speaker
stringclasses 2
values | text
stringlengths 4
2.14k
|
|---|---|
A
|
I just think that's custodial. I don't know. I would not bet against that. I realize.
|
B
|
I definitely wouldn't bet against it. I realize we have been saying it for a while.
|
A
|
I'm like, um, also, uh, what is your take on Aml Kyc? I actually want to talk to him a bit more about this, but, like, he's of the mindset that there are definitely reforms to make. Right. Um, there's over, like, overstepping bounds with Aml Kyc, and also it does help keep the bad guys out of the system. And, you know, his notion of society, which I agree with, is it's all about trade offs. And we have a lot of things that we as a society are trying to optimize. And one of those things is not everything, but one of those things is we're trying to, like, generally keep bad guys from effing things up for everybody else. And so how do you do that without AMl Kyc? And I think he would be more in favor of, like, reforms for AML Kyc or, like, tweaks on it, but not, like, completely abolishing it and getting rid of it. What's your take on this?
|
B
|
I mean, I'm not going to say that, like, universally, Kyc AML is bad, of course. It's just like, where do we draw the line is I'm uncertain about, because, like, if we let down this date, apparatus will collect as much data on us as possible, surveil us as much as possible, regardless of, like, the utility function of that. Like, the state apparatus is not doing the calculus of how. How much are we infringing on the right to privacy? Versus, like, what benefit are we getting from it? They are only considering what benefit are we getting from it. So, like, a financial system that is by default, like, not, not surveilling like that, which is what crypto is, because, like, the banking system is more or less by default, surveilling, because if you are an LLC, you are in a financial LLC, you're going to be, uh, basically an extension of the surveillance arm of the state if you're inside the United States. Uh, so at least in the crypto world, we have, like, a blank slate where, like, the best thing about this is, like, the state gets to leverage as much data as, like, the individual because it's a public, free, open, permissionless, uh, auditable financial system. So, like, we all have access to the same amount of data, and that's something that I appreciate. And so the state doesn't have any edge over anyone else in terms of, like, what data is available. And so, like, yeah, do all of your KYC AML using all the publicly available data? To me, that sounds like a fair system.
|
A
|
You know, I actually think Patrick would be open to this. And again, we didn't have time to talk about it, but he was almost alluding to it. He said that even the bank secrecy act in the 1970s, which was, like, put in place basically to stop mobs, they were carrying briefcases full of cash, you know, like, duffel bags full of cash into the banking system. Like, where is this cash coming from? So to sort of stop that behavior, it did not anticipate the digital age, where now every single transaction is on some sort of bank ledger somewhere, credit card ledger somewhere. And so what has the state done? It's just like a vacuum. Just, like, sucked up all of that information, right. And they don't even have to directly collect it. They just, you know, you could buy it. In some cases, you could just, like, grab it from PayPal or, like, you know, any, any bank and just kind of suck it in. And then there are also these things like SARS, where notices are filed to fincen, that kind of thing. But the idea of a bill of rights, like a digital bill of rights, I am so on board with this concept and this idea because, like, you know, when the framers of the constitution, like, mapping out the constitution, they also saw this problem that the state would continue to, like, encroach individual freedom and power and, like, do it and do it and do it. It's like a machine. Once you start it, it's just going to stop. It's just going to eat everything. It's going to take as much as it can. And to your point of, like, but where does it stop? Well, the nice thing about the Bill of rights is we set some places where it stops. Right? Like amendment one. Congress shall make no law respecting establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. Like, we drew some lines in the constitution. It's like, speech needs to be free. Religion, you could pick your religion, freedom of the press, freedom of people to peacefully assemble. I think we need something similar in the kind of the digital age. Right. The right to own digital property, the right to encryption, for example.
|
B
|
These things should be the right to own digital property. Isn't that kind of contained in the original Bill of Rights?
|
A
|
I think possibly, but something like the right to encryption, let's say right.
|
B
|
Or just making it more explicit, you mean?
|
A
|
Yes, and we don't, we don't have, like, privacy baked in to the Bill of Rights, really, anywhere. It's almost like it's sort of implied in the Fourth Amendment, but it's not like it's through, like, supreme court types of decisions, and it's not as strong, like, right to encryption would be incredible. For example, how strongly is that preserved in us society? I feel like you could have a bad five year run in any democratic country and somehow end up with encryption outlawed. You know what I mean? And that's really, that's dangerous. Anyway, I'm all about, and I think even people like Patrick would be very much all about enshrining some civil protections now that we've entered this digital age for, like, you know, just, just to make sure our nation states don't encroach on our freedoms, because that's the default. They will if they can. I don't know how you create, like, such political will. It's usually, it's like generally we need.
|
B
|
Like, a really crypto first president.
|
A
|
Yeah. It's just like something probably really bad has to happen for us to go to these extents, but, yeah, it's sorely needed is what I would say. What else you got?
|
B
|
I don't know. Should we wrap this? We're at 35 minutes.
|
A
|
Oh, God. All right, guys, sorry we went long. Hope you enjoyed the episode. Give us any feedback if you have it. Thanks a lot.
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.