NY will go right down the middle.
users, merchants, software devs, online wallets, and miners not affected. exchanges and money transmitters heavily regulated as originally outlined.
Topic: Gold collapsing. Bitcoin UP. - page 615. (Read 2032266 times)
I'm anxious to hear about the revised Lawsky regulations tomorrow.
Would I prefer they don't exist? Of course, but I expect they will be significantly "softer" than the original submission and this is certainly something that should bring some much needed confidence to this market.
Would I prefer they don't exist? Of course, but I expect they will be significantly "softer" than the original submission and this is certainly something that should bring some much needed confidence to this market.
Interesting. I am expecting the opposite. More hardline and draconian. He has no political opposition, he is not elected. He is paid by interests opposed to this. What is his incentive to "soften"?
He could just as easily say something like "I have listened carefully to all the commentary and determined that the concerns and need for consumer protections are much greater than we initially thought". It isn't like he has to show any proof of anything to anyone, or do any science or analysis.
all eyes towards greece at the end of the year.
their main policy
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30521193
Europe may have alot more trouble ahead.
Quote
The calculation is simple - if the Greek parliament fails to elect the country's next president before the end of this year, a snap general election will be held in late January or early February.
And Syriza, the radical left wing opposition coalition, is favourite to win.
And Syriza, the radical left wing opposition coalition, is favourite to win.
their main policy
Quote
Syriza wants to bring austerity to an abrupt end and write off a significant chunk of Greece's international debt.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30521193
Europe may have alot more trouble ahead.
I'm anxious to hear about the revised Lawsky regulations tomorrow.
Would I prefer they don't exist? Of course, but I expect they will be significantly "softer" than the original submission and this is certainly something that should bring some much needed confidence to this market.
Obviously they will not matter in the long run but I expect they will have a positive effect in the short to medium term. Lawsky was quoted in an interview recently as saying he expects Wall Street "will rush into this" when the field is properly regulated and as much as everyone dislike the idea of "regulating" Bitcoin I am very much in favor of getting cozy with Wall Street.
Only once they swallow the pill will they realise it is a poison that will kill them from the inside.
Would I prefer they don't exist? Of course, but I expect they will be significantly "softer" than the original submission and this is certainly something that should bring some much needed confidence to this market.
Obviously they will not matter in the long run but I expect they will have a positive effect in the short to medium term. Lawsky was quoted in an interview recently as saying he expects Wall Street "will rush into this" when the field is properly regulated and as much as everyone dislike the idea of "regulating" Bitcoin I am very much in favor of getting cozy with Wall Street.
Only once they swallow the pill will they realise it is a poison that will kill them from the inside.
It will definitely be interesting to see if/how the proposed regulations were modified.
Bitcoin's fundamental strength is that it is censorship resilient. NYDFS can go heavy handed, but they risk the market bypassing and ignoring them. In my opinion that would be the most damaging outcome (for them) because the world would see how powerless regulation can be against bitcoin.
The smartest option for NYDFS is to make the regulation light and easy enough to comply with that most of the market sees compliance as the path of least resistance. Then after most firms have bitlicenses established, NYDFS could slowly increase the regulations having already trapped many market participants who now would find non-compliance more difficult.
If NYDFS is not smart, they will start off heavy handed forcing most of the market choose ignore as the optimal path, and in the process expose how little power they actually have and setting a precedent for the market to ignore further attempts in the future.
Bitcoin can take a cozy with Wall Street path, but it's censorship resiliency makes a black market path a valid option as well.
The question I suppose is how much communism is too much? 15%, 30%, clearly 100% is fatal, and anything more than 50% is probably also terminally toxic.
How much cancer is terminal?Are just a few couple metastatic cells ok?
Quote
There is a growing body of evidence that bigger government means slower growth of real GDP. Once the level of total government spending as a percentage of GDP reaches a tipping point, estimated to be from 15 percent to 25 percent of GDP, additional expansion crowds out private productive investment and slows economic growth. When government overreaches, economic freedom is diminished and private exchange opportunities are lost — that is, the range of choices open to individuals is restricted.
This is hardly a revelation, most of the communist economic experiements of the last century have demonstrated this is abundance (well total lack of abundance). The question I suppose is how much communism is too much? 15%, 30%, clearly 100% is fatal, and anything more than 50% is probably also terminally toxic. Optimally operating economies seem to have around 5-10% govt. share of GDP but it also depends on strong justice and legal systems for protection of individual freedoms.
An open question is what is considered to be government spending or government control of an economy. What we consider government spending is usually limited to what the government directly does (DOD, roads, courts, prisons, K-12 ED, NASA, etc). But the government also indirectly controls (and removes from free market dynamics) large swaths of the economy, such as healthcare, universities, regulated FED supported banks, etc.
If you consider government to consist of both what it directly and indirectly controls, then the US government past 50% of the economy a while ago.
Quote
There is a growing body of evidence that bigger government means slower growth of real GDP. Once the level of total government spending as a percentage of GDP reaches a tipping point, estimated to be from 15 percent to 25 percent of GDP, additional expansion crowds out private productive investment and slows economic growth. When government overreaches, economic freedom is diminished and private exchange opportunities are lost — that is, the range of choices open to individuals is restricted.
This is hardly a revelation, most of the communist economic experiements of the last century have demonstrated this is abundance (well total lack of abundance). The question I suppose is how much communism is too much? 15%, 30%, clearly 100% is fatal, and anything more than 50% is probably also terminally toxic. Optimally operating economies seem to have around 5-10% govt. share of GDP but it also depends on strong justice and legal systems for protection of individual freedoms.
I'm anxious to hear about the revised Lawsky regulations tomorrow.
Would I prefer they don't exist? Of course, but I expect they will be significantly "softer" than the original submission and this is certainly something that should bring some much needed confidence to this market.
Obviously they will not matter in the long run but I expect they will have a positive effect in the short to medium term. Lawsky was quoted in an interview recently as saying he expects Wall Street "will rush into this" when the field is properly regulated and as much as everyone dislike the idea of "regulating" Bitcoin I am very much in favor of getting cozy with Wall Street.
Only once they swallow the pill will they realise it is a poison that will kill them from the inside.
Would I prefer they don't exist? Of course, but I expect they will be significantly "softer" than the original submission and this is certainly something that should bring some much needed confidence to this market.
Obviously they will not matter in the long run but I expect they will have a positive effect in the short to medium term. Lawsky was quoted in an interview recently as saying he expects Wall Street "will rush into this" when the field is properly regulated and as much as everyone dislike the idea of "regulating" Bitcoin I am very much in favor of getting cozy with Wall Street.
Only once they swallow the pill will they realise it is a poison that will kill them from the inside.
There is a growing body of evidence that bigger government means slower growth of real GDP. Once the level of total government spending as a percentage of GDP reaches a tipping point, estimated to be from 15 percent to 25 percent of GDP, additional expansion crowds out private productive investment and slows economic growth. When government overreaches, economic freedom is diminished and private exchange opportunities are lost — that is, the range of choices open to individuals is restricted.
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/increasing-economic-growth-means-shrinking-size-scope-government?utm_content=buffereb64d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
this is what i mean by "Black Hole Shit" and it's not lookin good:
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/increasing-economic-growth-means-shrinking-size-scope-government?utm_content=buffereb64d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
this is what i mean by "Black Hole Shit" and it's not lookin good:
Bitcoin is small, so small, that I think the current low price could be explained with the fact that some holders, who otherwise would not cash out, have bought some christmas present for bitcoins (I know I did).
Ripple is basically a patch for the legacy banking system, improving upon payment networks such as ACH and SWIFT. This may be viable for a while but the entire legacy banking system needs to be completely replaced IMO.
They have a few centuries head start and are pretty well entrenched. It is a longshot.
But just maybe the force is with us.
Exactly why I say it need not be decentralized to serve its intended and most useful purpose. In fact the collapse of decentralization might be a blessing for them. They can stop the wasted effort of trying to be bitcoin and focus on being an add on to banking.
i hope you're right. good riddance to them. and stop pretending that they can decentralize a debt lending system.
what's the value of a spam-prevention token (XRP) of a centralized debt-tracker?
Ripple is basically a patch for the legacy banking system, improving upon payment networks such as ACH and SWIFT. This may be viable for a while but the entire legacy banking system needs to be completely replaced IMO.
They have a few centuries head start and are pretty well entrenched. It is a longshot.But just maybe the force is with us.
Exactly why I say it need not be decentralized to serve its intended and most useful purpose. In fact the collapse of decentralization might be a blessing for them. They can stop the wasted effort of trying to be bitcoin and focus on being an add on to banking.
i hope you're right. good riddance to them. and stop pretending that they can decentralize a debt lending system.
Ripple is basically a patch for the legacy banking system, improving upon payment networks such as ACH and SWIFT. This may be viable for a while but the entire legacy banking system needs to be completely replaced IMO.
They have a few centuries head start and are pretty well entrenched. It is a longshot.But just maybe the force is with us.
Exactly why I say it need not be decentralized to serve its intended and most useful purpose. In fact the collapse of decentralization might be a blessing for them. They can stop the wasted effort of trying to be bitcoin and focus on being an add on to banking.
i'm actually looking forward to the XboxOne even tho its for my high schooler and his friends. do they even make Star Wars games for it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnaNYXVch8s
Ripple is basically a patch for the legacy banking system, improving upon payment networks such as ACH and SWIFT. This may be viable for a while but the entire legacy banking system needs to be completely replaced IMO.
They have a few centuries head start and are pretty well entrenched. It is a longshot.But just maybe the force is with us.
i'm actually looking forward to the XboxOne even tho its for my high schooler and his friends. do they even make Star Wars games for it?
Ripple is basically a patch for the legacy banking system, improving upon payment networks such as ACH and SWIFT. This may be viable for a while but the entire legacy banking system needs to be completely replaced IMO.
They have a few centuries head start and are pretty well entrenched. It is a longshot.But just maybe the force is with us.
Brian Kelly on Ruble, Gold, UST and what comes next.
http://briankellycap.tumblr.com/post/105449023922/the-ruble-is-the-latest-battle-in-the-global
http://briankellycap.tumblr.com/post/105449023922/the-ruble-is-the-latest-battle-in-the-global
Ripple is basically a patch for the legacy banking system, improving upon payment networks such as ACH and SWIFT. This may be viable for a while but the entire legacy banking system needs to be completely replaced IMO.
yeah, Ripple and Stellar. what the heck is that? esp after Stellar contracted down to one node?
Don't forget that centralized systems are still thousands of times bigger than bitcoin. So there is a big market potentially even if the whole thing runs entirely on one node.
Yeah but the rally started on or near the time of the stellar fork and retrenchment to one node which should have been a huge indictment against their entire concept of consensus.
totally. The ripple concept in its current form died when Stellar forked ... this latest pump seems like a desperate attempt to get out by the insiders before it goes to its NAV, now proven to be worthless.
i dont think they'll disappear. you could think of ripple as an analogy with macdonald. its plain shit, yet there is a lot of people going for it. hence once bitcoin to become mainstream (if ever, as i dont believe mainstream attention to be the key of bitcoin's long term success), ripple may play a role in the democratization of cryptocurrencies with traditional banking partners and their quite impressive business network. because masses are just dumb, twerking all around, and neither you or bitcoin will change this.
yeah, Ripple and Stellar. what the heck is that? esp after Stellar contracted down to one node?
Don't forget that centralized systems are still thousands of times bigger than bitcoin. So there is a big market potentially even if the whole thing runs entirely on one node.
Yeah but the rally started on or near the time of the stellar fork and retrenchment to one node which should have been a huge indictment against their entire concept of consensus.
totally. The ripple concept in its current form died when Stellar forked ... this latest pump seems like a desperate attempt to get out by the insiders before it goes to its NAV, now proven to be worthless.
Jump to: