Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Julian Assage Taunts US Government For Forcing Wikileaks To Invest In Bitcoin (facebook.com)

Posted by EditorDavid on from the prisoner's-dilemma dept.

Saturday's tweet from Julian Assange says it all: "My deepest thanks to the US government, Senator McCain and Senator Lieberman for pushing Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, AmEx, Moneybookers, et al, into erecting an illegal banking blockade against @WikiLeaks starting in 2010. It caused us to invest in Bitcoin -- with > 50000% return."
Assange's tweet was accompanied by a graph showing the massive spike in the price of bitcoin -- though most of that growth occurred in the last year.

106 of 195 comments (clear)

  1. ASSSANGGGE!!!! by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Screamed yet another agitated U.S. President at the sky.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by elrous0 · · Score: 3, Funny

      And, BTW, I wonder how much the UK still spends each year pretending that they just want to deport him to answer some questions about a sexual assault that even the victims admit never happened. "ASSAAAAGE!" screams yet another Prime Minister too.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    2. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do not taunt Happy Fun Trump.

    3. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by sittingnut · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Nah, the current US President is more likely to scream, "TRUMP IS GREAT!" at the sky because that's where he thinks Sky Magazine comes from and they are being so unfair to him! ;)

      still underestimating trump? some never learn.

    4. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Here is a source:
      http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/julian-assange-affidavit-states-rape-victim-sent-texts-denying-attack-1434895

      There are many more, I suggest you bother trying, although of course your rather obvious smear game shows you are almost certainly an 'involved party' shall we say?

      Interesting isnt it, to try and smear someone with first rape of two women (which appears to mostly be a spat because they were angry he slept with both at similar times - women dont like that, but thats hardly rape), and now we are supposed to believe he is a hardcore Gay Pedophile (this time without even an attept to make up evidence - I assume because that worked out so badly last time).

      Hint: one makes the other look somewhat unlikely, dont you think?

      So sorry, back to the training manual for you, try harder next time, the ministry of disinformation expects better!

    5. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by geekymachoman · · Score: 1

      http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-311...
      2.5 years old.

      Good to show who UKs real bosses are though.

    6. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Nothing. No one has an active extradition request for him anymore. They do however want to arrest him for breaching UK law. Like for being a fugitive, ignoring the courts, etc. There's a UK warrant for his arrest regardless of what the rest of the world thinks.

    7. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      "Why was the suspect beaten?"

      "He resisted arrest."

      "Arrest on what charge?"

      "Resisting arrest, of course!"

      "I see, carry on!"

    8. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      How's the weather in St. Petersburg, comrade?

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    9. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by slashrio · · Score: 1

      He fled a valid Warrant, that's why the Brits still want him.

      Or so the excuse goes...

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    10. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by The+Cynical+Critic · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Did you pay any attention at all when he locked himself into the embassy? He never went there because he had an active extradition request on himself, but because of the real risk that if he's arrested, the U.S is going to put in an extradition request, apply pressure to bypass the normal procedures to deny him any kind of due process (which the U.S has the ability to do) and finally stage a similar sham of a trial that Manning got. Try to remember that before and after locking himself into the embassy U.S intelligence did their best to try to wiretap him using, amongst other things, a stingray-type device (which they forgot to re-configure for him so it initially showed up as a south american carrier's base station in the middle of London) meaning that they clearly were looking for cause to extradite him.

      With another autocrat in the white house you can't exactly blame him for not daring to come out yet...

      --
      "Why should I want to make anything up? Life's bad enough as it is without wanting to invent any more of it."
    11. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      You really could have googled that yourself.

      I guess as long as there's no hurricane coming through it's kinda nice.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Let's see, internet access, food, freedom to sleep whenever you please, no need to work or do anything sensible...

      Not so different to your mom's basement, to be honest.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      > It's quite likely that even if convicted he would be released immediately due to "time served" being stuck in the embassy.

      Conviction would be a legal problem, since it would create significant visa issues. The real risk for him once he's outside an embassy is extradition to a nation interested in prosecuting him for espionage. Even if no extradition proceedings are currently in progress, I'm certain they'd be filed within moments of his departure from the embassy.

    14. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The UK tends to roll over to US extradition requests pretty easily. Even when they clearly violate British laws and human rights. Not just the US either, we extradite people to all sorts of places where they face torture and murder.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    15. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dan+East · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You have to admit the genius in this. Why should the US waste money on pursuing him, when he's incarcerated himself through his own paranoia?

      --
      Better known as 318230.
    16. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      One should really avoid any comparison with Manning. Manning is a U.S. citizen who swore an oath to defend the country and turned over files she was entrusted with. I think she was punished appropriately, and strongly agree with her release and criminal record.

      Assange has no such relationship with the U.S. and shouldn't be subject to its arbitary, extraterritorial whims.

    17. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by aquacrayfish · · Score: 1

      One of the more interesting comments I've read on this story in ages. I wish I had mod points today.

    18. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by DrXym · · Score: 2
      He locked himself up because he was too chickenshit to face rape charges in Sweden. In so doing he broke his UK court bail conditions and he'll be arrested on the spot when he steps out of the embassy or is shoved out.

      It's sucks to be him but frankly he'll get everything he deserves by way of the judicial system.

    19. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      The courts consider him "on the run", not serving time, even if that is de facto what is happening.

    20. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by torkus · · Score: 1

      He fled a valid Warrant, that's why the Brits still want him.

      Or so the excuse goes...

      Knowing the premise of the warrant is bogus and just an illegal attempt by the government to controls someone, you still believe that the due process following his surrender would somehow be completely legitimate and above board?

      The tooth fairy still leaves a quarter under your pillow too I assume.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    21. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by torkus · · Score: 1

      Because his current 'incarceration' still allows him to communicate and continue his work. If it was just the physical aspect you might have a point, but his whole platform is about communication and dissemination of information.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    22. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And all of that is completely irrelevant as to why the UK is attempting to arrest him, you know like the post I was replying to. Nothing happening in the USA or in Sweden is currently related to the crime he committed in the UK.

    23. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Translation: He picked on the Democrats!!! He's BAAAD now!!

    24. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "You could have targeted Trump and not Hillary, but chose to disclose malfeasance wherever it was seen!"

    25. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      This is old.

      She wore a dress and came out to her commanding office before handing over the secrets.

      Whether she identified male or female while she was pretending to listen to Lady Gaga and downloading files is uncertain enough to not matter. Pointing out that her circumstances forced her to publicly identify as male at that time is pointless and cruel.

    26. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Zorpheus · · Score: 1

      He can't secretly meet people anymore though, and he would have more influence if he was talking on stages.

    27. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Confirmation source please?

    28. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Malfeasance? Like taking millions from Putin in the form of donations in kind (a felony)?

    29. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Mattcelt · · Score: 1

      Which was what, exactly? I've heard aught of him being charged with anything in the UK.

    30. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      If all he did was publish, no, that's been to the Supreme Court already (and ignoring that he isn't a US citizen and was not in the US.)

      If he directly participated, as with planning, or paid, then maybe. You don't get to commit crimes in the US just because you are over the border any more than you get to lob a missile.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    31. Re: ASSSANGGGE!!!! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      The extradition request is valid, including showing that what Assange allegedly did would be criminal under UK law. That means the UK warrant for Assange's arrest is valid, and Assange is, in fact, a wanted fugitive.

      Neither of us actually knows what happened with the women in Sweden, but it's very clear that Assange has committed a criminal act under UK law.

      I don't see government conspiracy theories under every bush, so I don't see why he'd be denied due process.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    32. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      If he's a gay pedophile, exactly what was he doing with those women in Sweden? You'd think he wouldn't be attracted to adult women.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    33. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Like any man-on-woman sexual assault case, there are myriads of truth-challenged misogynists coming out of the woodwork to explain why the man is a saint and the victims are liars.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    34. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      First, you're assuming the US has an interest. As far as I know, he hasn't violated any US laws, and I haven't heard any official action. There's no evidence of extradition attempts. There may have been surveillance attempts, although I haven't seen credible sources on that. Manning was an open-and-shut case.

      Second, you're making Assange out to be a blithering idiot. If you don't want to be extradited to the US, the second-to-last place you should go is the UK, which is notorious for granting extradition requests to the US.

      The simplest explanation is that Assange sexually assaulted two women in Sweden, left the country while he still could, didn't want to be extradited and face trial, and made up a story about the big bad US to look like the good guy in this. I haven't seen another good explanation that doesn't have unsupported assumptions about the US.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    35. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      He was to report for extradition, pursuant to a perfectly legal request, and fled instead. I believe he agreed to turn himself in and instead headed for the embassy. That's a crime.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    36. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      Actually, the real risk is being sent back to Sweden to stand trial on rape charges.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    37. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The UK tends to roll over to US extradition requests pretty easily.

      See, that is just a really stupid and ignorant thing to say.

      "Roll over" implies they responded to some sort of pressure, and did something they wouldn't otherwise do. But that is a blatant lie; the UK is in fact pleased to have an extradition treaty with the US! There is no "rolling over" to grant a legitimate extradition request; please note also that none was ever requested! The whole idea of extradition in this case is not based on facts; it is purely and completely based on a perceived sense of guilt by an active fugitive from justice.

      And extradition isn't something you even can "roll over" on; the only requirement is that they completed the paperwork correctly and claim to have evidence that, if true, would prove a violation of US law. Everything else about it would be ruled on by the US justice system, which is entirely capable of determining if there is evidence of a crime and if there is evidence of a party's guilt.

      Just because you hate the US government shouldn't stop you from understanding that the UK's government is actually friends with the US, and have similar legal systems that show each other mutual respect and confidence.

    38. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Not only is he in defacto jail now, but when he finally leaves he has to stay in the UK and receive his spanking for violating court orders!

      The bitcoin price is an interesting thing, but is it possible to actually sell very much at that price? Surely that price is based on new entrants using it as a short term exchange medium, and at the other end people are mostly stockpiling their profits because of the perceived increase in value. I mean, the currency has long term price deflation built in; new currency is harder to create than new products or services, so the currency value increases over time causing prices to decrease. This guarantees hoarding, but what happens if somebody tries to sell a large amount? If the price drops, then people realize their hoard values are just high scores on a screen, and the real money that they can get is highly constrained. Then everybody wants out at the same time.

      If you can get somebody to sell you price insurance on the bitcoin, and also accept payment in bitcoin, then you could build a good strategy; if the insurance company is solid enough, anyways.

    39. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is a significant matter of historical accuracy and how to communicate about these types of things; society is still working this sort of thing out.

      When a person changes their name, you're expected to use their new name; but it is not uniformly true that you still use their new name when discussing actions in the past. In many situations people use the information that was true at the time that they're speaking of to speak about the things that happened at that time, and they consider it to be distorting history to alter historical facts to match later changes.

      And then other people say yes, you should always alter historical facts. And if somebody wants to research the history of Muhammad Ali, you're not allowed to tell anybody that he used to have a different name, unless it is only to talk about why he changed his name. And then when they look up old newspaper stories on microfilm, they just have to have the Secret Knowledge if they want to understand who is who.

      Same here, I guess. If you want to look up historical reports, you just have to have the Secret Knowledge about what the facts were at the time, and then you just destructively edit the historical references and quotes so that they assert facts from a later time.

      Time will tell if these proposed cultural changes happen. ;)

    40. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      the UK, which is notorious for granting extradition requests to the US.

      You're part of a very small minority of people who consider that following bilateral treaties with allied countries is a source of notoriety.

    41. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      "Roll over" implies they responded to some sort of pressure, and did something they wouldn't otherwise do. But that is a blatant lie; the UK is in fact pleased to have an extradition treaty with the US! There is no "rolling over" to grant a legitimate extradition request;

      No, we really do.

      We have extradited people to the US for doind something in the UK which isn't even illegal in the UK. If that's not rolling over the nI don't know what is.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    42. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      "Same here, I guess. If you want to look up historical reports, you just have to have the Secret Knowledge about what the facts were at the time, and then you just destructively edit the historical references and quotes so that they assert facts from a later time."

      There's no secret knowledge. Manning made her thoughts very clear on what she was going through at the time she gave up the secrets.

      All your hypothetical statements about whether a trans person should be referred to in their non-preferred pronoun in the past is purely hypothetical because I didn't make any such references. She privately identified female when the crime was committed, and even communicated it to her commanding officer.

    43. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Right, that's not rolling over, that's what the treaty says to do.

      Can you please try to at least have the IQ of a pair of shoes?

      It doesn't have to be something that is illegal in the UK! That has nothing to do with it. Things that are legal in the UK and illegal in the US are not automatically things where you can flee from the US authorities and hide in the UK and be protected by their government. That is just plain stupid, and that's why we have the treaties.

      That's the whole fucking point. It was illegal in the US, and the US informed the UK of that fact, and so the UK granted the extradition. That's the process. The only real consideration is regarding the death penalty; the punishment has to be a legal type of punishment in both countries. So the UK doesn't do execution, so the US has to promise not to execute the person. That's it, that's all. Being sent to prison for a long sentence on a felony is a totally normal and legal punishment in the UK. It doesn't matter if the punishments for individual crimes is different.

      If the US asks the UK to extradite a person, the UK courts are only looking at: is the accused person the same person that they are trying to extradite or is it maybe the wrong person with the same name; are they accused of a US crime; did the US document properly their claim of having evidence to present to the US courts that could prove the accusation; and will they face execution as a possible punishment?

      That's it. Nothing is being proven other than identity. Nothing is being weighed. The paperwork is being checked for completeness. The case might be weak. No problem. The conduct might have been legal if it had been done in the UK. No problem. The crime might even have been committed on a computer system or financial system located in the US, by a person acting over a communication network from the UK. Again, no problem! The evidence might not even exist, it might just be a lie by the prosecutor; even that would not be a problem, because extradition weighs the documented promise that evidence exists, not the evidence itself.

    44. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      Right, that's not rolling over, that's what the treaty says to do.

      Right, so we rolled over when we signed the treaty and continue to do so.

      Not sure what your point is other than "some document that someone signed says so so it's OK".

      It doesn't have to be something that is illegal in the UK!

      So, what you're saying is that you can stay in your home country, no NOTHING illegal and still get extradited and somehow that's not us rolling over? Wow.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    45. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      this isnt about what manning feels, but goes to history bradley manning leaked the documents. and if you are looking for information, that is the name you need to search for

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    46. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You're derping all over yourself, the treaty is symmetrical, neither side could possibly have "rolled over."

      You seem to totally fail to comprehend the phrase, "rolled over." It means they didn't want to do it, but did because of pressure. Are you really so fucking stupid that you can't comprehend that what the UK signs extradition treaties, it does so because it thinks they're a good idea? How fucking hard is that?

      That fact is the same regardless of if you personally approve of extradition treaties or not, because nobody is claiming that the decision was yours to make.

      What a fucking moron. I mean, your conclusions are also stupid but who cares? You can't even comprehend if you're the Queen of England, or not.

    47. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      No, you simply failed to comprehend my point, and yet you replied to it anyways.

      Better luck next time, and don't worry, if you manage to comprehend what I say and give a response that shows you understood the words before deciding you disagree, I'll be happy to respond to whatever you said. But if, as here, you just totally ignore what I said and respond as if you only read every third word, then I'll only respond to remind that words have meaning, and you don't know what that meaning is because you didn't read it carefully.

    48. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      yeah symmetrical, right. Give me one example of a time the USA has allowed a citizen who never broke American laws to be extradited anywhere.

      Until you can demonstrate otherwise, my claim stands.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    49. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 1

      Sooo, no such confirmation of CIA complicity exists, is that right?
      Figures
      You can always tell when some people are repeating Alex Jones shit.

    50. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by DrXym · · Score: 1

      And by "obvious trap" you mean a situation of his own making. He can rot in that embassy for all anybody cares.

    51. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      It's hard to understand what you're talking about because I didn't use Manning's first name.

    52. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      You were the first person in this thread to use private Manning's first name.

      You objected to the pronoun. That's not necessary for the search.

    53. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Wow, man. You need some sort of plugin to stop you if you're about to post drunk.

      You did talk about the subject. You really did, just scroll up; not only are they your words, they should still be on your screen when you're looking at this thread. Durrrrrrrrr

      Better Luck next Next Time. You're either a complete idiot, or you're passive-aggressively pretending you're too stupid to understand. Is there a difference? I mean, if you disagree with me, that's fine. But you're not even comprehending the points you purport to disagree with!

    54. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      "You did talk about the subject."

      Are you talking about names or are you talking about pronouns? Or is it about the general theme now?

      Is the name thing some kind of metaphor?

      I honestly have no clue what you're talking about. I intentionally didn't use Manning's first name so as to NOT make a political point about this.

    55. Re:ASSSANGGGE!!!! by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      None of it happened in secret, it is all there in the thread above if you're curious what you were replying to.

  2. Mooning the giant by John+Jorsett · · Score: 1

    Word is that the President of Ecuador is getting pretty tired of this guy and is thinking about ejecting him from the London embassy. I think under the circumstances I'd keep a lower profile.

    1. Re:Mooning the giant by sittingnut · · Score: 1

      Word is that the President of Ecuador is getting pretty tired of this guy and is thinking about ejecting him from the London embassy. I think under the circumstances I'd keep a lower profile.

      yes you are right, a coward will keep a lower profile when a neutral party is buckling under threats of arbitrary tyrannical power.

    2. Re:Mooning the giant by Gussington · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Word is that the President of Ecuador is getting pretty tired of this guy and is thinking about ejecting him from the London embassy.

      We've been hearing that since 2 minutes after he entered the Ecuadorian embassy. Unless you are the President of Ecuador, or one of his aides, I suggest you stop believing the headlines...

    3. Re:Mooning the giant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      if you're not familiar with Australians - it's a national sport telling authority and the elite to piss off.

      Now that I've moved to North America I can see the cultural difference that comes from the fear indoctrination.

    4. Re:Mooning the giant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Rubbish.

      As of 24 September 2017 (less than three weeks' ago):

      "Ecuador will extend Assange's asylum over fears for his life - President Moreno"

      https://www.rt.com/news/404374-ecuador-president-asylum-assange/

    5. Re:Mooning the giant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      +100 for novel use of the Greengrocer's apostrophe!

  3. I may not have any Bitcoin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    but I can leave my house

  4. From a guy who lives in a converted storeroom by jfdavis668 · · Score: 1

    What other kind of money could he get in there?

  5. It's probably not a good idea to point this out by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    right now it's largely illegal activities (drugs, money laundering, gambling, randomware) that are driving up the value of bitcoin. That value goes poof the moment the government clamps down on it. It's not like bitcoin is even anonymous. What I'm saying is taunting genuinely powerful people and bringing the main way you're funding your organization to their attention when they have a history of blocking your funding methods is just plain arrogance.

    Then again, he did pretty much side with the current administration during the election and, well his man won. So he might be in a position to taunt McCain. Especially since McCain doesn't get along well with said administration.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by geekymachoman · · Score: 1

      So what if it's illegal ? The only thing government can do is legalize all those things.. and that will never happen.
      How are they going to clamp down on it ? The more they 'clamp down' on _information_, the more ways people are going to invent to circumvent those and carry as they would, and the more fascist they get, which will anger people as this is not 1928 anymore .. and you cannot stop information from flowing.

      I don't care about Assange, but I'm happy he mocks the USG and war criminals in it.

    2. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by borcharc · · Score: 2

      All of the things you claim that are driving the price are really binary transactions. If person A buys btc to do a thing on your list, person B who receives them needs to convert to cash. The drug dealer needs to buy more inventory. The money launderer needs to continue the process of layering his money. The casino needs to pay out winners and take profits. The ransomware guys, who really don't make much in the grand scheme of things, also have bills to pay.

      You really think all of this accounts for 42 billion in USD volume over the last 30 days????

    3. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by ASDFnz · · Score: 1

      Who is this "the government" you keep referring to? The UN? The IMF?

      I am curious to know what global governing body you think has this much power?

    4. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by slashrio · · Score: 1

      right now it's largely illegal activities (drugs, money laundering, gambling, randomware) that are driving up the value of bitcoin.

      Citation needed.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    5. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by slashrio · · Score: 1

      How about the banksters?

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    6. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by antifoidulus · · Score: 1

      No, it's largely Chinese demand as a way to hide assets from the Communist government. China is heading for a Japan-style economic crash(their economy, much like Japan in the 80s, is built on piles of bad debt) and the rich know that when the shit finally hits the fan the CCP is going to get grabby, real grabby. Using bitcoin is a way to shield money from the CCP(foreign assets such as property is another way, which is why there is a huge boom of Chinese buying up property all over the world, away from the grabby hand of Uncle Xi)

      --
      Monstar L
    7. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by MrDozR · · Score: 1

      Would that be those banksters who are taking a serious interest in blockchain technology, even so far as to conduct test deals between multiple entities using said tech? Those banksters who will try anything and everything if it earns them more money?

    8. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Then all you have to do is create a demand for bitcoins. Sell something people want only in exchange for bitcoins. Then the problem is on the masses, not you.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by houghi · · Score: 2

      1) Just because something is used for something illegal does not mean it should be made illegal to use. (bittorrent)
      2) I am sure they very well know how it is funded
      3) Almost nobody voted for Trump, they voted against Clinton. And even so, just because he wanted Trump to win does not mean he can't be critical of what he does.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    10. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      The syndicate.

      Can't wait for new X-Files...

    11. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by Khyber · · Score: 1

      "You really think all of this accounts for 42 billion in USD volume over the last 30 days????"

      More drugs than that flows between the US and Mexican border every single day, so yes.

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    12. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      right now it's largely illegal activities (drugs, money laundering, gambling, randomware) that are driving up the value of bitcoin.

      Or some say... and some are even dumb enough to believe: however, unlike what you're told in the "news," real criminals don't use Bitcoin.

    13. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by Nikkos · · Score: 1

      ""You really think all of this accounts for 42 billion in USD volume over the last 30 days????""

              "More drugs than that flows between the US and Mexican border every single day, so yes."

      Um no. The world drug trade is about $300-$400 billion - so about ~$1billion a day - and you can't begin to suggest that even half of that is done in cryptocurrency.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    14. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by codebonobo · · Score: 1

      You are around 5 years behind on the bitcoin technology. I suggest you investigate into tumblebit, LN payment channels, Confidential Transactions and MimbleWimble if you want to see how private and fungible bitcoin can get

    15. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      The real key problem though is that it means it is just a transactional currency; if you sell a bunch of units, the price of units goes down rapidly because there is no latent demand at all; all the demand is based on the transactions.

      Which is to say, the value of the goods sold in dollars is the same regardless of if the price is 1 bitcoin or 10 bitcoin. If you try to dump a bunch on the market, the price goes down, as soon as the product sellers realize it happened their prices change; they might even have a computerized system that sets the price of the items based on the exchange rate they can get.

      The high bitcoin value is based on this transactional nature, and lots of new people coming into the system. Lots of criminals were using cash still a year ago and are using bitcoin now. Supply is constrained both by the design of the currency, and also by hoarding. So the price will drift up depending how many new people are coming in. And later when it peaks the prices will stabilize because people really just want dollars at both ends; they want to spend dollars and receive dollars, but they want to hide the transaction.

      End result, for the hoarders the price is mostly fake; it is a real price that they can get by selling small quantities, but attempts to cash out will crash the price. And there is no real inherent value to correct after that, so it just normalizes and resets and drifts up as people enter the market.

    16. Re:It's probably not a good idea to point this out by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Well, laundered money ends up being counted multiple times. That's the whole point; you create fake transactions and put the dirty money in it, pay taxes on it, and make it clean. If you have multiple stages in order to obscure the true nature of the transactions, you're counting it multiple times.

      How much of that $42B in "volume" was taxable income? Divide that by 3, and that's how much actual economic activity you should expect was represented.

      Remember also: a lot of bitcoin gets moved around just to bundle and rebundle it and hide the transaction history; no money is being made and no actual economic activity is happening, but those bookkeeping methods increase the total sum of transactions done on an exchange.

      Don't be overly credulous of numbers; the misleading numbers have meaning too, and they might only be misleading because they mean something different than you anticipated. Wait for the meaning behind the numbers, and use that directly.

  6. End of Visa Mastercard Duopoly by ghoul · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Visa, Master and Swift have been abused so badly in pursuit of political goals in US Primaries that people all over the world have lost faith. Case in point - Sanctions against Iran a country which does not promote Wahabbism whil allowing full trae with Saudi. People have realized that depending on American and Western money networks opens you up to financial blackmail whenever American politicians want to do some dog whistling.
    Russia has created its own payment network and making it difficult for Visa and Master to operate there in order to drive adoption. China most transactions are moving to Baidu's network. India is now using PayTM. As more and more major economies start moving away from western payment systems the West's power to use sanctions as a policy tool will go away. Since money still needs to move between the competing monetary systems cryptocurrencies will become the interface currency

    --
    **Life is too short to be serious**
    1. Re:End of Visa Mastercard Duopoly by jeti · · Score: 2

      They also tried to force shops in Germany to stop selling Cuban cigars.

    2. Re:End of Visa Mastercard Duopoly by dj245 · · Score: 2

      Visa, Master and Swift have been abused so badly in pursuit of political goals in US Primaries that people all over the world have lost faith. Case in point - Sanctions against Iran a country which does not promote Wahabbism whil allowing full trae with Saudi. People have realized that depending on American and Western money networks opens you up to financial blackmail whenever American politicians want to do some dog whistling. Russia has created its own payment network and making it difficult for Visa and Master to operate there in order to drive adoption. China most transactions are moving to Baidu's network. India is now using PayTM. As more and more major economies start moving away from western payment systems the West's power to use sanctions as a policy tool will go away. Since money still needs to move between the competing monetary systems cryptocurrencies will become the interface currency

      Dodging government to government pressure is probably only a small reason for countries to move away from Visa and Mastercard. A much bigger reason taking 1-2.5% of every consumer transaction. That's a huge incentive for any bank or financial company to build a competing system.

      Government sanctions as a policy tool are deeply flawed, but one of the few options to pressure countries without dropping bombs. The reason sanctions are somewhat effective is not because of the power of one country, but only when lots of countries adopt them. It's basically a government-level boycott.

      Government sanctions are a flawed method of applying pressure, but cryptocurrencies are not a great workaround. Suppose North Korea gets their hands on a huge pile of bitcoin. Then what? They can't exactly make bitcoin an official currency, that would wreck their internal monetary policy of having artificially inflated exchange rates. It is difficult to cash out in other countries and use legitimate banks to transfer money, because they are sanctioned. The only reliable option left is to cash out in Russia (closed) or China (closed) and launder the money the old fashioned way (for overseas use), or carry it across the border (for internal use). Cryptocurrencies are just one of many difficult and not-foolproof options to try to get around sanctions. They are not a magic sanction-killing bullet.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    3. Re:End of Visa Mastercard Duopoly by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No one is moving away from Visa / Mastercard because it's "western payments". They are moving away because it's old methods with old technologies.

      Hell the USA were the first to move away from these payment methods with the rise of Paypal. This all is just the natural progression of technology combined with a cashless economy.

  7. Re:50,000% by hcs_$reboot · · Score: 1

    His ticket would have him make an unwanted stop in the US

    --
    Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
  8. Damn; wish I would have purchased $1000 in.... by lkroll4565 · · Score: 1

    .....bitcoins back in 2010. :)

  9. Ah yes Sweden. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    The country where a person can retroactively decide they shouldn't have had sex, and it gets called "rape". A country that is trying to outlaw men urinating while standing up.

    1. Re:Ah yes Sweden. by slashrio · · Score: 1

      And one of the first countries to ban cash.

      --
      "Trump!!", the new Godwin.
    2. Re:Ah yes Sweden. by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      You do realize that the extradition request was found to be valid, including the fact that what Assange is alleged to have done is rape under UK law, right? If you commit some odd sort of crime in country A and go to country B, and what you did isn't criminal in country B, you aren't going to be extradited. Any oddities in Sweden's sex crime laws are irrelevant here.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    3. Re:Ah yes Sweden. by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      Even if the US got hold of Assange, they couldn't even do anything because he hasn't done anything that the US can hold him criminally liable for. Assange is just an attention craving little weasel. How about that time he promised he'd turn himself over to UK police if Manning was given clemency? Well, that did happen...so...why is he still in that embassy? Oh yeah, he made an excuse just as retarded as the one that he is using to avoid extradition to Sweden.

  10. Now he can pay Portugal for his stay by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

    I'm sure they are happy.

  11. You didn't want to prove your claim. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because if you put down "proof" it can be proven false. Better just to claim it exists, where it can never be gainsaid.

  12. Time to get around the holdup by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    Ecuador needs to make Assange a citizen and then give him diplomatic status. So they can get him out of that Embassy. He will still need to stay holed up somewhere as there will be assignation attempts.

    1. Re:Time to get around the holdup by LostOne · · Score: 1

      "there will be assignation attempts" ... that's almost certainly a typo or autocorrect run amok, but if it isn't, you, sir, win twelve internets.

      (For those who don't get it, hint: look up "assignation".)

      --

      If it works in theory, try something else in practice.
  13. Re: It's probably not a good idea to point this ou by sound+vision · · Score: 1

    How are they going to clamp down on it? At the endpoints. Bitcoin needs to be cashed out to another currency at some point, unless the *only* things you want to buy are drugs and sploits and Magic cards. Now, there are some small players who might fit that description. There are even some in the psychedelic community who make certain drugs available on ideological grounds (cognitive freedom) and don't really care about cashing out. But they can certainly turn up the heat on anyone trying to profit. How effective that is remains to be seen.

  14. Re: It's probably not a good idea to point this ou by sound+vision · · Score: 1

    So people who can't trust the full faith and credit of the Chinese government are running to... Bitcoin as a safe store of value? Somehow that doesn't add up. They may very well use Bitcoin for transactions they don't want the government to know about, but if you are trying to keep large sums safely stored, the other options you mentioned (foreign real estate) are way more stable.

  15. Re:nice editing slashdot, assage by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    >Julian "Ass Age"

    And here I thought calling Trump orange was as childish and idiotic as it got.

    Nah, that would be televangelist Jerry Fallwell and "Ellen Degenerate", because she came out as a lesbian.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  16. Re:nice editing slashdot, assage by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    the medieval French "âne du singe"

    Lighting farts on fire?

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  17. The funny twist by k2r · · Score: 1

    in that sad story is that the revelations of Wikileaks helped Trump to win the vote, which may not exactly be in Assangeâs interest.
    I guess there would have been better candidates lower the probability of being detained that moment he leaves the ambassy.

    And personally: I think being set up and being a self inflated, stupid asshole having unsafe sex go very well together.

  18. Not if you don't believe gender can be chosen by HBI · · Score: 1

    And it can not be. It just is.

    --
    HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
    1. Re:Not if you don't believe gender can be chosen by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      She's only asking you to accept a pronoun. The rest is none of my business.

  19. Re: It's probably not a good idea to point this ou by codebonobo · · Score: 1

    Just like the war on drugs it will be impossible for states to censor bitcoin. Any discussion of making bitcoin illegal will only encourage us to buy more like we all did with AR15s and bullets whenever a anti-gun rhetoric or gun control fanatics open their mouths.

  20. Re: It's probably not a good idea to point this ou by codebonobo · · Score: 1

    Chinese love bitcoin because many of them love gambling and day trading , but yes some of it is capital flight as well.

  21. Re: It's probably not a good idea to point this ou by Aighearach · · Score: 1

    No need to worry over the absolute that was stated, obviously it was hyperbole.

    The point is, most of the bitcoin market is illegal items. A few businesses accept bitcoin and a few customers use it. They haven't been burned by it yet, so they will continue to for now. Maybe it is really true that you spend lots of bitcoin, or maybe it is really true that you accepted a bunch of questionable payment instruments and you've converted a small fraction of them to goods and services, but you are also sitting on a pile of financial instruments with uncertain future value. And the vast majority of the trade that they are good for is contraband.

  22. Re:Ah yes Sweden. Really? by sabt-pestnu · · Score: 1

    I thought you were referring to American colleges: Title IX, and the Dear Colleague letter. How many students have been falsely accused by educational institutions, denied due process, etc...