Exactly. Whenever I see something like this (e.g. Philippines police has also bulldozed some expensive cars recently) I always wonder if they actually are idiots or have extracted the valuable internal parts first.
I suspect big conspicuous destructions like this are the reverse of US asset confiscation; destroying the thing is a signal that you're really serious about stopping it, rather than just confiscating it and letting the police keep the proceeds.
Perhaps there are reasons beyond my understanding why this is a wrong idea but if I were the head of the government I would rather officially sell the machines to a legitimate tax-paying mining operation or (if we are low on electricity and don't want any mining in the country) sell them on eBay to whatever a foreign party interested to get the funds for the budget. If the hardware would appear at an illegal mining facility in the country again I would just confiscate and sell them again making even more funds for the budget.
"Hello, Dear Sir! I am most foreign of foreigners, wishing to buy your Bitcoin Printing Mint Equipment, paid in your local currency, for export out of your fine country."
"... really? You're the guy we seized these from, holding your finger under your nose like a mustache. To cover your mustache."
If you object to the entire principle (or, at least, need to be seen objecting to the entire principle), destroying the assets in a visible public spectacle is the way to go.
California had at least some high profile "street racer" destruction back in the day, and I don't believe any western government, upon seizing a big load of cocaine, goes about trying to figure out how they can unload it to someone else. At least, in easily tracked ways...
Ok, let them buy it again and seize it from them again if they use it unlawfully. Double profit.
> seizing a big load of cocaine, goes about trying to figure out how they can unload it to someone else
Because there is an internationally agreed war on drugs. Cocaine (unlike meth which can be officially prescribed as Desoxyn in the US and heroine which also is used medically in some cases e.g. in the UK) is officially considered pure evil with no legitimate medical use (it can be used for good but in practice 99.9% of its use is abuse and even the 0.1% who use it for good also do that illegally).
AFAIK there is no international agreement on fighting cryptocurrencies mining so far, the mining equipment (let alone the power supply units) are perfectly legal to manufacture, sell, buy, own and use (unless you actually steal electricity to power them) in many countries.
Even such a totalitarian and unreasonably conservative country as Iran officially allowed (and taxed) mining until they found out they are running low on electricity.
> Cocaine (unlike meth which can be officially prescribed as Desoxyn in the US and heroin which also is used medically in some cases e.g. in the UK) is officially considered pure evil with no legitimate medical use
This isn't true at all; cocaine is a Schedule II drug, not a Schedule I like marijuana. It has historically had plenty of medical use.
Did I say it does? It might. But what you said was that it is "officially considered pure evil with no legitimate medical use". There is an official schedule of drugs organized by how evil they are and whether they have a medical use. Cocaine is listed as having medical use. This is, to the maximum possible extent, the official opinion of the United States. Where are you getting your official statements from?
This is why you’re not a head of government. Heads of government realize that a public display of power and consequence is much more valuable than a few hundred K revenue that you can shake down out of anyone.
My point was things seem to be going the opposite of what you're wanting. More and more things seem to be contracted out to different companies. Warfare/mercinaries is a big area, however, jails are another.
We do this here in the US too. Grey market cars that are imported and don't meet US emissions get crushed. People caught street racing have had their cars impounded and crushed. It's just to make a show.
Yep. I have a buddy who works at $BIG_US_RETAILER and he weekly has to go into the stock room with a box cutter and scissors to destroy unsold clothing.
I have also heard big box retailers (i.e. Best Buy) will destroy unsold items to discourage employees from purposefully hiding or down-selling things in the hope they can grab it for cheap or free.
Though a lot of places will unload these items to wholesalers or discount retailers, and some gets donated to clothing charities. It goes through a few steps first.
This feels like such a waste. Yeah, let's destroy electronics (when there is a silicone shortage) and let's destroy clothing (when a large percentage of the people in the world walk around in rags).
Makes me unbearably sad we're such a wasteful species.
I wonder if this is also the case in Singapore - the only known good dictatorship in the world where the leader could have easily banned this behaviour.
Yeah, but this is the equivalent of bulldozing a house because someone committed a crime in it. Sure, I get you're serious, but I also get you're being wasteful.
I think they also said that they knock down houses that have illegal electricity connections to steal electricity - this punishment is probably just the equivalent
On the other hand big destructive displays like this are big signals that it’s not police corruption and theft (like with the perverse incentives “civil forfeiture” creates in the US)
My personal view is that the government should never be able to profit from prosecuting a crime. Law enforcement should never be a money making venture, and it would never be possible to implement a system that overcomes the perverse incentives so long as it is.
I don't think the financial disincentive is necessarily corrupt, in the form of fines or asset forfeiture, but I think that they should never be allowed to contribute to government revenue in any way.
If the government has any incentive to prosecute somebody, other than a well founded and provable basis for believing they committed a crime, then the justice system just becomes a weapon to turn against the citizens it's supposed to be protecting. If the government has a financial incentive to prosecute certain crimes over others, then how the law is enforced is not going to align with community needs. For instance, that's why there's never enough police to attend burglaries, but always enough police for handing out speeding tickets.
This. In a corrupt country, not destroying the seized equipment in theatrical fashion makes everybody assume cops/government just took it and used or re-sold it themselves, individually.
Similar reason why drugs are destroyed with a lot of fanfare in most Latin American countries (er, when they are). Surely it'd be easier and cleaner to bury it somewhere after soaking it or something, but no, they need to make a pyramid of drugs and have someone throw a pyre at it to create a big symbolic bonfire that is a toxic mess to clean up.
They can just as easily be signals of corruption. I have a friend who owns a bar on a beach in Malaysia. He isn't willing to pay the requested bribes to the local cops, so every winter they douse it in gasoline and burn it to the ground. He rebuilds every year; it costs less than the bribes.
