Hacker News Reader

Comment by kbart | Hacker News Reader

Call me cynical, but I don't believe it's uncommon for them to take forfeit money after an arrest. This time the only difference was that Bitcoin transactions could be publicly seen, as opposed to cash/wire transfer, and the agent wasn't aware of that.

View on HN

> the agent wasn't aware of that

If thats the case, it's interesting that he wasn't aware of the fundamentals of the technology that enabled the people he was investigating.

Is it? Criminals are often just dumb.

Well, you'd expect that the agents investigating those crimes would not be.

I'd expect agents to be organized and well versed in the goals and procedures of departments, not smarter or better at any random thing than any other human.

Why is that?

Because they are expected to have the skills needed to perform their job, specially such an important one.

I personally know few quite technical people who even own some Bitcoins and tried to confront me in recent discussion when I stated that all BTC transactions can be publicly seen. They knew that BTC doesn't provide complete anonymity, but thought of it more like wire transfer, where you can only see transactions from some "authorized center", exchange or something, not that anyone can see them. So I guess this detail is easy to miss or misinterpret.

That normally wouldn't go directly to the agent though, right? So that's completely different.

I believe he was saying it's not uncommon for law enforcement officers to steal forfeitures from the state.

If you're the one accounting for an arrested individual's belongings, it's very easy to falsify documents.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com