Bitcoin just became preferred is all. In no way did it "enable" ransomware to exist, it simply lowered the bar.
Would love to know where the heck you pulled the quoted "enable" from, because it certainly wasn't from my post.
And you say "it simply lowered the bar" as if that's somehow insignificant. Actually, it's the entire freaking point. There's orders of magnitude difference between the two. We're not proving undecidability here...
Tainted money like that would need to be put through a Bitcoin tumbler which is unsafe and imperfect or only ever used to pay for other criminal activities as exchanging it for fiat in an exchange cooperating with any authorities could be pretty hard.
And I was merely saying Bitcoin has been making untraceable digital payments possible (and practical/easy).
Nowhere was I saying it is impossible to also use Bitcoin for traceable digital payments.
It takes longer, but it's possible.
That's like saying decrypting RSA "takes longer, but it's possible". Yeah, good luck.
And I don't see why the RSA analogy is "too harsh". Impractical is impractical.
Like, it's more awkward but quite doable especially with decent resources.
But yes, it's WAY easier to trace than cash
Yes, because we clearly need to fix software vulnerabilities at any and all costs, hospital patients and the poor/elderly be damned. And it's obviously their fault for paying for indirectly supporting the development of insecure software, right? Only an idiot would think tackling the payment side of ransomware might be a better solution. After all, ransomware must've obviously been a bigger problem before; there's no freakin' way our cryptocurrency like Bitcoin has made these problems worse or that it might be causing more problems than it's solving. Clearly the ability to make anonymous or untraceable payments is a human right more fundamental than being able to live a life free of others demanding such ransom from them in the first place.