So you mean that,
  1. Govt agencies already know about everything and anything this subject is about, but passively.
  2. Due to passive nature, the actions are post incident and not pre. So there is a risk of many ticking time-bombs which some JB (Jack Bauer or James Bond or Jai Singh Rathore) would diffuse. Sorry for being dramatic, the purpose is to make the point, and nothing else.
  3. The subjected proposal doesn't breach the decentralisation, but just not like swiss democracy.
I am not a legal expert, but know this much that there are 2 kinds of crimes, one against liberty and other against life. Most of online privacy advocacy is for liberty. But money is attached to life and not liberty. So this has to change. It means life for many and many depend on it.

And the appeal is, Let us get active.

PS: I do not own much of bitcoins to be an advocate, but many others do and any mayhem would affect me somehow, even if in farthest of world.

Best,

Prabhat Kumar Singh


On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:39 AM, prabhat <prabhatkr@gmail.com> wrote:
So where is the solution? What to do?

This is a development list; organizations like https://coincenter.org/ work on high-level policy issues.

Last I heard, competent law enforcement organizations said they were perfectly capable of tracking down criminals using Bitcoin using traditional investigative techniques (like infiltrating criminal organizations or setting up honeypots). Given how many "dark markets" have either disappeared or been taken down, it seems they are correct.

--
--
Gavin Andresen