcoin using traditional investigative techniques such as infiltrating criminal organizations or setting up honeypots. He cites the disappearance of several dark markets as evidence of their success.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T21:08:13.500249+00:00