Soo.. if I contract with a mining pool to provide hashes, and get paid in BTC.. am i a miner? Or is the Pool Op the miner? After all, the mined coins go to HIS wallet when first "created" ...
I'm just providing hashes.. he's the one who's building the new block, and broadcasting it out to the world to be included in the blockchain....
Sigg
Topic: Poll, FinCEN Guidance, Good or Bad? (Read 4479 times)
Oh and let's create Bitcoinland and make bitcoin legal tender there, so it is no more "virtual currency"
.That's actually an interesting thought, if some small country ( cayman islands or something?) were to make bitcoins a legal tender that would throw a real monkey wrench in all FinCEN's definitions. I don't really see how they'd be able to isolate bitcoin from any other fiat currency.
Time to get lobbying some small countries?
How about Nauru? Doesn't have their own currency, any high rollers feel like making some donations
Mining and selling mined coins does not make me a fucking MONEY TRANSMITTER. Am i a money transmitter when i mine and sell gold? No. Same for bitcoin, because it is digital gold.
Oh and let's create Bitcoinland and make bitcoin legal tender there, so it is no more "virtual currency"
Oh and let's create Bitcoinland and make bitcoin legal tender there, so it is no more "virtual currency"
From what I've gathered of the article, it looks like they're planning on targeting miners because they seem to think that's where all the Bitcoins will come from and if they shut that down they shut the whole thing down, failing to realise of course Bitcoins can be broken up very easily, but of course there is a lot there and there's a lot of PR speak bullshit going on.
Ah yes, the slippery slope argument -- that's the one that's pretty much universally rejected as a fallacy, right?
Operating in the grey of the law brings more uncertainty to investors than having clear regulations.
Operating in the grey of the law brings more uncertainty to investors than having clear regulations.
Voted bad. 
Why? Because Slippery slope:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1akq4d/regarding_the_fincen_regulations_stop_acting_like/
Why? Because Slippery slope:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1akq4d/regarding_the_fincen_regulations_stop_acting_like/
Bitcoin clones are basically equivalent to Bitcoin. The page doesn't mention the word "dollar" either, but it obviously applies to dollars.
Wow your dumb.
great argument! Welcome to my Wow list.
Thanks I like partially/misquoting people too.
I don't see how they could track or even enforce that regulation on miners.
Once passed through an anonymizer, they basically become users of virtual currency - since they won't be owning any of the created coins any more. Since users aren't affected in any way, isn't this an obvious loophole?
Of course, they're expecting people to play fair and declare what they're doing, but I don't see how they could ever enforce that regulation.
Once passed through an anonymizer, they basically become users of virtual currency - since they won't be owning any of the created coins any more. Since users aren't affected in any way, isn't this an obvious loophole?
Of course, they're expecting people to play fair and declare what they're doing, but I don't see how they could ever enforce that regulation.
Just buy gold with btc and exchange for fiat. They just declared it as legal to do so.
I don't see how they could track or even enforce that regulation on miners.
Once passed through an anonymizer, they basically become users of virtual currency - since they won't be owning any of the created coins any more. Since users aren't affected in any way, isn't this an obvious loophole?
Of course, they're expecting people to play fair and declare what they're doing, but I don't see how they could ever enforce that regulation.
Once passed through an anonymizer, they basically become users of virtual currency - since they won't be owning any of the created coins any more. Since users aren't affected in any way, isn't this an obvious loophole?
Of course, they're expecting people to play fair and declare what they're doing, but I don't see how they could ever enforce that regulation.
The US is like the titanic and bitcoin is the iceburg.
I should add that I think the law is good news. Big businesses don't like grey areas. Their accountants and CFOs need things spelled out, so they can analyse risks appropriately.
Having some guidance -- albeit rather obvious guidance -- is very helpful and a very promising development.
Having some guidance -- albeit rather obvious guidance -- is very helpful and a very promising development.
I think it is too early to state your conclusion (2).
Does a miner "create" virtual currency? I don't think so -- the currency is created by a decentralised virtual platform and given to them as a reward for computations. I do not think this affects miners.
Does a miner "create" virtual currency? I don't think so -- the currency is created by a decentralised virtual platform and given to them as a reward for computations. I do not think this affects miners.
what does this mean if you sell BTC on Gox?
Nothing.The cases that are affected are:
1) Mining coins and then selling them for fiat.
2) Acting as a third party who sends coins from Person A to Person B (neither of whom are you) as part of an exchange of fiat.
So, exchanges and miners are affected - nobody else.
Bitcoin clones are basically equivalent to Bitcoin. The page doesn't mention the word "dollar" either, but it obviously applies to dollars.
Wow your dumb.
Wow, great argument! Welcome to my ignore list.
Quote
A person that creates units of this convertible virtual currency and uses it to purchase real or virtual goods and services is a user of the convertible virtual currency and not subject to regulation as a money transmitter. By contrast, a person that creates units of convertible virtual currency and sells those units to another person for real currency or its equivalent is engaged in transmission to another location and is a money transmitter.
So what happens when mining income is mostly fees rather than inflation subsidy? They aren't creating units of currency, they're just getting paid fees.
Can I separate my mining income into fee and subsidy and turn the former into fiat without a money transmitter license?
I suspect FinCEN didn't look too carefully into the technical details...
what does this mean if you sell BTC on Gox?
Where is the "neutral" option?
Bad, this means expenses and expenses and fail regulations like the tons that already exist and that are strangling the economy.
Anyone else perplexed by the distinction between "real" and "virtual" that's arbitrarily made without definition?
They provided a definition, though. A "virtual currency" is any currency that isn't legal tender in any country.
Laws are created to solve problems. I wonder what problems were perceived that necessitated this move.
Jump to: