Topic: NYDFS form for submitting comments on bitlicense (Read 3528 times)
Well, mercifully they've extended the comment period. So at least there's that.
Although im not american, the most relevant point that will hurt bitcoin is the word "resident". in regards to ANY world-wide service that has a CUSTOMER that is a new york resident, that business would need the licence.
as it means just having 1 person living in new york that purposefully goes to every bitcoin service (exchange, game, pool, etc) and then reporting to government which site he went to would automatically get those companies in alot of trouble. either instantly fined, or demanded to buy the licence. no matter where in the world they exist. purely because of one new york resident purposefully doing it.
you kind of have to expect that businesses have to be monitored to some extent, which you can all argue what level or if certain services do or don't need monitoring. but while all of you New Yorker's are commenting to your state governors etc about what businesses should or should not be regulated, please atleast get them to remove the word "resident's" from the draft.
thanks
as it means just having 1 person living in new york that purposefully goes to every bitcoin service (exchange, game, pool, etc) and then reporting to government which site he went to would automatically get those companies in alot of trouble. either instantly fined, or demanded to buy the licence. no matter where in the world they exist. purely because of one new york resident purposefully doing it.
you kind of have to expect that businesses have to be monitored to some extent, which you can all argue what level or if certain services do or don't need monitoring. but while all of you New Yorker's are commenting to your state governors etc about what businesses should or should not be regulated, please atleast get them to remove the word "resident's" from the draft.
thanks
Interesting point, it's like a big issue in law nowadays is jurisdiction because the internet means basically anyone can order from any website so they the owner of the site makes themselves possibly vulnerable to being sued. In other words you sell something that hurts someone (accidentally) in New York and you live in California, then you get sued in NY and have to hire someone or fly all the way to NY to defend yourself.
I would suggest actually reading and understanding the regulations prior to commenting otherwise you will sound like a fool and will likely be ignored by the regulator
Knowing how bitcoin and cryptocurencies work would be the most vital thing to not sound like a fool. It's surprising how many people don't know how they do yet they use cryptocurrencies...
Although im not american, the most relevant point that will hurt bitcoin is the word "resident". in regards to ANY world-wide service that has a CUSTOMER that is a new york resident, that business would need the licence.
as it means just having 1 person living in new york that purposefully goes to every bitcoin service (exchange, game, pool, etc) and then reporting to government which site he went to would automatically get those companies in alot of trouble. either instantly fined, or demanded to buy the licence. no matter where in the world they exist. purely because of one new york resident purposefully doing it.
you kind of have to expect that businesses have to be monitored to some extent, which you can all argue what level or if certain services do or don't need monitoring. but while all of you New Yorker's are commenting to your state governors etc about what businesses should or should not be regulated, please atleast get them to remove the word "resident's" from the draft.
thanks
as it means just having 1 person living in new york that purposefully goes to every bitcoin service (exchange, game, pool, etc) and then reporting to government which site he went to would automatically get those companies in alot of trouble. either instantly fined, or demanded to buy the licence. no matter where in the world they exist. purely because of one new york resident purposefully doing it.
you kind of have to expect that businesses have to be monitored to some extent, which you can all argue what level or if certain services do or don't need monitoring. but while all of you New Yorker's are commenting to your state governors etc about what businesses should or should not be regulated, please atleast get them to remove the word "resident's" from the draft.
thanks
I just hope that people actually post constructive comments and aren't just 'trolling' or harassing the people devising those regulations. Talking about a mature community and a currency that's evolved enough to enter Wall Street and the banking sector.
I would agree that this will be very important if any of the "anti regulation" comments are to be taken seriously. If they get a lot of comments like "horse shit" then they will think you are a 13 year old and will likely ignore you. This is mostly not true. Be civil, be somewhat informed, but a massive deluge of comments will let them know that we are watching, and that we care. There are experts who are going to write very detailed, well thought out responses and proposals about what should be changed and why. Lets back that up with thousands and thousands of : "I don't support the regulations as written, they are too onerous and overly broad". The more of us who speak up, the better. Don't be dissuaded from speaking up just because you don't have the time to read every letter of the proposed regs or because you don't feel like writing a five-page thesis in reply.
I expect the regulations to be heavily modified after this draft. They got it wrong. I will spend time to give a more targeted reply after they are revised.
Here is what I am writing:
"I find your proposed regulations for Virtual Currencies to be too onerous, with many of the definitions overly broad. As written the regulations will stifle innovation. Only the largest, most established players will be able to afford to comply with the new rules. Please don't drive innovation out of New York or out of the United States."
I just hope that people actually post constructive comments and aren't just 'trolling' or harassing the people devising those regulations. Talking about a mature community and a currency that's evolved enough to enter Wall Street and the banking sector.
I would agree that this will be very important if any of the "anti regulation" comments are to be taken seriously. If they get a lot of comments like "horse shit" then they will think you are a 13 year old and will likely ignore you. 
I just hope that people actually post constructive comments and aren't just 'trolling' or harassing the people devising those regulations. Talking about a mature community and a currency that's evolved enough to enter Wall Street and the banking sector.
I would suggest actually reading and understanding the regulations prior to commenting otherwise you will sound like a fool and will likely be ignored by the regulator
The form is the "Notice of Proposed Rule Making" on this page:
http://www.dos.ny.gov/info/e-file/e-forms.html
It is totally impossible to download the pdf. I have tried more than one computer, Win7 and Ubuntu, the latest version of Adobe Reader XI and ALWAYS get this error
To view the full contents of this document, you need a later version of the PDF viewer. You can upgrade
to the latest version of Adobe Reader from www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
For further support, go to www.adobe.com/support/products/acrreader.html
Same thing for all the pdf links under the "Revised" heading on that page. This is a false error message; the pdfs under the "Formats" and "Other" headings all show up just fine.
Do they pull this shit on purpose?
WTF.
http://www.dos.ny.gov/info/e-file/e-forms.html
It is totally impossible to download the pdf. I have tried more than one computer, Win7 and Ubuntu, the latest version of Adobe Reader XI and ALWAYS get this error
To view the full contents of this document, you need a later version of the PDF viewer. You can upgrade
to the latest version of Adobe Reader from www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
For further support, go to www.adobe.com/support/products/acrreader.html
Same thing for all the pdf links under the "Revised" heading on that page. This is a false error message; the pdfs under the "Formats" and "Other" headings all show up just fine.
Do they pull this shit on purpose?
WTF.
Jump to: