The trillion dollar rent seekers as you call them were some of the first to get legal counseling on this issue. You're just ignorant.
Discussion
cool
"some lawyers said its ok this one time"
clearly that means it could never ever be a problem
wtf is wrong with you man?
when did NOT thinking adversarialy become ok?
I dislike Kratter as much as the next guy but BSV surviving is NOT proof illegal content on the chain will not be an issue. maybe its just nobody cares about BSV...?
The onus is not on me to prove a negative.
The onus is on the fearmongers to prove their claims.
that logic isn’t assuring
How do you think the general public responds to articles like this?
How do I even talk to my friends and family about Bitcoin ?
I have had to explain this shit to people in real life that aren't interested in Bitcoin.
People who have no idea about any of it but heard something somewhere and worried about me getting arrested for running a node warning me it's dangerous.
You think that's going to help with mainstream adoption?
🤣
Don't we all agree that the law fair imposed on tornado cash developers and samurai developers is a travesty?
And it's that kind of power you're assuming won't be leveraged against CSAM on a node?
If software developers are at risk what makes you think that node runners aren't?
Its a lot easier to go after developers than individual node operators
so its not really an analogous threat model
except that they had guidance that what they were doing was within the boundaries of the law too
which reinforces my point that its about *what the state is threatened by*
not what precedent says.