I realise there are bitcoin users who are libertarians or crypto-anarchists, and they tend to reject all regulation. They seem to desire that bitcoin forever remain underground. Or, if any of them ever think regulation is a good thing, it would only be because they believe any attempted regulation of Bitcoin would ultimately serve to drive Bitcoin further underground, where they want it to stay. Until of course the global revolution, when it can go mainstream because mainstream will then mean mainstream in a new world order of decentralized everything?
That's one view... but it certainly isn't mine.
Ideologically, I do see dangers in centralised power structures and hierarchical authorities. But I see benefits there too, provided sufficient checks and balances are in place to help curb abuse of power. No system will prevent or catch all abuses. There's no perfect system.
I want Bitcoin to go mainstream, for the benefits it offers people as a free payment system. The Bitcoin decentralized network and the way it's possible to trust it because of how it's set up is a really clever computer science invention. But I don't deny a role in society to centralised authority as well. I don't see the two as mutually exclusive.
But whatever your political ideology, I think we have to face the fact that Bitcoin is not going to go mainstream without going through a process of regulation. Mainstream Bitcoin means regulated Bitcoin. That need not break the benefits of Bitcoin if it's done carefully.
Governments have a legitimate interest in curbing money laundering, because of the crime that is facilitated by such money laundering. Yes, I know the worst culprits in terms of scale are the banks who are too big to fail, and too big to jail. And yes, it is hypocritical of authorities to go after the small time Bitcoin money launderer, but give a free pass to the major bankster money launderer. But the ideal solution is not to give a free pass to both, it's to go after both with the full force of the law.
If Bitcoin regulation is tuned appropriately, I think regulation could be a very positive development. I think it's important that Bitcoiners who aren't crypto-anarchists are willing to engage in the process of helping authorities to appropriately regulate Bitcoin.
Maybe some of you want to use Bitcoin to buy drugs or worse, but I don't, and I don't think the majority of people who've currently never heard of Bitcoin and who currently use cards and cash to pay for things are wanting a way to buy heroin or hire a hitman and so on. Those regular people buying everyday things are people I would like to see using Bitcoin, to pay for all the regular everyday stuff they currently use inconvenient cash and expensive cards for. Along with all the unbanked people in the developing world who are currently excluded.
I personally was very encouraged to watch the recent NY DFS Bitcoin hearings. I got the impression that the man apparently in the driving seat of that process is really quite enlightened and is genuinely looking to find a way of achieving necessary law-enforcement goals without crushing Bitcoin in the process. He's trying to find a win-win solution if he can, and (not being a crypto-anarchist) I think such a solution is possible. That possible outcome is, I think, more likely if Bitcoiners co-operate with authorities over regulation.
It remains to be seen how regulation in NY actually turns out.
But in principle I want to see Bitcoin (appropriately) regulated, it will give it a major boost towards going mainstream, where it will benefit everyone. Except the currently overpaid chief banksters of course
Any comments?