340
Dutch court convicts engineer to 5 years for maintaining crypto mixer Tornado Cash
(www.patrick-breyer.de)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 16 May 2024
340 points (98.0% liked)
Privacy
32482 readers
231 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
The same logic should apply to manufacturers whose products are used in committing a crime...
Uhh really hope that's sarcasm...
I dunno. If you manufacture tools designed specifically for killing, for example, you've definitely played a part in somebody's use of your tools for killing.
I can't think of many examples. Maybe electric chairs and guillotines.
Military weapons, which should be banned lol.
You cannot get select fire firearms as a civilian, they're effectively banned.
You've never heard of guns?
They're not necessarily made for killing. Most people defending themself with a pistol (whose only purpose is for shooting humans) would not want to shoot for the head or chest
Ah yes, I forgot that all pistols have a "wound only" setting.
Was tornado cash made for laundering money?
My point is that gun manufacturers will say they make their products for defense, not killing. Knife manufacturers, same. Hammer manufacturers, same.
There's very few products which everyone can objectively say are designed for killing.
No, guns are tools designed specifically for killing. They have no use as defense if they can't kill. They're not shields. You also can't hammer a nail with a gun, or cut a steak with a gun.
You can sport shoot with them, you can hunt for food with them, and every military uses them...for mainly defense.
How does hunting not involve killing?
How does such military defense not involve the act or threat of killing?
This is like saying veterinarians are killers with their tools because they euthanize animals....
Just having arms is a deterant, yes firearms are designed to destroy, they're also designed as a defensive tool.
You clearly ignored sports shooting which is an actual sport, even an event in the Olympics.
The fuck? Vets do much, much more than just euthanize animals. What do guns do other than shoot projectiles intended to kill?
How do guns defend without using the threat of violence? How do they act as a physical shield?
Yes, it's possible to practice using tools designed specifically for killing. Cars are tools designed specifically for transport, and people have contests for driving those, too.
Why is it so hard for you to accept that guns are tools designed specifically for killing? That's literally just what they are.
Just using your silly logic...you know vets have captive bolt guns and suppressed firearms as well, does that make their tools pointless because they only kill?
Same way a sword or knife can be used to kill and also defend, its a force multiplier.
Glad you're grasping it
Because I'm not the one that suggests magically thinking banning them all will make the world a safer place. Do you think the 100lb woman can defend against a 250lb man? Or what about minorities who are threated by a few racist fucks? Or an LGBTQ+ person who has a bunch of bigots trying to kill them? Should these people just not get a gun because it's designed to kill? What tool do you suggest they use?
Where did I suggest magical bans? You're projecting a ton of your own insecurities onto me.
None of your rant contradicts the fact that guns are tools designed specifically for killing.
This entire thread chain is in place to suggest that only guns which are designed to kill, should have their manufacturs liable for what other people do with the product. No other industry was brought up, just guns. Why? Because at the end of the day, you're all for complete bans, and no amount of "nuh uh, we're fine with hunting rifles" or whatever else bullshit, that's the end goal...you just try and sugar coat it so you can try and gain some support for the idea.
It was a single example as a thought exercise.
All the rest are words you're putting on other people's mouths.
No I'm not, that's literally the end goal of all people who are anti-gun.
There you go again, putting words in even more people's mouths.
Anyway, what would that have to do with the fact that guns are tools.designed specifically for killing?
Naa that's literally the end goal. It's pointless to sugar coat it.
Because I'm not the one suggesting that companies be liable for what people do with their products. Way more people a year die from alcohol than guns (it's like a 3xs as many) and alcohol has no other purpose but a vice, yet you're probably not going to suggest that companies be liable for drunk drivers who kill people, nor are you going to suggest that they cover all the alcohol related health issues...are you.
No, guns are just tools designed specifically for killing.
I mean I've already pointed out other uses, but ok...
No, you haven't. You've given some examples of how they are useful due to being tools designed specifically for killing, though.
Yea sports shooting is totally useful because they're made to kill paper targets and clay doves. Sure thing
Yes, it's possible to practice using tools designed specifically for killing. Cars are tools designed specifically for transport, and people have contests for driving those, too.
Uh, I started this thread, and I brought up other products: electric chairs and the guillotine.
And, no, hunting rifles are the worst kind of guns. They are definitely designed for killing. But my point was that not all guns are designed for killing.
Thread chain == thread. I was talking about noodle...and wtf why are hunting rifles the worst type?
This. I guess people here aren't familiar with skeet
Yes, and guns are one of them.
Agreed, it's very rare, guns are absolutely one of those things though. They're the perfect evolution of the personal handheld killing tool. You just point it at the thing you want dead, push the button, and you've got a good chance of deadding it immediately with your first try.
Guns don't have a secondary use, like how a knife can whittle a tree branch into a nice spoon, or cut some thread, or skin an animal. Guns cause massive damage to whatever they are pointed at, and sometimes to the things around that thing too, if you're particularly unlucky.
They're the solution to a problem when you need the solution to be "escalate this situation to 1000% and start killing stuff".
Gun manufacturers who say they're made for defence and not killing must be delusional or confused about what their products do, or just lying to their potential customers for.... who even knows what reason.
They are made to defend yourself by killing the person you need to be defended from. Pure and simple. They are truly as cut and dry a tool for killing things as there is.
Nobody is out there shooting people defensively with some non-lethal mode built in to their high speed projectile metal lumps that tear through the human body, causing parts of it to explode and massive trauma to the surrounding tissues and organs.
Do guns exist that fire beanbags, or tranquilliser darts, or such? Absolutely, but none of us here are talking about those types of more specialist guns. We're talking about your standard gun, the kind they sell to lots of civilians in countries like the USA.
What do you think the first digital computer was invented for? Hint: it wasn't world peace
I'm downvoting you, but only because you wrote "whose only purpose is for shooting humans", which is false statement.
Really, you could have used better examples like brass knuckles. They can't be used for anything else other than injuring and killing people.
You hoped right.
Well apparently the rest of the people here didn't get the memo
That logic they're using should be burned with fire.
With that logic, cars being highjacked for a crime should make the company liable for the crime (Revolutionary actions would also count as crimes). That gives car manufacturers alot more legal reason for adding kill switches to their vehicles' engines, which would most likely be used by cops for whatever the fuck they want.
How about DJI's drones being used to kill individuals in Ukraine? Steam decks are currently also being used by Ukraine to control machine gun turrets remotely, and they're able to be used that way explicitly because they use regular OS's (a major boon to its users.)
This type of regulation would only further lead to anti-consumer products, and a stronger police state.