Topic: How Should Bitcoin Be Regulated? - page 2. (Read 2789 times)
If bitcoin will be regulated by someone...it will lose an idea of bitcoin!
I think the various governments have got their words mixed up... I think they meant "how do we tax bitcoin". Also considering it cost me £30 to transfer £550 between two international bank accounts a few months ago I suspect banks are wondering how to "regulate" bitcoin so they can keep committing daylight robbery on people who simply want to move money around.
The bitcoin network is regulated by the network itself, and seems to do well if you compare it to the regulated bank system which continues to suffer from inflation.
I do not think it needs any regulation at present, as it will be in the way of innovation.
I do not think it needs any regulation at present, as it will be in the way of innovation.
Bitcoin should not be regulated, I don't want the banks to think for one second they can get in on this. But it is going to be a very difficult few years for bitcoin with the possibility of becoming very mainstream and regulations, we will soon see.
It should NOT be regulated!
And if it IS regulated, we should ferociously resist compliance ...
The problem with this is that small amounts of regulation will give legitimacy to bitcoin, helping increase bitcoin adaption. If people do not use bitcoin in mass then the price of bitcoin will eventually flame out. And if it IS regulated, we should ferociously resist compliance ...
Bitcoin will gain mainstream legitimacy through better security(hardware wallets), better software design(More intuitive wallets), a history of holding its value and increasing in value, and by providing secure and low cost transactions.
Political Regulation has proven to not work and will only lead to allowing existing banks the ability to steal our technology to extract greater profits while they refute the whole Raison d'être for Bitcoin in the first place.
I think Bitcoin should be the "official" cryptocoin and a coin like Monero could take the 100% no regulation super anarcho coin with no limits or boundaries on what you do with the money. Only this way people will find enough thrust in BTC imo.
No, other alts can create weaknesses and backdoors for corruption by introducing "regulation". Bitcoin by definition has certain core principles that if deviated from will essentially create a new alt. No compromises, No apologies. They can fight it or benefit from it, progress will move on and they ultimately have the choice of whether or not they wish to become the next Kodak.
I think Bitcoin should be the "official" cryptocoin and a coin like Monero could take the 100% no regulation super anarcho coin with no limits or boundaries on what you do with the money. Only this way people will find enough thrust in BTC imo.
I think it should be regulated in some way, so companies willing to deal with/in bitcoin have some legal framework and groundrules they can take into consideration. Maybe the 'right' rules have yet to be found and I, personally, don't exactly know how they should look, but I am certain that there need to be regulations.
It should NOT be regulated!
And if it IS regulated, we should ferociously resist compliance ...
The problem with this is that small amounts of regulation will give legitimacy to bitcoin, helping increase bitcoin adaption. If people do not use bitcoin in mass then the price of bitcoin will eventually flame out. And if it IS regulated, we should ferociously resist compliance ...
The only way to regulate bitcoin is by enforcing AML on all exchanges.
This is an interesting subject because if you regularize BTC you sort of lose that anti-stablishment appeal of the concept. I wonder what Satoshi's views was regulation-wise? Did he want just a 100% free currency careless about what the powers that be had to say about it?
Here are Satoshi's views:
http://satoshi.nakamotoinstitute.org/posts/
Satoshi was either a Libertarian or anarcho-capitalist/agorist and was distrusting of both banks and governments.
"Yes, [we will not find a solution to political problems in cryptography,] but we can win a major battle in the arms race and gain a new territory of freedom for several years. Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally controlled networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem to be holding their own." - Satoshi Nakamoto
"[Bitcoin is] very attractive to the libertarian viewpoint if we can explain it properly. I'm better with code than with words though." - Satoshi Nakamoto
In the Bitcoin network's transaction database, the original entry has a note by Nakamoto that reads as:
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"
This is an interesting subject because if you regularize BTC you sort of lose that anti-stablishment appeal of the concept. I wonder what Satoshi's views was regulation-wise? Did he want just a 100% free currency careless about what the powers that be had to say about it?
It should NOT be regulated!
And if it IS regulated, we should ferociously resist compliance ...
And if it IS regulated, we should ferociously resist compliance ...
Minimal regulation, just enough so that bitcoins can be used in ordinary markets. Otherwise there may be a split like this:
"Why Bitcoin May One Day Split Into Black and White Coins
Rumors are swirling that as governments move to integrate and legitimize bitcoin, it could have a divisive and lasting effect on the virtual payment system. Forcing regulations on bitcoin could divide the digital currency into two camps: coins that are regulated and managed by a government or central agency, and coins that remain pseudonymous and decentralized. White coins and black coins." -- Full story: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-bitcoin-may-one-day-split-into-black-and-white-coins
"Why Bitcoin May One Day Split Into Black and White Coins
Rumors are swirling that as governments move to integrate and legitimize bitcoin, it could have a divisive and lasting effect on the virtual payment system. Forcing regulations on bitcoin could divide the digital currency into two camps: coins that are regulated and managed by a government or central agency, and coins that remain pseudonymous and decentralized. White coins and black coins." -- Full story: http://motherboard.vice.com/read/why-bitcoin-may-one-day-split-into-black-and-white-coins
I don't think it should be regulated at all. I do however think that it is naive to believe that there could ever be adoption on a massive scale without governments stepping in and sticking their hands in everyone's pockets.
At the end of the day, they pretend to care about people's financial well-being, but they really don't. They just want to make sure they are getting their piece of the tax pie.
At the end of the day, they pretend to care about people's financial well-being, but they really don't. They just want to make sure they are getting their piece of the tax pie.
This is a trick question, right?
What does regulation mean? Ha, there should be very little regulation...let the community regulated it based on their actions not a set of by-laws and infrastructure.
What does regulation mean? Ha, there should be very little regulation...let the community regulated it based on their actions not a set of by-laws and infrastructure.
I think it shouldn't be regulated at all, it's fine as it is.
I don't think it should be regulated. It regulates itself, though I understand that the powers that be are going to anyway.
Bitcoin should ABSOLUTELY be regulated. It should be regulated just as it IS BEING REGULATED, by the math and science of nature, that are being used in the protocols.
In fact, there is NO OTHER WAY to regulate Bitcoin. None of the governmental regulation is Bitcoin regulation. ALL of the governmental regulation - 100% of it - is PEOPLE regulation.
Personally, I'm a bit tired of being regulated by government so that they are forcing me to do their will. Isn't this the reason that Satoshi invented Bitcoin in the first place? because he was sick and tired of the banks and governments regulating our lives in ways that we didn't want?
If you want to get regulation out of your life, you need to FIRST recognize that governments don't regulate Bitcoin. THEY ONLY REGULATE PEOPLE !!!
I don't think it should be regulated. It regulates itself, though I understand that the powers that be are going to anyway.
Regulation seems like such a dirty word round here. I know they can't really regulate the technology (and I hope they realise that), but the governments are going to want to regulate the way people deal with it or when they sell it for fiat. It's going to be interersting to see how each different government deals with it though and it'll be funny watching how badly they screw up.
Jump to: