I think by creating a Bitcoin savings account only, people can use an ATM to invest in Bitcoins without being able to spend them.
1. Customer uses a smartphone to setup an account and password based on cryptography with a special app that also sends a copy of account information to email and 2FA verification.
2. Customer puts local currency into ATM
3. Customer uses app to set up a multisig transaction (optional) with a nLockTime set for 1 year like a Certificate of Deposit.
4. Customer receives an encrypted signature key electronically and a hardcopy as a receipt.
5. Customer may withdraw whatever that Bitcoin amount is worth minus a small fee by inserting the hardcopy (or a oopy) or use the app.
Note: The customer may wish for the price of Bitcoin to be higher than when secured.
Obviously the ATM company would not even be in the Bitcoin business except by collecting fees and reinvesting like a bank.
edit:
I think the option of an nLockTime that sends the Bitcoins to the account holder would help ensure that if the ATM business folds, the transactions are not lost. The accounts cannot be transmitted any farther that the ATM business allows. They would probably also require ID to set up an account for AML conformity.
Topic: Make a real ATM - page 2. (Read 1961 times)
If I am understanding your last post correctly they would only add or remove dollars and the dollar balance would be based on the BTC exchange rate. So if the exchange rate today is $1,000, they deposit $1,000 and have a 1 BTC balance. Later it rises to $2,000 per BTC so they could withdraw up to $2,000 USD?
It is an interesting idea although my reading of FinCEN overly broad and vague "guidance" on virtual currencies is that would still be considered a MSB. A startup looking to do that should obtain qualified legal advice though as it could also run afoul of various banking and securities statutes as well. Ironically it might actually be more regulated than a "normal" Bitcoin ATM.
It is an interesting idea although my reading of FinCEN overly broad and vague "guidance" on virtual currencies is that would still be considered a MSB. A startup looking to do that should obtain qualified legal advice though as it could also run afoul of various banking and securities statutes as well. Ironically it might actually be more regulated than a "normal" Bitcoin ATM.
What distinction do you think that makes (other than likely the worst marketable ATM in the history of mankind)?
FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
Really it would be more like a Bitcoin savings account. It would be a terrible ATM but we will never likely see any real bitcoin commerce in america with the witch hunt mentality. At least it would give some bitcoin exposure to people on the street. FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
IF the ATM accepted dollars and converted them to BTC then FinCEN (in their awkward let cram this square peg into the round hole which is the "closest" fit mentality) says its operator is a money transmitter.
So if there are no full service Bitcoin ATMs in the US there will be no "savings account" Bitcoin ATMs in the US either and if you could deploy Bitcoin savings account ATMs it would make a lot more business sense to just deploy much more capable and popular full service ones.
What distinction do you think that makes (other than likely the worst marketable ATM in the history of mankind)?
FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
Really it would be more like a Bitcoin savings account. It would be a terrible ATM but we will never likely see any real bitcoin commerce in america with the witch hunt mentality. At least it would give some bitcoin exposure to people on the street. FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
IF the ATM accepted dollars and converted them to BTC then FinCEN (in their awkward let cram this square peg into the round hole which is the "closest" fit mentality) says its operator is a money transmitter.
So if there are no full service Bitcoin ATMs in the US there will be no "savings account" Bitcoin ATMs in the US either and if you could deploy Bitcoin savings account ATMs it would make a lot more business sense to just deploy much more capable and popular full service ones.
What distinction do you think that makes (other than likely the worst marketable ATM in the history of mankind)?
FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
Really it would be more like a Bitcoin savings account. It would be a terrible ATM but we will never likely see any real bitcoin commerce in america with the witch hunt mentality. At least it would give some bitcoin exposure to people on the street. FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
What distinction do you think that makes (other than likely the worst marketable ATM in the history of mankind)?
FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
FinCEN says the act of exchanging BTC for USD or the reverse is what makes one a MSB. Your proposed restricitons would only make the ATM very unpopular.
BTW "traditional ATMs" comply with money transmitter laws. You can't get cash out of an ATM in the US without having given someone somewhere all your personal info (name, address, ssn, dob, photo id, etc). The ATM operator may not have that information but they are working with your card issuer who does. If the card issuer doesn't follow the rules the ATM network won't accept their cards.
I'm probably not clear enough. I mean to say that you would need to restrict the ATMs further so you cannot add funds to any other wallet than has been issued by the ATM owners. Robocoins and Lamassu machines allow you to send to any address. This should be restricted so that such funds can only be transferred outside the ATM system. For instance, you would not be able to send to your smartphone but you could be issued a paper wallet that you could sweep yourself after the funds have adequate confirmations.
It's actually already avaible in few cities.
Can't someone just make a Bitcoin ATM that works like a real bank ATM. That is you register for a wallet and only get one wallet address. You can deposit and withdraw from that wallet, but can't send to any other address unless it is in your wallet. Additional paper wallets could be issued from a deterministic wallet, but would not be transferable to another wallet within that ATM system. If funds were to be moved, they would be treated like cash and no longer the responsibility of the money transmitter. Basically it would be like a smartphone app with local currencies loaded. This seems like it would be fully compliant with how current ATMs work with full accountability.
Jump to: