Instead of encouraging a flame war, why don't you set a good example (as a hero member) and just be respectful?
Ok. I respectfully request that you put a bit more thought into your posts.
Furthermore, I respectfully request that you attempt to avoid making false statements and presenting them as facts.
Additionally, I respectfully request that you explain why you believe that "governments
need to know the amount of money going into their country and the amount of money leaving their country".
Finally, I respectfully request that you not waste time suggesting that a currency give up fungibility to satisfy your personal preferences. It should be clear by now that it isn't possible to get consensus on such a proposal. Since the bitcoin protocol can't change without nearly 100% consensus of all users, it should be clear that such a proposal isn't valid.
I am just stating crazy showerthoughts I have. I don't put much thought into debunking them at the moment I post them because I like to keep a stream of consciousness going.
What false statement did I pose as fact?
They need to know the amount of money for, like CliveK said, economic reasons.
I don't think Bitcoin will ever be allowed in its current state by any first-world government to get very big. The reason being is that all transactions are anonymous. Governments need to know the amount of money going into their country and the amount of money leaving their country. My proposal for this is to have an option (default value: true) on each transaction to get the geolocation of each IP (Country only) and put that in the txn hash.
you would be allowed to disable this option but the majority of users would be too lazy to change it and a slightly accurate amount is generated per country.
Does this make sense?
You started good, but then you are completely wrong imho.
First of all, clearly the government will try - sooner or later - to ban any crypto. That's something you've got right. (Just the reasons are different by far.)
As others stated, the transactions are far from anonymous. Even the possible excuse (which you didn't mention, I know) that the governments may not have enough people qualified enough to check the transactions is kinda weak, I am sure that NSA has enough specialists, which already check what funds go where (you know the drill: terrorists and such).
The governments don't know already how much fiat is in or out their country, so... yeah. Another wrong assumption.
Changing bitcoin by your ideas is.. let's say childish. No chance. Your conclusions are wrong by far and your idea is - sorry to say - far from brilliant and far from useful. And the people that want to hide will disable that "feature" anyway.
The transactions are pretty anonymous compared to PayPal or bank transfer, I guess that is what I meant. sorry I wasn't very clear on that point.
They do know, google "m0
" for a rough estimate of notes and such.
"And the people that want to hide will disable that "feature" anyway." that's why the feature is enabled. I'm saying that people who use Bitcoin in day-to-day transactions, the SAME people who use Paypal for day-to-day transactions, will NOT disable the feature. It's simple psychology, that's why sites automatically check "send me a newsletter" every time you sign up. It's easier to not say no, than it is to say no.
If imports are higher than the exports for a nation the value of the currency is negatively impacted which is one of the reasons why governments want to know how much money goes in and out the country, rightly or wrongly. It is an economic indicator.
"Internet is for everyone - but it won't be if we are not responsible in its use and mindful of the rights of others who share its wealth. Let us dedicate ourselves to the responsible use of this new medium and to the proposition that with the freedoms the Internet enables comes a commensurate responsibility to use these powerful enablers with care and consideration. For those who choose to abuse these privileges, let us dedicate ourselves to developing the necessary tools to combat the abuse and punish the abuser." - V. Cerf
Thank you for recognizing some of the validity in my statement.
Instead of encouraging a flame war, why don't you set a good example (as a hero member) and just be respectful?
You started it, with your title to this thread.
There is an obvious problem with someone who only has 37 posts and has only been here since
August 09, 2014 starting a thead entitled "An obvious problem with Bitcoin" in a forum filled people who know more about Bitcoin in their little finger than you.
Do you see that the title of your thread is calling everyone here stupid? Here is how you come across:
"I know next to nothing about Bitcoin, and I know you guys have been here supporting and studying this thing for years and years but come on guys how could you lame ass idiots miss such an
obvious issue. Even though I really don't know anything about Bitcoin I am way smarter than you guys so I will do you all a big favor - here is how to fix it."
That is how you came across. That is why you rubbed people the wrong way (including me). That is why you are being flamed.
Was that your intention?
If you really think i meant that, you should take a look at how you view others on the Internet. Don't make assumptions, either, like I "know next to nothing about Bitcoin". I've been using the protocol off and on since early 2012, just because I registered a month ago doesn't mean I learned about it a month ago.
