They would be. It’s obvious to anyone with a brain that this is over broad and not the intent of the statute. So hopefully the judge has a brain. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and the easiest place to draw it is by making control a prerequisite.

It doesn't make sense. The State doing state things.

Keep reading the DoJ document, it explains why. We need to level up here.

Because the courts decide the meaning of statues, even if the statute seems obvious to us.

One difference is that the samurai guys were getting paid and there's likely many transactions they can find were from some ill gotten bitcoin paying fees directly to them. Could be seen as a business that's getting fees for facilitating money transferring.

What USB cables do you recommend. Need one that's registered as a money transmitter. Should also be able to charge my phone.

Agreed, with their definition, our brains are money transmitters.

They shouldn't have been calling wallets wallets. Maybe key manager. Nobody would have cared. And there's nothing in the wallet except for keys.

Or fiber optic cables and routers and kubernetes and AWS and pretty much all software and infrastructure connected to the internet. Ridiculous.

How is me paying for groceries in cash not money transmitting? It's just literally applying the English language definitions of transmit and money.

Layers matter

Then an ordinary wallet is also transferring money e.g.: from my home to the grocery store

and browsers.... I mean... browser extensions... This is some scary shit ...

The more rules the State makes, the less effect the body of rules has. This is end game for them.

solid point

ISPs ARE money transimitters🤣

Data transmitters are money transmitters?

The absolutely insane Pandora’s box this “interpretation” would open makes me all the more confident that the lawyers who are Bitcoin-facing will annihilate any attempts to pass this through in court. 🙏

Why do you even try to make sense of laws that are permanently bent, violated, or outright ignored by the people supposed to be upholding them ?

the logical conclusion here is that money that can be self-custodied is illegal.

ISPs also fully surveil your data and backdoor the govt 🫠

Also custodial wallets

value transmission = money transmission what legal difference Ask Attorney General please

anything of value (cowdung, dogshit , satoshishit) can be converted to money or viceversa in barter system - barter can happen between virtual <-> physical or virtual<-> virtual what if offical state money is NOT involved at all? law can interpreted just for benefit of state apparatus and to manife...

Craigslist is facilitating money transmission

But wallets don't transmit any money. They allow for the modification of a field on the ledger to alter the private key that has access to the Bitcoin.

If I trick a politician into saying a seed phrase during a game of charades he is an illegal money transmitter THINK DIFRNET

The coin-join protocol that Samourai used was custodial meaning they moved other peoples money making them a transmitter. WHOOPS Almost as if all custodial software is a scam