Definitely food for thought... But it's definitely not a victimless crime.
At best it's inflationary, and at worst the victim gets punished for being victimised.
Discussion
I'm gonna write a full length post about it to properly articulate my ideas and where I'm coming from.
If the bank takes the hit and the bank is insured it's absolutely a victimless crime.
But again to be clear I'm not advocating for fraud - in a parallel Bitcoin circular economy, people would pay each other in sats instead of a CBDC.
Assuming these transactions are not reported on tax returns like cash in hand deals today, the only loser here is a thief.
I'll tell you what's not a victimless crime. The artificially inflated fees that get pulled out of your pocket every time you make a Bitcoin transaction. Because of so-called ordinals..💀
That's not a crime and it makes no victims. I disagree 100% with that.
Not justifying ordinals, just don't see where the (non ordinal scammed) victims are.
It absolutely is a crime. Bitcoiners paid millions in artificially inflated fees because of so-called #ordinal..⚖️👮♂️💀
Here's the post:
nostr:naddr1qqyxgdpc8qckye3hqgs0plu8uaukh2r0ep95spajtfw7ugrdwfxx7cd23pfewk3emmh07kqrqsqqqa28lwfgxk
Here's a TL;DR:
Yep, the very definition of a man in the middle #attack. For these characters it's a #lifestyle. A perceived #birthright.
They don't need no stinking #Proof #Of #Work..😆😂🤣🤭