More seriously, though, it is because non-Americans have sat passively by while Americans have run to the front of the parade and yelled, "Follow Me!!!" It is one of the things that we do very, very well.
The US tends to be the noisiest (especially in the media), but if you think that means that everything is happening there or that the rest is sitting passively by you're mistaken. 
Topic: . (Read 1076 times)
The only thing that bothers me, as a non-US citizen, is how US-centric all this discussion is.
This.
How did Bitcoin become centralized in Silicon Valley?
In the country most hostile to BTC?
The controversies being aired on these boards about the Bitcoin Foundation, impending regulation, etc., remind me of Dot.Com 1.0 back in the 1990s.
In our day, we wuz gunna conquer de woild, we wuz, with our server-based payment systems, with static IP addresses and known locations, that were one subpoena or administrative decision away from being shut down. We believed, naively, that we were immune from government intervention, because we had taken the Information Superhighway to Cyberspace. [cue cheesy sci-fi music]
It didn't work out that way.
Today's True Scotsmen come across just like their counterparts from twenty years ago, who argued vociferously against the regulation of the Internet. We actually had flamewars about whether or not websites should be allowed to offer goods and services for sale... like, for profit! Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it, and they look like teenage boys who act as if they've invented beer, girls, and loud music for the first time in all of human history.
Today, individuals who rest their heads on pillows that are within concentric US jurisdictions—local, state, and federal—are working themselves into a lather over whether Bitcoin users who are similarly located should submit to the 'jackbooted thugs'. My answer now is the same as it was back then: Yes. If you disagree, last time I checked US Immigration had not yet instituted exit visas, and one is free to relocate to a less restrictive regime.
If you want to set yourself on fire—or merely make yourself a Person of Interest by shooting your mouth off in public—in protest of the unfairness of it all, go right ahead. That way, you draw attention away from me. Meanwhile, those of us who see regulation, taxes, rent, utility bills, etc. as costs of doing business will include these in our financial projections when assessing the viability of prospective plans. Do we like regulation, taxes, rent, utility bills, etc.? No, but every minute spent arguing about those costs is a minute not spent earning more money.
The regulatory panel at Bitcoin 2013 was very informative, not only for the prepared remarks on the dais, but for the unscripted comments from one of the jackbooted thugs in the audience. (Actually, she seems like a very nice lady.) It isn't that they want to shut us down, it is that they want their cut, and they don't want us helping to fund terrorism.
If the public image of Bitcoin is snot-nosed punks, it makes it very easy to ban Bitcoin. If the public image of Bitcoin is 21st Century Dot.Com 2.0, some of us could be running this generation's Amazon, Google, or PayPal.
In our day, we wuz gunna conquer de woild, we wuz, with our server-based payment systems, with static IP addresses and known locations, that were one subpoena or administrative decision away from being shut down. We believed, naively, that we were immune from government intervention, because we had taken the Information Superhighway to Cyberspace. [cue cheesy sci-fi music]
It didn't work out that way.
Today's True Scotsmen come across just like their counterparts from twenty years ago, who argued vociferously against the regulation of the Internet. We actually had flamewars about whether or not websites should be allowed to offer goods and services for sale... like, for profit! Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it, and they look like teenage boys who act as if they've invented beer, girls, and loud music for the first time in all of human history.
Today, individuals who rest their heads on pillows that are within concentric US jurisdictions—local, state, and federal—are working themselves into a lather over whether Bitcoin users who are similarly located should submit to the 'jackbooted thugs'. My answer now is the same as it was back then: Yes. If you disagree, last time I checked US Immigration had not yet instituted exit visas, and one is free to relocate to a less restrictive regime.
If you want to set yourself on fire—or merely make yourself a Person of Interest by shooting your mouth off in public—in protest of the unfairness of it all, go right ahead. That way, you draw attention away from me. Meanwhile, those of us who see regulation, taxes, rent, utility bills, etc. as costs of doing business will include these in our financial projections when assessing the viability of prospective plans. Do we like regulation, taxes, rent, utility bills, etc.? No, but every minute spent arguing about those costs is a minute not spent earning more money.
The regulatory panel at Bitcoin 2013 was very informative, not only for the prepared remarks on the dais, but for the unscripted comments from one of the jackbooted thugs in the audience. (Actually, she seems like a very nice lady.) It isn't that they want to shut us down, it is that they want their cut, and they don't want us helping to fund terrorism.
If the public image of Bitcoin is snot-nosed punks, it makes it very easy to ban Bitcoin. If the public image of Bitcoin is 21st Century Dot.Com 2.0, some of us could be running this generation's Amazon, Google, or PayPal.
Just as I begin to lose faith in Bitcoin, mainly because of many of it's followers, someone comes along and writes something completely rational. Am I on the right forum or is this a Phishing site?
Either case, this pics for you:
Of course the US will try to regulate exchanges from/to bitcoin in the US. Other governments will likely do the same in their country.
The only thing that bothers me, as a non-US citizen, is how US-centric all this discussion is. But I agree with you that it is a complete waste of time.
The only thing that bothers me, as a non-US citizen, is how US-centric all this discussion is. But I agree with you that it is a complete waste of time.
Quote
If you want to set yourself on fire—or merely make yourself a Person of Interest by shooting your mouth off in public—in protest of the unfairness of it all, go right ahead.
Fearmongering is a waste of time, too, by the way. Being too scared to speak your mind out of fear of becoming a "person of interest" sounds borderline paranoid. Then again, this seems common in US based discussions about government.
Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it, and they look like teenage boys who act as if they've invented beer, girls, and loud music for the first time in all of human history.
So true. Just stop and think about how many times throughout history people have tried to take back their economic freedom using peer-to-peer cryptocurrencies and have failed miserably.
Jump to: