Ah ok, the use case is breaking the law.
What led you to think laws are being broken in those scenarios?
Law ≠ moralityb
Sure, but plenty of bad actors have broken the law as well - the examples of these are far more numerous. While there are hypothetical moral use cases for crypto, some of the most common actual uses are greed (yield farming, speculation), scams (rug pulls, pump and dumps, wash trading, ransomware), tax evasion, and as currency for contraband like drugs. What ratio of moral to immoral use cases is acceptable to the crypto community? 1:10? 1:100? Or is anything ok as long as someone out there is using it to escape repression?
Finding out that somebody used crypto to buy something that harmed your family shouldn't make you dislike crypto. Bad people will get a hold of weapons regardless.
If it didn't change anything then by the same token it wouldn't help people in oppressive regimes.
> Finding out that somebody used crypto to buy something that harmed your family shouldn't make you dislike crypto. Bad people will get a hold of weapons regardless.
Security is always a tradeoff. You can't make it impossible to get hold of weapons, but you can make it harder, and that matters at the margin.
I said "doesn't change anything there", not "doesn't change anything".
> Security is always a tradeoff. You can't make it impossible to get hold of weapons, but you can make it harder, and that matters at the margin.
The payment itself is not where these efforts should go to. Transport, manufacturing, advertising. These are all much more fruitful places to look at stopping illegal trade.
But there's a symmetry to the situations. To the extent that it helps people evade government controls, it will help people evade government controls.
> The payment itself is not where these efforts should go to. Transport, manufacturing, advertising. These are all much more fruitful places to look at stopping illegal trade.
That's pure whataboutism. Enforcing laws against bitcoin makes all kinds of illegal activity harder, without significant downsides for law abiding people. So it's a worthwhile measure, regardless of what else you do or don't do.
I said that crypto didn't create black market trading and so I'm unsure what you mean by this?
> That's pure whataboutism. Enforcing laws against bitcoin makes all kinds of illegal activity harder, without significant downsides for law abiding people. So it's a worthwhile measure, regardless of what else you do or don't do.
That's not what whataboutism means. I said that it's a better idea to target other aspects of the black market.