because they left it on a US exchange. They were not able to chase up the affiliate fee, which should give your pause to think about exactly how it can be reclaimed.

> bitcoin in it self is not an asset, just like paper money by itself is worthless.

I dunno man, i can give a paper $20 bill to a bartender and they give me beer. paper seems not to be worthless by itself.

> i'm not sure if it's as permissionless as you think. you would still need an internet connection, which in most cases require identification to setup. regular people aren't gonna implement the software themselves, so they have to get it from somewhere. the most widely distributed bitcoin wallets are not permissionless.

It is permissionless, in that nobody needs to grant permission to download/compile an open source product and use it. You have to have permission from your parents to be alive i guess...

> if you're trading bitcoin through an exchange (i.e 99% of the users), it's not anonymous.

Yes, and with the travel rules going in worldwide it will be even less. However, what the powers that be do not understand is that it is PERMISSIONLESS. Once the funds are in the UTXO, they can be spent anywhere, including non-KYC destinations, or even lightning channels. The industry wants to push the narrative that KYC-exchange -> ??? -> KYC-exchange implies ??? is the same beneficial owner. It isn't, and someone is in for a rude shock when their case falls apart due to bad assumptions. Ultimately, any regulation is a bandaid on a broken arm. The technology exists and is unstoppable.