Topic: Government Regulation owns Bitcoin (Read 3261 times)

They can also target exchanges outside of the country through bank seizures. They can't stop the rest of the world, but think of a) the influence that the US government, for example, has on the policies of other governments, and b) what would happen to the price of bitcoin if the legal bitcoin-related market of major countries were to disappear. As for cash, we can't go back to the stone age. Continued growth IMO requires fast, electronic payment solutions.


IMO events like "Cyprus" only affect speculators. I think average people want proven stores of value that are easy to transact in (both in terms of fiat/asset exchange and ease of use). At this point, bitcoin can't offer this.

The real problem re government  is that if bitcoin does achieve significantly rising adoption levels, it won't be so thinly traded. It is at that point that it may receive unwanted attention. If the US government is afraid of something, it tends to squash it.

In this context, bitcoin may or may not achieve the mass appeal that would thrive despite government crackdown. Not so sure it will. I've seen it suggested here that drug prohibition is analogous to bitcoin prohibition -- crazy! Drug consumers don't have alternatives. Consumers have too many viable alternatives to bitcoin. The next question, then, is whether bitcoin can truly grow into more than its principal uses as a speculative vehicle for fiat, and currency for black market goods (drugs, gambling, etc).

So, not assuming either will happen, which comes first? A truly viable bitcoin economy? Or a government crackdown? I suppose that's the final question...


But file-sharing protocol is not an asset. People are not willing to pay for it. There is no market for money there -- I don't think it applies to bitcoin. I mean, who doesn't love free shit... 


Yes, this specifically is one of the things in the back of my mind that colors my longterm outlook on bitcoin. If this were to happen, the centralization that Gox entails could cripple bitcoin.

+1

Ah... a similar minded person posted while I was typing. +1

lol. RUN!

No, if I am the hornets nest to be poked - I am not an irrational person and no one is required to agree or face my wrath. Furthermore, I think you are correct.

When I am confronted with someone who I believe is, IMO, a "sheep" I do try to reason with them, I am not like "SHEEP! FK U I'm going home!" lol. But, even when approached in a calm rational manner, it's hard to debate with people with the sheep mentality. When almost anything you say meets a response such as "Government knows best" / "Government just wants what's best for the people" or "I don't mind loosing (some) freedom to be safe" or "Why do you need privacy if you have nothing to hide?" it becomes very difficult to communicate - there is simply no common ground and common understanding to build from... They believe a fundamental is one way and I believe it is another, when that fundamental is most basic concept - it's an issue. When I debate with those types, I don't do so in a hostile manner, I want to gain understanding into their thought process with the hope they will do the same - but that is not what happens. They simply are either unable or unwilling to consider an alternate point of view. I will consider their point of view but generally reject with evidence, but it's still subjective. I might be wrong, who knows

The reason for the "sheep" attitude above is complicated... But IMO... it's basically they've focused on pop culture, being "happy" in the moment without regards for the future (just look at financial irresponsibility/credit debt/etc now) and don't care to see what happens in other nations now and throughout history. It's an extension of the "It won't happen to be attitude" and while I may at times be a bit pessimistic, I think it's possible to be too optimistic as well. Lets be real.

That said - The U.S. is a democracy - which I support, if that attitude is what people support and want, then it is I who is wrong and not them -  at least here.

Already tried this, on several occasions.  Instead, they put you down for being a "conspiracy theorist".  We're talking people who still believe their taxes are going to noble causes (some even believe the holy crusade for oil is about conquering the evil demons of the middle east.)  Anyway, I've yet to find a way to get through to these people.  I've been able to help my closer friends, but the so-called patriots are too far up their own asses to listen to reason.  It's almost like a religion; try arguing with a priest about the existence of God and see how well that goes.  In the end, the priest has quoted at least 10 Bible passages, hasn't changed his mind, and you're just frustrated that you wasted an hour going in circles.

+1  Figured I give this TRUTH a thumbs up before the flaming beings.  Saying things like this is like poking a hornets nest with a stick.  "RUN!!!!!" 

Perhaps we wouldn't have a "90% sheep population" if the 10% who are awake could quit denigrating them and instead win over their hearts and minds with honest ideals.  If you are right that "mommy government" is corrupt, it shouldn't be too hard.  Lead by example, not by putting down those who don't see things your way.

Satoshi understood EXACTLY THIS (and begged people to keep a low profile).

Repeat:

ALL government power flows from currency and taxation...
It does NOT flow from controlling Hollywood movies on the internet.

But noooooooooo...
Even though $1,000,000,000 is a Rounding Error in the Grand Scheme...
Every freaking wannabe Hipster Dipster Closet Revolutionary has got a Raging Hardon for Bitcoin.

Full Tilt Poker was maybe 5-10 times larger than MtGox in 2010...
And living large in Ireland running everything out of a Big Slush Fund...
When the DOJ of Lower Manhattan shut it down in 5 minutes.

Pokers Star paid $731 million to settle with the US government.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanvardi/2012/07/31/pokerstars-will-pay-547-million-to-settle-u-s-government-charges-and-buy-full-tilt-poker/

There is a non-trivial probability this is what happens to MtGox.

Well stated. By the way, I hope the Kardashians die.

I think that might be a difficult task actually.

You're mostly correct, but I still hold out hope. The sad fact is, the 90% sheep population will eat whatever mommy government feeds them. That said, bitcoin and decentralization is a worldwide movement, not just the U.S., and as an American, I hope there are other countries on Earth where the population cares about more than simply what Kardashians are doing or who is playing who on TV tonight. Not to start a political debate... but I have a feeling, with regards to US regulation, long term it won't matter anyway.  The US is an exponentially increasing decline due to the very factors you speak of. The fact bitcoin exists and NEEDS to exist is, IMO, proof.

I recognize that the US is not alone in regulatory bullshit, and sadly it probably won't be in my lifetime, but technology (like bitcoin) has the potential to change everything at such a fundamental level it's astounding to contemplate.

Here is to a bright future, even if in the short/medium term things are dark *cheers*

or - a dedicated virtual currency bank based in panama

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1dyj70/update_coming_soon_a_private_fiat_bank_to_bitcoin/

Anything that gets regulated, belongs to the regulator.  Plain fact.

Bitcoin as a concept is free, however, any part of it, such as clearing the fiat to buy or sell bitcoins is a part of the regulators world, and so access to bitcoins is controlled.

The answer here is to build infrastructure to keep the regulator as far from bitcoin as possible.

However, to just give up, is pointless.  And that was how I read the OP statement - a white flag!

Yes, it is a method for taking back control of our money.  I'm only worried that it's not likely to be a successful one.

Bitcoin is a method of taking back control of our money for ourselves.

So you don't think MAbtc's argument (a few posts up) carries some weight?  Bitcoin threatens the very core of governments -- collecting taxes & issuing currency.  Of course governments will  react if Bitcoin makes any noticeable mark on fiat economy.  Forgot who said "Give me control over a nation's money, and I care not who makes its laws," but he summed things up pretty well.  There was pretty sound reasoning behind not wanting Bitcoin to hit the limelights so early in the game.

Exactly my thoughts. If enough poeple find something really useful I don't think law does matter that much.

I don't know maybe I'm completely wrong but when I see goverment being afraid (banning/complicating things) I would personally say to myself - hey they are frightened to death by that thing - there must be a reason for it, so how can I exploit it to my own benefit? I always have this in mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_6102

Maybe it's just me. I have no idea what average Joe will do, but considering what has happened in Cyprus and how many ordinary folks hate EU I would not underestimate them.

I think that really depends on how useful people find bitcoin. Downloading/uploading movies via bittorent is illegal almost everywhere in some form or another, yet the audience and userbase of bittorent only continues to grow. Of course there isn't any zuckerberg who is the billionaire poster boy for creating it/selling it, but that doesn't stop it from being enormously useful for hundreds of millions of people (I have no idea how many).

It can be the same for bitcoin. Illegal or regulated, but extremely useful anyway. The black market remember is worth trillions and trillions of dollars. Regulation doesn't change that.