Topic: Bitcoin evangelist Michael Saylor says crypto regulations would speed adoption (Read 570 times)

You touch an important point, we want adoption of course but at what cost? If that means giving up the core concepts of bitcoin then we are better off without that massive adoption and we could just bid our time until the moment is right, however institutional investors, which are mostly interested in the profits this market can produce, do not care at all and just see bitcoin as yet another asset from which they can earn some money, so it is obvious they will push for the market to be regulated since they think this will bring even more money to their pockets.

Decentralised exchange is an option for exchange deregulation, However, DEX has many limitation. Most traders of bitcoin still need to move their coins in fiat hence P2P from some centralized exchanges keep seeing high volume trade. We now have over 10 type of blockchain DEX which will massive coin movement as new investors come in.

I know it hurts but it's the sacrifice we have to if we want Bitcoin to be mainstream of payment and you seem not to understand that the government can not regulate Bitcoin or the market but they are going to regulate major crypto exchange and organizations.

I never said the government regulation will reduce risk but it will help adoption because there are people who still don't trust crypto because the government is not involved.

The government can not regulate the crypto market but in the future, the institutional investor may have the power to manipulate the market just like the whales did in the previous market because they are currently the major holder.

Where are we really heading to? We all used to boast of how Bitcoin is a currency that was created for our freedom and how we can now be able to do most things and be free from the government, but now you people are talking about needing government regulation, doesn’t that defeat the main purpose as to which Bitcoin was created for? How exactly would having government regulate the market be able to reduce the risk and increase adoption?

If the government starts regulating the crypto market, it doesn’t change anything for the better, rather things might even get worse. Anyways, what did I know? I would just stay and watch where the market is heading to.

With regulations, of course, it will provide guarantees for us in carrying out every crypto transaction, maybe indeed we have to pay taxes if the government implements regulations on crypto, but as long as the tax is still in a reasonable percentage, of course it doesn't matter in my opinion, I think regulation is very necessary to adopt bitcoin and impose limits on the use of bitcoin to be clear in the economy in a country, but I think the government also needs to make rules that make sense and don't hinder the industry or the development of bitcoin in the future.

This is also my personal view on crypto regulation. For me, its even a positive way of reinforcing people to invest in bitcoin because its protected by the government and that regulations are made for the security of the crypto investments and to protect the interest of the investors.

Regulators’ concerns around the world include how to conduct know-your-customer checks and ensure anti-money laundering, as well as make sure digital transactions aren’t used to move illicit goods and fund terrorism. This way, it will create positive awareness to all the people and that may lead to speed up its adoption in the future. https://www.arabianbusiness.com/gcc/uae/469931-crypto-cracking-out-of-shell-regulation-education-needed-to-speed-up-adoption

No, I don’t think that the adoption has nothing to do with government regulation. Having a tight government regulation might even discourage some of the old users who liked Bitcoin for the fact that it gives them privacy and not having the government force themselves into everything they are doing. And another thing is that government regulation doesn’t stop the volatility in the market or does it?

I believe that for most of the people there are three major things keeping from investing in Bitcoin: it is either that they are not interested in it, second is that they do not understand it, and lastly is the volatility of the asset is too much. So these are the issues here and not regulation..

It can speed up adoption in terms of countries or their governments because all what they usually want is regulation. Regulation won't also be a problem to most newbies that will enter crypto because they don't have an idea if what is the main purpose of crypto. Only the old users on crypto can figure it out that cryptos can be free from regulation.

I am afraid they will quit cryptos once crypto have now been successfully regulated. I agree, regulation can in fact make crypto more manipulative because many governments and big institutions are now adopting it but that is good if they constantly warn people or newbies about the risks in crypto.

Although, I believe the crypto regulation will speed adoption and recognition but in the article link you share I wonder why the writer says regulation will prevent market manipulation which is totally wrong. Besides, he also stated it will make people understand the risk when almost all crypto exchange sites provide a popup notification to every new account register on their platform about the risk involve in crypto trading.

As regulations becomes more inevitable, then it will create a win win scenario both for the government and the potential investors in crypto. Why? Because the government will make virtual currencies accountable and become transparent in their transactions. And on the part of crypto investors, it will be a safer environment for them if the government has the proper regulations for it. And in fact, i have here some good reasons why there is a need for crypto regulations. Check it out: https://www.ndtv.com/business/5-reasons-why-cryptocurrency-regulation-is-important-2637741

Speaking technically then it couldnt be possible but even though we do like it or not, regulation would really be always next in line and there's nothing we can do about it.
Does it speed up adoption? Certainly yes and we know that once government do really make out some involvement yet people around would definitely tend to believe
on what they are tending to say even though crypto platforms had been centralized then it would really still get that kind of attention which would fasten
out that kind of exposure and overall adoption and recognition.

He's not wrong. Not that it would just speed adoption, regulation is actually a barrier that stops BTC from being adopted. But we need to ask ourselves, is that what we really want? Why do we need mass adoption, especially so quickly? Are we only chasing that all-time financial high? Because maybe we need to redefine why we are in Crypto in the first place. I don't know if we are heading there, but it's definitely a line that will have to be crossed, and we need to discuss if that's something that has benefits in the long run.

We knew that such regulations were going to eventually come to this market, however they can write whatever they want in a piece of paper and say they have regulated the market of cryptocurrencies, but will they be able to implement what they wrote on those laws? Because that is the real question, just to give an example many chemical substances are forbidden due to the effect they have on people and yet the illegal drug market keep growing and growing despite all the money invested to combat it, and when we think that this market was specifically designed to deal against centralized enemies then the chances they will regulate this market as they like is very close to zero.

Once said some time ago that if you said you're a crypto enthusiast and you don't expect some regulations within the system and you want cryptocurrency to be mainstream of payment or you want the institutional investor to join it wagon then you're not a crypto enthusiast because there's no way cryptocurrency will achieve this without some form of regulation which I believe is the major sacrifice we have to face.
Michael Saylor was absolutely right and I don't think this regulation should bother us since the government can only regulate exchange sites etc, not crypto itself.

Regulation is a good thing, and if bitcoin is not regulated then it will without question be banned in most countries.  First off the privacy aspect can still be upheld for the most part even with regulations.  Secondly, it does not make it centralized just because you add regulations to it.  If regulation doesn't come, then it will be banned, meaning countries will not allow for exchanges to operate in their nation, which will in return deter people from purchasing/transacting.  It is what it is and if you want bitcoin to succeed then you should be in favor with some level of regulation.

There are some points that can be assumed that some institutional investors are very indecisive about crypto due to regulatory uncertainty. They talk differently. Regardless of the many things, just having clear rules will not make them a "good" investment, it will give them a better assessment. It can be expected.

Are people afraid of investing in Bitcoin because there is no government regulation, or are they avoiding it because of the volatility? Maybe regulation is helpful, and may have a little impact in helping people adopt Bitcoin, but that is really not the main thing.

For now, I think the case with this has to do with people not understanding Bitcoin, they don’t know how to go about it or maybe they just lack interest in having to do with cryptocurrency, it can also be that they are afraid of how volatile cryptocurrency is, which is they would avoid it. So, it’s not much about regulation, because even if they should regulate it, that volatility still remains and anyone will think twice before going for it.

I think he’s right. The reason why most people usually think that cryptocurrency is not meant for them is because it is not regulated, so they all feel like it not something safe for them to invest their money in. Maybe if Bitcoin should eventually be well regulated, it might just help with the adoption. But you have to consider those that have been around and what they want.

I know for sure that the least some of them would want now is regulation. Most of the old users prefers privacy and doesn’t want the government looking into what goes on the crypto space, they prefer to stay anonymous. There are also those that doesn’t mind. Finally, we should also look at the main purpose in which Satoshi Nakamoto created Bitcoin, was it for the government to be part of it?

Such a bold step on the part of the US president, it's about time they pay attention to digital currency and recognize it's importance in any country's economy,  and I kinda wonder though, if the El-Salvador stand on btc has some kind of influence on this proposal, I mean El-Salvador really display a strong determination in the face of pressure from a powerful organization like the IMF.


It is very possible this will happen, at the most majority of the 3rd world countries will change views and come up with their own regulation methods, I can tell this no longer far away.

I guess with the incoming crypto regulation in US, this will benefit both. US will take advantage on the trend since crypto has become mainstream, and crypto on its side will also gain more popularity from the people. And i have to agree with OP that once crypto will be regulated, it will build on the minds of the people that crypto is a safe investment and it has nothing to worry about since there is government that comes to regulate it.

At this stage, it is undeniable, regulation is coming for crypto and there is nothing anyone can do to change that, it is already happening.  According to yahoo news of February 18th, president Joe Biden is expected to issue and execute order that will require government agencies to study cryptocurrencies and cbdc afterward develop a statewide strategy to regulate digital currency". 
So it is just a matter of time before a complete crypto regulation begins worldwide. My belief is, once the United State start the regulation process many other countries will follow.

With the regulation, it comes with better perception towards crypto.
Because up until today, many people who are not well-informed about crypto are still thinking about its negative aspect.
Like being used in money laundering, scamming and other illegal activities.
If their government will have regulations towards the usage of crypto, they may change their mindset and trust its existence.
So yes, I am fine with regulation because it will further boost adoption. But as a crypto user, you can also reserve some privacy on your own.

Regulation will keep the people on safer zone unlike the market. The adoption of bitcoin over the years have gradually increased. This increase happened as a result of more countries showing positive signs of regulating the usage of bitcoin. Even now there are people around the world who feel bitcoin is developed for the purpose of illegal activities and gambling needs. This happens because many countries don't disclose the decision of whether cryptocurrency is legalized or not.

Truth to be told there is a huge number of people that are not ready now and will probably never be ready to be their own banks, and personally I have no problem with that, the problem is that those people want to transform bitcoin in something that is not and want this market to accommodate them and offer them all the safety nets that fiat offers, and this is not only not possible but it goes against what this market stands for, and as such we must not relent as they are the ones that will have to adapt, and if they cannot do it then they can keep using their fiat as they have always done so.

But this market won't get rid of scammers, since it's inception we have seen hackers and criminals still plowing around and ready to pound on anyone they gonna see. So I guess the vulnerability is there regardless if there is a regulation or not. Just one example is that we have one celebrity here locally and someone broke into his car and took everything. The sad thing is that there are crypto in his cellphone and this criminals was able to withdraw it. The good thing is that those criminals has been caught. So still depends on the individual on how they are going to protect their crypto assets with or without regulations in place.

It is impossible to make this market completely safe for those people since the nature of bitcoin is completely different than what we can expect out of fiat, people are the ones that will have to adapt their current way of thinking to bitcoin and not the other way around, after all if bitcoin were to transform and offer the same kind of protections that fiat offers then we can safely say that the idea behind bitcoin of becoming your own bank will be impossible under those circumstances, and as such there will be no reason for people like us to keep supporting it.

Totally agree, with more regulations means that it's safe for people to get into the market with no worries of being scammed because they're protected but the only downside to all of this is that we need to get less private which is a problem for a majority of the users so we are still hanging on a thread and we don't know which way we are going to go.

That's not even a question now.

Regulation is for investor adoption and not necessarily for regular users. He is already too deep on BTC and other crypto so it's understandable that he wants more people and private companies to join.

They probably do not care anymore. They can transfer their BTC without a third party involved and they can still trade P2P.

It is understandable that Saylor wants more regulation since he wants the price of his coins to go up, and it is not possible to make the price of bitcoin to go up by that much with retail investors anymore, so he is hoping that if things are clearer and easier for institutional investors then he will make more money, however that is not needed at all for bitcoin adoption, bitcoin will be adopted as long as it is useful, and since I do not see how bitcoin will ever become useless when we take into account the huge amount of money governments created during the last two years then there is nothing to worry about.

Regulation of bitcoin is so easy to say, but due to some factors it is too hard imagine as well how it's possible to happen especially from some countries wherein still don't believe that bitcoin is a future money until now. I mean despite of some good news and adoption of other countries they are still blind.. But you know no need to worry if adoption will not speed up because it keep increasing gradually every year indeed, so probably no need to rush.

First and foremost regulations are inevitable whether we like it or not. Sooner or later any country will try to regulate bitcoin in any sense, it is been known that regulation tends to lag behind technological innovation, and the more mature and known Bitcoin, the government will bat an eye into it to put up the regulation.

Arguably, I think those kinds of regulations won't bother too much to maxis since I believe as long as the underlying itself isn't bothered like the past example of the mining pool who attempt to censor the tx that they mined, it will keep the decentralization and privacy.

Yeah the only thing regulations will bring is control which has always been the target of governments, if this happens, they are finally having their way, the majority of btc community are normal users who don't have that much technical knowledge to use vpn bypass restrictions, those who understand things properly will seek alternative ways to handle the situation,
But so far this hasn't been official yet, so we just have to wait and see how it will turn out. if regulating the crypto space will be the only way to attain mass adoption.

What happens is that governments like this want to go against BTC and everything it represents, they have to accept that it is money, and it is a lot of money that moves in the market, obviously people will enter the market as soon as they have knowledge, but regulations are very easy to jump, you just don't have to put KYC and start doing it, because one of the things for which Satoshi created BTC is so that our money is managed by ourselves, not by governments or banks that tell us how much we must move, how much we can have, I think that the regulations, even with VPNs, can be skipped. I know a friend who lives in Spain and from there he evades Doing in a spectacular way, he never pays taxes, nor can they trace his operations.

I don't think that's what we want.

Some may not agree with this part of my views but we don't want more investors, we want more users. People who aren't in bitcoin because they think they can make some fiat profit and get out and not care about anything else.
Even if you don't agree with that, I think you can agree with the fact that volatility has been one of the reasons that adoption has been slow. More brokers, banks, etc. coming in and getting involved in trading bitcoin is only going to increase the volatility and market manipulation specially if they also control the media which they do.

But I agree that regulations could potentially remove some obstacles against adoption. For example businesses and merchants who couldn't accept bitcoin payment due to lack of clear regulations could start accepting it which helps adoption by a lot.

Regulating Bitcoin because of adoption is not a perfect Idea. People that will adopt Bitcoin will do so whether regulated or not. This is more than ten years of bitcoin's existence without being regulated and more people in the world know about Bitcoin. What matters is to allow bitcoin the way It was created by Satoshi. The longer Bitcoin stays the more people will adopt it. Michael Saylor as a business man needs fast profits so he would need a large percentage of people to adopt Bitcoin because he is among the whales in the market. I don't want Bitcoin to be regulated by the government.

The government and its institutions will continue to find new ways so that the majority of people will find it too bothersome to remain anonymous. Or in some cases, pretty much impossible. It's not in their interest to not know how you earn and spend your money, including digital currencies.

Saylor is right when he says that more regulation will increase the adoption rates. It will open the door to new investors who wont mind the regulatory framework. The number of people wanting to stay outside and remain untraceable and private will unfortunately shrink.   

Well, in a way I will agree that Crypto regulations will help adoption, because the definition of Bitcoin currently in the US is that it is some kind of Commodity and if the Biden administration clearly define that Bitcoin could be used as legal tender (which will never happen) then Bitcoin adoption will be faster.

The retail industry and large franchises (McDonalds / KFC / Burger King etc) will not risk going against current regulation to accept Bitcoin directly as a payment option. (They bypass this via the Payment processor loophole) 

It would speed up adoption by large institutions, but not by small retail investors. It also won't make people use it as a currency more, even though it's one of the steps needed for that, but still price volatility would be preventing that. So, Saylor has his own interests in mind first, and not the interests of Bitcoin community as a whole.

It would be nice if the regulations are aimed towards the secure development of the space and not just regulations that are aimed to limit the growth of crypto. Most of the time they are just placing regulations to monitor people's activities, and are not really keen on helping them to achieve more and be with the people at all.

While I do believe that what Saylor is saying is partly true, I don't think regulations, per se, would be enough of a motivation for people to adopt cryptocurrencies.

Bottomline, we are always entitled to change our decisions when the situation calls for. We can say one thing, but it is always open for alteration if other things need to be done. We are just humans, subject to ever changing evolvement. Saylor, is no exception, don't treat what he is saying as his absolute action. Because the future is unseen, so as a human, we react on what is presented to us.

He is smart but if we believe in what he's saying he can wait years for this investment to bring profit, but can he really? He's just a human with all our vulnerabilities. Say he becomes sick, or his child, and money at hand won't be able to cover it, say there's a way and he has to do some cuts, or maybe he finds an even better investment, goes into debt, there's a lot of options. I tend not to put people on pedestals too fast. We had so many bitcoin lovers like McAfee or Musk, or more recently Trace Mayer, who turned to pumping shitcoins. I'd hate to see Saylor do the same.

Depends on who you are asking and talking about adoption, for example for anyone who really cares about privacy and wants to have always anonymous transactions regulation won't be something favorite, surely. But for any government and big organization regulation can certainly speed up the adoption or better to say in their own ideas regulation is necessary for the next step on bitcoin adoption. However, even after these regulations and legalizations, there will be many people unhappy because of the regulations because of the possible limits.

Despite some problem people may face, I would agree too that regulation would speed up the adoption. India has recently forced users to pay 30% taxes on their gain. I guess this is better for us though the taxes are quite high. There will be people who didn’t know/own cryptocurrency but now they know. Institutions now have some way to invest in cryptocurrency. I'm sure most institutional investors will look for diversity & cryptocurrency is definitely is better choice IMO. They wouldn’t invest in cryptocurrency ever, had the rules not applied in India. Well, for widely adopted, regulation is good.

I do not know if what is the difference of this new regulation compare to what we have now on exchanges but let us hope that it was not too much that it can cause more harm than good.

There are countries and people that are waiting for bitcoin to be regulated first before they will use it but do we really need to sacrifice some important features just for their sake? But who are they, we do not even know them very well. They are the one's that needs to adjust and not us that are already here because they are new on this scene. The current state of adoption is doing fine with the current system that we have now. No need to rush and risk what we already have built.

I agree with him, actually. Most of the mainstream public will want the safety of government regulations before it accepts Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. Said regulation will make the industry more popular. Whether the actual industry will remain the same, however, is another matter altogether.

More regulation although I don't like it will allow certain people to invest who now cannot.
There are a lot of funds / brokers / banks / etc. that cannot invest at the moment due to the way their internal regulations are written.
It's a policy and risk management issue.
Before the XYZ retirement fund can invest in this or that, they have to have certain things in place. If not, they have to pass on the investment.
Nothing more then that.

-Dave

Saylor is a genius. He's right. If you haven't watched "The Saylor Series" yet, you should now.

Am not surprised, it is bound to happen sooner or later, although doing this completely negate the narrative of privacy but it will gain widespread adoption according to Saylor.

Now the question is which one is most pressing! Remain in the original narrative without regulations and no adoption or change the narrative, give up privacy and gain adoption? Since we can't have it both ways, there is opportunity cost,

Adoption will be achieved but at the cost of something also valuable, and from the above posts, it seems the majority already agrees to regulations.

We have to come to terms with the fact that the old spirit that lived the first few years of Bitcoin's existence is increasingly fading and disappearing because people like Saylor have a completely different philosophy on how to use Bitcoin. Imagine a situation where the world's 100 largest companies buy 100 000 BTC and we have 10 million BTC locked as a store of value - for some it would probably be a dream come true because the price would surely skyrocket, but for small people who have not yet discovered Bitcoin, it meant they would pay a high price to get into that game.


It is inevitable that if we want an adaptation that must happen in regulation, and the second option is to move underground and show the governments of the world the middle finger. However, there is a third option to consider, and in this scenario, Bitcoin may play the role of a Trojan horse that will cause significant changes within the existing financial system - but in order to do so, it must be positioned there. This would mean that some battles are fought and must be lost in order to win the war in the end.

Don’t know, I’m little skeptical about it. Many of fellow peeps here saying it’s positive thing to regulate the crypto but I don’t know I’m really against it. This is straight away failing the principle of Mr. Satoshi and his vision of freedom.

If we want the crypto regulated then it would be just another payment system or stock or share market. It won’t benefit us. We can’t risk it with regulations. This will literally push the crypto currencies in the black hole and sucking all the good characteristics of bitcoin.

Like it or not but in the end the world must accept that bitcoin is a form of progress, and in that case the countries of the world will not be able to refuse it, now we just need a real example of a complete bitcoin adoption like salvador did, in my opinion if later salvador decision to adopt bitcoin has a positive impact on the country's economy, of course many other countries will imitate and follow the steps taken by salvador today, so that in the end adopting bitcoin in the future will become a necessity for countries in the world .

He's not wrong. More regulation means more adoption means more stability means more adoption and so on. BTC has surpassed it's inital concept and has become much more than it's fully autonomous decentralised self once was. That dosen't mean all of crypto needs to get on that path, but for BTC it seems there is no turning back. But regulation does not mean one side will inforce restrictions on the other. It just means that a common ground will need to be established.

It's his opinion and I remember before the pandemic and the bull run came. Many have said that it's the institutions that will drive the prices up and it seems that they're correct on it.

There's nothing to worry about decentralization. It's still going to be remain and just as what they've said, the regulators are going to focus to the businesses mainly the exchanges which will give confidence to the other institutional investors that haven't invested yet.

This is pretty true, because while Bitcoin is an excellent online currency it will never be accepted fully by governments (and thus seen as a dangerous threat by financial departments) until it is fully regulated. That is going to involve exchanges that share financial transaction information with the tax authorities and cooperate with police authorities. This is one way that people could avoid their country banning it outright, but it only works successfully in democratic countries, authoritarian governments tend to have ulterior motives when they are trying to control the financial abilities of their citizens. There will always be a possibility that criminals will adopt it heavily until this comes into place.

They can only suppress the price & ignore bitcoin for a limited time. Bitcoin is the internet of the 90’s, in 10-15 years the majority of the civilised world will own or use bitcoin, even if not knowingly. Bitcoin is the future of money & there’s nothing anybody can do to stop it. 

But the majority of crypto community always frown against anything that has the slightest regulations to it, take centralized exchanges for example, many crypto users claim they don't use them because of the simple reason of going through kyc, then imagine a strict regulation from the government on btc, what will happen to these sets of people,

I don't think regulations are entirely bad especially when it can sanitize the crypto space with all the junk projects created on a daily basis, but it also means no room for privacy, and perhaps most of the privacy projects will be targeted.

That is the whole idea behind regulation, for them to know just about everything that is going on there, so it is always to their advantage but that said, it might not totally mean it is bad just as you too have said, this could make undecided folks/institution have more conviction in a space that wasn't regulated if it does come thru.

I agree with what Michael Saylor said. regulation can be a positive catalyst for adoption. without clear regulations, institutions will not want to adopt crypto especially bitcoin. that's why the role of government is needed for this. if regulations on crypto are released, institutions like the SEC will find it easier to regulate crypto projects. the impact will be favorable for the market.

Is this starting to enter the concept of centralization that we are not aware of with the regulations on the exchange. If it fully impacts on massive adoption, then how will the impact of government control in controlling crypto exchanges will make it easier for institutions to dominate the market. Adoption is important, but setting policies that will only narrow down privacy is definitely not good for crypto users.

I think Btc maximalist will not be bothered by regulation. Haven't they been managing their bitcoins in their privacy way for a long time? Meanwhile, if regulations try to centralize bitcoin as happened with Elsalvador, this is more intended for the benefit of prospective (or existing) service adopters, not individuals specifically because there is no need for adoption regulations to own it (silently).

they tried to regulate gold. didnt work
they tried to regulate alcohol. didnt work
they tried to regulate drugs.. didnt work

all they can regulate is businesses that use such things

I totally agree with Michael Saylor's statement.
In fact, if the government can't regulate Bitcoin, they will be forced to stop it. Because no government of any country would want to let their people go unchecked.

So, in the interest of adopting Bitcoin Vastly, its regulation is very important. But I think no matter how hard the government tries, regulating Bitcoin will never be 100% effective if the people don't want it. Because you know Bitcoin is creatively pseudonymous.

this is not about regulating bitcoin.
its about regulating businesses that offer bitcoin services. (exchanges)

take for instance the delays of offering a ETF, or where some small banks freeze accounts because they were told 10 years ago to be wary of people moving funds to/from known exchange owned accounts

I'm afraid it is more complicated than that. Basically I'd say it depends on the regulations and how restrictive and terrible they are. For example Japan and El Salvador both regulated bitcoin and that led to an increase in the speed of adoption. But if we see restrictive regulations as US loves to implement and they end up with huge taxation, a lot of nonsense intrusive KYC and things like that, it could actually slow down adoption, at least in US.

But as I said things are a lot more complicated than that. The more restrictions could actually backfire and it could push more people towards bitcoin specially as US dollar keeps tanking and inflation soars. If we see another recession then bitcoin adoption could also go through the roof with US dollar value dumping harder than ever.

Of course, the legalization and acceptance of cryptocurrency can be carried out by states only through reasonable regulation of its circulation in society. Investors are reluctant to invest heavily in a financial asset without its legal status, so even tight cryptocurrency regulation is better than a long period of uncertainty. In addition, we see that cryptocurrency reacts very painfully to the prohibitions of states regarding cryptocurrency, and even to information about the possible introduction of a ban, with a sharp drop in prices. In the future, regulation may be weakened or tightened, but the very fact of legalization by establishing a certain legal status of the cryptocurrency and the conditions for its circulation is very important.

6 years ago it was the other way around because every time a government will be announcing thier coming crypto regulation, the prices of cryptocurrencies are plummeting. It's different these days. When I've read about Biden regulation on my feed I watched the market for hours thinking price could plunge a bit to finally see RSI to its oversold. Price didn't dip a bit.

It could be true because after all regulation will ease the mind of investors who are skeptical with Bitcoin.  What is bothersome is that IMF is cracking down Bitcoin as legal tender while Biden is regulating.

Here we can say without a doubt. Most of the regulations have been made with the status of the exchanger and as more regulations come it will change and take on new forms.
Again if the people around are not satisfied with the regulations, there will probably be a way to get around them without too much hassle or they will be able to do them with a small amount of crypto.

He somewhat has a point. I'm guessing that some institutional investors are very undecided with bitcoin/crypto is due to the regulatory uncertainty. Simply having clearer regulations regardless if positive or negative will give them a better assessment if bitcoin would be a "good" investment or not risk/reward-wise.

Most regulations have been targeted at exchanges and exchangers imo and I don't think that'll changr with more regulations coming in.

If people aren't happy with regulations, there will probably be ways to get around them without too much hassle or they might be able to just go ignored for those too with smaller amounts of crypto and go fairly unnoticed.

Tighter government crypto regulations would actually be a positive catalyst for bitcoin, MicroStrategy co-founder and CEO Michael Saylor told CNBC on Wednesday.

"Additional regulatory clarity from the [Biden] administration is going to benefit bitcoin and accelerate institutional adoption of that asset," Saylor said on "Squawk on the Street," stressing as a major bitcoin believer and holder he's looking for "clear, bright line definitions of digital property versus a digital security versus a digital currency and the operating rules of the digital exchange."

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Gary Gensler said last month that the agency is planning to crack down on Wall Street, including by creating and enacting rules for cryptocurrency markets. Back in August, Gensler said Congress needs to grant the SEC additional powers to regulate crypto.

Source

Is this where we are heading! Without regulations from the government, btc will never be able to achieve the so desirable adoption, if people like Saylor is publicly calling for regulations it means soon we will witness it, what do you guys think would happen, and what about btc maxis who are strongly in support of decentralization and privacy, will they be willing to give that regulation in other to use btc?