There is a fraudulent bitcoin user who goes by the online name of "Hess".
It would be expensive to use ordinary legal processes because his false paypal accounts are in multiple countries, his registered mobile is in Sweden and he pretended to pay for bitcoin in Australia, with either fraudulent or hijacked paypal accounts from various countries. When paypal do a chargeback, legit bitcoin sellers are left with a debt according to paypal equal to the trade bought by Hess. The weakness in the system is that the non-bitcoin end of the transaction is not being honoured.
Due process must verify a suspect before he is made to pay for what he bought.
Get Hess.
Topic: As a community, we need to be able to govern ourselves (Read 5166 times)
1. Love one another.
2. Bitcoin Protocol
(not necessarily in that order).
2. Bitcoin Protocol
(not necessarily in that order).
ASIC providers are (usually) legal companies and they are governed by the law.
Bitcoin already has rules. It's called the bitcoin protocol. The rules you seek are about something else that bares little relation to bitcoin.
But we already do govern ourselves. To make obvious rules which are already obvious to us is a moot point; to make new rules which aren't obvious to us is in the interest of another, for if those rules were rules we agreed upon, they would already be obvious. What we're talking about, when it comes to making rules, is curbing the actions of other people, which we already do:
An example of curbing actions
In this example, there is no rule against scamming; there is, however, still a change in action, for people who become acquainted with scammers are more likely to avoid scams. In this case, we are not stopping scammers by telling them not to scam (ineffective, I would say, since you can't ban a scammer before he is known to be a scammer), but instead stopping scammers by educating people so the scam cannot happen to begin with.
Besides, if government wants to impose more rule upon us, making our own rules won't help; their rules would always supersede ours, they're the ones with the tanks after all.
An example of curbing actions
In this example, there is no rule against scamming; there is, however, still a change in action, for people who become acquainted with scammers are more likely to avoid scams. In this case, we are not stopping scammers by telling them not to scam (ineffective, I would say, since you can't ban a scammer before he is known to be a scammer), but instead stopping scammers by educating people so the scam cannot happen to begin with.
Besides, if government wants to impose more rule upon us, making our own rules won't help; their rules would always supersede ours, they're the ones with the tanks after all.
We need clear, simple rules that enhance rather than stifle the progress that crypto-currencies are capable of...
I believe that the problems currently being heatedly discussed about ASIC providers deserve the attention of the Bitcoin Foundation. Specifically, the delay in shipment of hundreds of thousands of Avalon chips is causing a firestorm. If the Bitcoin Foundation does not act quickly to kill the flames, I am afraid litigations will come flying from all quarters, and government regulators will have a very good reason to come in and make the rules for us.
I believe that the problems currently being heatedly discussed about ASIC providers deserve the attention of the Bitcoin Foundation. Specifically, the delay in shipment of hundreds of thousands of Avalon chips is causing a firestorm. If the Bitcoin Foundation does not act quickly to kill the flames, I am afraid litigations will come flying from all quarters, and government regulators will have a very good reason to come in and make the rules for us.
Rules are very expensive, and are typically not worth the cost. The existence of litigation does not indicate the need more rules. Litigation can be sufficient.
Rules derived from the nature, voluntary courts, commercial judges.
We need clear, simple rules that enhance rather than stifle the progress that crypto-currencies are capable of. Before cars came along, there was no need for traffic lights. We need a Bitcoin traffic light, whose sole purpose is not to herd us into a corral, but rather to prevent us from bumping into each other. This is one of the functions of the Bitcoin Foundation, and meeting with government regulators is one good step in this direction. Meanwhile, in the absence of such rules, we can rely on common sense to resolve issues -- and right now there are issues raging in the mining side of Bitcoin.
I believe that the problems currently being heatedly discussed about ASIC providers deserve the attention of the Bitcoin Foundation. Specifically, the delay in shipment of hundreds of thousands of Avalon chips is causing a firestorm. If the Bitcoin Foundation does not act quickly to kill the flames, I am afraid litigations will come flying from all quarters, and government regulators will have a very good reason to come in and make the rules for us.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3054081
I believe that the problems currently being heatedly discussed about ASIC providers deserve the attention of the Bitcoin Foundation. Specifically, the delay in shipment of hundreds of thousands of Avalon chips is causing a firestorm. If the Bitcoin Foundation does not act quickly to kill the flames, I am afraid litigations will come flying from all quarters, and government regulators will have a very good reason to come in and make the rules for us.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3054081
Jump to: