Regulations are not centralization, we need to learn this already. As long as bitcoin itself is not tempered with, whatever law they put on you is a law related to you and what you can do with bitcoin and it is not about bitcoin itself.
This is why I always give the 21 million bitcoins example, if no government can change that and it will always stay at 21 million or at the very least we decide to move to another chain with 210 million or whatever, that means that governments and regulations can't be a part of it. This is why I believe that it is decentralized no matter what laws or regulations countries pass, doesn't change a thing about bitcoin.
Topic: More regulation on crypto developers, altcoins and exchanges (Read 261 times)
Centralization has its own pros and cons but in my opinion, the regulations would enhance the safety and security of our funds to some extent. Also it will apply to all crypto currencies and hopefully that will prove to be helpful for traders and investors in the future. But I do understand the concern of fellow traders. Hoping for the best regarding this news.
More regulation over exchanges were found to be hard with time. This is a way to have control over the people's funds. The recent one being the leading cryptocurrency exchange of India, Kuber switch stopping the service for UPI transaction. Only RTGS and NEFT transactions were possible. Already these kind of restrictions were found on the global market. Anyhow people will find an alternate solution for this.
Bipartisan bill to give CFTC authority over exchanges and stablecoins
I am thinking this will be for altcoins and exchanges and not bitcoin. This will not go beyond cryptocurrency developers, dealers, exchanges and stablecoin providers that are in US but there are several of them there and other countries can follow if this is successfully done.
But I hope this will not affect bitcoin in any way.
Quote
The Digital Commodity Exchange Act would give the commodities regulator the authority to determine rules for cryptocurrency developers and exchanges offering spot trading.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers in D.C. introduced an updated bill on April 28 to regulate cryptocurrency developers, dealers, exchanges, and stablecoin providers, bringing them under the regulatory control of the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
A bipartisan group of lawmakers in D.C. introduced an updated bill on April 28 to regulate cryptocurrency developers, dealers, exchanges, and stablecoin providers, bringing them under the regulatory control of the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
I am thinking this will be for altcoins and exchanges and not bitcoin. This will not go beyond cryptocurrency developers, dealers, exchanges and stablecoin providers that are in US but there are several of them there and other countries can follow if this is successfully done.
But I hope this will not affect bitcoin in any way.
I know I am like a broken record saying this, but if crypto, and BTC in general want a step forward to mass adoption, a good chunk of crypto freedoms will have to be forfited, and we will have to come to terms with some regulations coming into place. The question is how much and at what cost.
This is expected with the ongoing expansion of the popularities of NFTs and altcoins, they will need to come up with something to secure the assets of the investors and at the same time, they will shorten the gap between decentralization. Expect more updates such as this one in the future because where there is money, there are people who will gonna do their own way to claim some of it. Let's just hope that they will not totally close the door of unanimous transactions if they do, these whole financial revolutions, end up with nothing.
hero member
Activity: 2660
Merit: 651
Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me
I am thinking this will be for altcoins and exchanges and not bitcoin.
Technically, yes. The government can not regulate every decentralized cryptocurrency and privacy coin but they will want to regulate the initial offering (crypto developers), CEX, and some stablecoin like USDT to prevent another market cap manipulation which was once done by the USDT team.This is what some people hate about regulation and the privacy people won't get through the regulation.
It would take me a year to get that going properly with the legal papers but I would be easily handling that eventually, not really impossible. So, why trust tether? Why trust any company at all for it? It is such a huge amount. So, them getting some closer eye on them would be fine by me for sure. They are not decentralized anyway, they deserve it.
The game played by the Tether team was among the thing that make the SEC introduce KYC, regulation, etc in crypto but the regulation the OP was talking about is not only about Tether but all Stablecoins which I believe would harm the privacy level in the Stablecoin market. 
I am thinking this will be for altcoins and exchanges and not bitcoin.
Technically, yes. The government can not regulate every decentralized cryptocurrency and privacy coin but they will want to regulate the initial offering (crypto developers), CEX, and some stablecoin like USDT to prevent another market cap manipulation which was once done by the USDT team.It would take me a year to get that going properly with the legal papers but I would be easily handling that eventually, not really impossible. So, why trust tether? Why trust any company at all for it? It is such a huge amount. So, them getting some closer eye on them would be fine by me for sure. They are not decentralized anyway, they deserve it.
I guess for us crypto enthusiasts having seen the governments trying to milk us all over the years imposing unreasonable taxes or compromising our right to privacy and all makes us see any type of regulation as something bad. It would be better to be open minded about this a bit because we really cannot avoid regulation and that is an unchangeable fact. But beyond this reason, there is just no such thing as absolute freedom, one way or another there will be limits for if none the world would've long gone into sht. Only thing that us, crypto enthusiasts can do is to try and and adapt to these regulations and try to take advantage of the benefits that it may bring since there sure will be some while hoping they do not overstep boundaries that shouldn't be overstepped.
From what the article says, it's just stablecoins, and exchanges that allow spot trading of those. I actually think it's a good thing because it'll finally put some control over how backed USDT is, and what it's actually backed with. Perhaps this info won't be publicly available, but even if at least authorities will know, it's better than nothing. Overall, it seems it won't affect Bitcoin and most altcoins, apart from perhaps affecting some trading pairs because they include stablecoins. We'll see how it goes in practice, but I don't think it's anything bad.
Yeah I agree, this may probably put some mind at ease with usdt usage and lack of transparency, knowing the authorities are watchful of what they do will influence their operations.
And I think the idea of regulating altcoins is great, the rate at which new projects are pumping into the altcoins market is alarming, regulations will cut down so many shit being created on a daily basis. This should regulations should not be for the Americans alone, it should be for every country.
In the United States we are seeing more cryptocurrency exchange platforms that are operating as well as dapps.
It is well known that there is an important movement of developers who are building to make the main capitals of the United States a boost for blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
So a law to regulate the use of altcoins, stablecoins that prevent any act of fraud will give American users security when investing in cryptocurrencies.
It is well known that there is an important movement of developers who are building to make the main capitals of the United States a boost for blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
So a law to regulate the use of altcoins, stablecoins that prevent any act of fraud will give American users security when investing in cryptocurrencies.
And also, we are already heading in that direction. The government just want to protect those individuals who will be in this market.
Just take for example, who will audit these stable coin platforms, if not the government?
If you are legit and claiming that you have the actual assets pegged to a stable coin, you won't be afraid of the government regulations.
Because for me, this will give security to newcomers, who are new and no idea how scammers work in crypto.
At least with the intervention of the government, they are quite protected. And then, they can move on to other alts once they got a good grasp of the market.
Well that's what their excuses on going after exchanges that doesn't have KYC or not enforcing it. And projects that are scamming people, government wanted to protect the consumer as they are mandated by law.
I guess this is not new, again this started in 2017 wherein CFTC suddenly started this whole crusade against everything related to crypto and this continue up to this day.
I don't think this is for Bitcoin or decentralized altcoins. How a decentralized cryptocurrency would regulate? They can't prevent them from using or creating. Regulation sounds are for a centralized organization like an exchange and stable coins which they mentioned in the title. So it's impossible to impact Bitcoin, even if it won't affect decentralized altcoins.
Decentralization is the way to keep your money. I also do not think the US government's regulation of this law is clear or not, but I will not endorse the eternal actions of governments. They admit bitcoin is superior and they will have to continue to enforce regulations to increase price pressure on bitcoin and ceypto. Decentralization will also have scalable stablecoins, loans where bitcoin is collateral… I believe bitcoin's long-term will be better. In the United States we are seeing more cryptocurrency exchange platforms that are operating as well as dapps.
It is well known that there is an important movement of developers who are building to make the main capitals of the United States a boost for blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
So a law to regulate the use of altcoins, stablecoins that prevent any act of fraud will give American users security when investing in cryptocurrencies.
It is well known that there is an important movement of developers who are building to make the main capitals of the United States a boost for blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
So a law to regulate the use of altcoins, stablecoins that prevent any act of fraud will give American users security when investing in cryptocurrencies.
And also, we are already heading in that direction. The government just want to protect those individuals who will be in this market.
Just take for example, who will audit these stable coin platforms, if not the government?
If you are legit and claiming that you have the actual assets pegged to a stable coin, you won't be afraid of the government regulations.
Because for me, this will give security to newcomers, who are new and no idea how scammers work in crypto.
At least with the intervention of the government, they are quite protected. And then, they can move on to other alts once they got a good grasp of the market.
In the United States we are seeing more cryptocurrency exchange platforms that are operating as well as dapps.
It is well known that there is an important movement of developers who are building to make the main capitals of the United States a boost for blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
So a law to regulate the use of altcoins, stablecoins that prevent any act of fraud will give American users security when investing in cryptocurrencies.
It is well known that there is an important movement of developers who are building to make the main capitals of the United States a boost for blockchain, bitcoin and cryptocurrencies.
So a law to regulate the use of altcoins, stablecoins that prevent any act of fraud will give American users security when investing in cryptocurrencies.
As I understand it, the decision is related to stablecoins, which are linked to some assets to stabilize their value, such as USDT and others, and central platforms that provide services related to paper money or that are based in the United States.
Regulation is a real test of the extent of decentralization of many of the services that claim to be decentralized.
- The reality of the altcoin market is full of scam, and if these currencies are centralized, they will not have a future.
- Crypto exchanges manipulate prices, gain from listing, pump coin and do a lot of shady things.
Regulation is a real test of the extent of decentralization of many of the services that claim to be decentralized.
I don't think this is for Bitcoin or decentralized altcoins. How a decentralized cryptocurrency would regulate? They can't prevent them from using or creating. Regulation sounds are for a centralized organization like an exchange and stable coins which they mentioned in the title. So it's impossible to impact Bitcoin, even if it won't affect decentralized altcoins.
As far as I'm concerned, stable coins are extraordinarily risky and whatever assets they claim to be supported by require that you trust them to maintain the value of those assets. I understand people have their reasons for using them, fine - one portion this bill seemingly would force stable coin providers to register as fixed-value digital commodity operators and that would force stable coin providers to have disclosure documents registered with the federal government which provide info on the assets backing the coin. Good. Stable coins are already centralized so it doesn't matter to me what type of regulation that would exist on a centralized stable coin. They're not "true" crypto currencies anyways.
hero member
Activity: 2660
Merit: 651
Want top-notch marketing for your project, Hire me
I am thinking this will be for altcoins and exchanges and not bitcoin.
Technically, yes. The government can not regulate every decentralized cryptocurrency and privacy coin but they will want to regulate the initial offering (crypto developers), CEX, and some stablecoin like USDT to prevent another market cap manipulation which was once done by the USDT team.This will not go beyond cryptocurrency developers, dealers, exchanges and stablecoin providers that are in US but there are several of them there and other countries can follow if this is successfully done.
But I hope this will not affect bitcoin in any way.
Most countries where cryptocurrency is not banned have already followed this step ever since the institutional investors find safe haven in cryptocurrency. But I hope this will not affect bitcoin in any way.
From what the article says, it's just stablecoins, and exchanges that allow spot trading of those. I actually think it's a good thing because it'll finally put some control over how backed USDT is, and what it's actually backed with. Perhaps this info won't be publicly available, but even if at least authorities will know, it's better than nothing. Overall, it seems it won't affect Bitcoin and most altcoins, apart from perhaps affecting some trading pairs because they include stablecoins. We'll see how it goes in practice, but I don't think it's anything bad.
OK but could you explain to me how can they still receive trading fees equal to 1% of the volume if the trade takes place Peer-to-Peer and there is no middle man (their servers) involved?!
From their introduction to DAO:Quote
Contributors produce, creating BSQ
In the Bisq DAO, trading fees are collected from traders and distributed to contributors, but there is no central authority to do this. Here’s how it works: after a Bisq contributor does work, they file a compensation request in the DAO with a description of what they did and how much BSQ they want in return. Then, stakeholders (who are other contributors, traders, and anyone else with BSQ) vote for/against the request. If the request is approved, the contributor is issued new BSQ in the amount they requested and BSQ supply is increased.
Traders consume, burning BSQ
Then, a trader looking for lower trading fees can buy those BSQ tokens from a contributor. When they buy BSQ tokens for BTC, the contributor is paid for their work, and the value transfer from producer to consumer is complete! When a trader pays trading fees with BSQ, those BSQ tokens are burned or "decolored" and BSQ supply is decreased. This process of creating and destroying BSQ tokens enables a sort of monetary policy controlled by Bisq stakeholders and traders.
In this way, there is no need for a central entity to collect and distribute revenue: the BSQ token enables a transfer of value from producer to consumer without any single entity controlling any aspect of the decision-making or distribution process.
In the Bisq DAO, trading fees are collected from traders and distributed to contributors, but there is no central authority to do this. Here’s how it works: after a Bisq contributor does work, they file a compensation request in the DAO with a description of what they did and how much BSQ they want in return. Then, stakeholders (who are other contributors, traders, and anyone else with BSQ) vote for/against the request. If the request is approved, the contributor is issued new BSQ in the amount they requested and BSQ supply is increased.
Traders consume, burning BSQ
Then, a trader looking for lower trading fees can buy those BSQ tokens from a contributor. When they buy BSQ tokens for BTC, the contributor is paid for their work, and the value transfer from producer to consumer is complete! When a trader pays trading fees with BSQ, those BSQ tokens are burned or "decolored" and BSQ supply is decreased. This process of creating and destroying BSQ tokens enables a sort of monetary policy controlled by Bisq stakeholders and traders.
In this way, there is no need for a central entity to collect and distribute revenue: the BSQ token enables a transfer of value from producer to consumer without any single entity controlling any aspect of the decision-making or distribution process.
Pretty neat I'll say. This is a graphical overview:
Quote from: https://bisq.wiki/File:User-dao-diagram.png
~
OK but could you explain to me how can they still receive trading fees equal to 1% of the volume if the trade takes place Peer-to-Peer and there is no middle man (their servers) involved?!Obviously they also have to know what outputs are being spent and what outputs are being created, this doesn't look so end-to-end encrypted or decentralized to me at least no when their servers are involved.
Jump to: