New Digital Money, New Digital Crimes
| | | | | | | | | | | New Digital Money, New Digital Crimes David G.W. Birch Unconditionally anonymous electronic money is a really, really bad idea. Prove me wrong. | | | The crypto opportunities for the gangsters are as big as the crypto opportunities for the GAFAs I wrote last week that governments will never allow anonymous digital currencies and my comments attracted a certain amount of controversy. And I understand why. But to those who say that uncensorable, untraceable digital cash would be a shield against dictators, a force for the oppressed and a boon to free men everywhere… well, I think it’s more complicated than that. The issue of anonymity in payments is complex and crucial and it deserves informed, calm, strategic thinking because the transition to digital currency touches so many aspects of society. One obvious and important aspect is crime. Would digital currency change crime? If I hire thugs to lure a cryptobaron to a hotel room and then beat him up to get $1m in bitcoins from him (as actually happened in Japan), is that a crypto-crime or just boring old extortion? If I use Craigslist to lure a HODLer to a street corner and then pull a gun on him and force him to transfer his bitcoins to me (as actually happened in New York), is that a crypto-crime or just boring old mugging? If I get hold of someone’s login details and transfer their bitcoins to myself (as has just happened in Springfield), is that a crypto-crime or just boring old fraud? If I kidnap the CEO of a cryptocurrency exchange and then release him after the payment of a $1 million bitcoin ransom is that, as the Ukrainian interior minister said at the time, "bitcoin kidnapping” or just boring old extortion?
