I voted for the first option because duh!
I have bitcoins and the French authorities don't have them or control them - my bitcoins are still totally independent of this.
Nobody is regulating me.
Are the French government now regulating my bitcoins because of this announcement?
It just seems to mean that people in the Euro zone can now interface with bitcoins more easily than anywhere else in the world (though China is fairly easy too surprisingly)
Topic: The french exchange partnership with banks (Read 1769 times)
davout, i've been following this fairly closely but not every detail. question: does the French bank actually "know" that you've tagged onto Aqora's PSP status and signed off on it?
They don't have to. The same way MasterCard wasn't aware of the BitInstant debit card, they're the technical providers.Aqoba is a financially licensed entity that is contractually linked to a bank in order to use its technical infrastructure, Aqoba has sole authority to choose with which clients it wishes to do business.
ok, then the answer is no. i was actually going to bring up the Bitinstant debit card as an example of how the traditional banking system can then still get involved by preventing you from going forward. since we haven't seen the Bitinstant card we can assume something negative has happened. this is considerably less positive than if you said the French bank was aware of the affiliation and had signed off on it.
davout, i've been following this fairly closely but not every detail. question: does the French bank actually "know" that you've tagged onto Aqora's PSP status and signed off on it?
They don't have to. The same way MasterCard wasn't aware of the BitInstant debit card, they're the technical providers.Aqoba is a financially licensed entity that is contractually linked to a bank in order to use its technical infrastructure, Aqoba has sole authority to choose with which clients it wishes to do business.
has it occurred to anyone that this could actually be the initial foray into the traditional banking system actually adopting Bitcoin as a reserve currency?
the haters are too busy hating i guess 
davout, i've been following this fairly closely but not every detail. question: does the French bank actually "know" that you've tagged onto Aqora's PSP status and signed off on it?
correct me if I'm wrong, but all this was, is a bank that said " sure we will hold customer deposits / withdraws for your bitcoin exchange ".
It does add some legitimacy. but its not as if the bank is holding BTC deposits ( Now that would be epic news
)
this is really good news for bitcoin being traded in EUR. basically means their banking problems are over for good.
I have no clue why anyone would have a problem with this
every other exchange operates with a bank account too...
It does add some legitimacy. but its not as if the bank is holding BTC deposits ( Now that would be epic news
)this is really good news for bitcoin being traded in EUR. basically means their banking problems are over for good.
I have no clue why anyone would have a problem with this
every other exchange operates with a bank account too...has it occurred to anyone that this could actually be the initial foray into the traditional banking system actually adopting Bitcoin as a reserve currency?
the haters are too busy hating i guess
has it occurred to anyone that this could actually be the initial foray into the traditional banking system actually adopting Bitcoin as a reserve currency?
As far as I'm concerned, at first I was enthusiastic about this news but after having read a few comments I'm not so sure. It's kind of complicated.
It's actually quite simple,
As Erik wrote:
I think a simple point is being missed by the critics... Companies that offer Bitcoin services will be shut down if they do not comply with certain regulations. This is a fact. It's true that small operations can exist as agorist entities, and that's excellent, but any company that wishes to be larger than a few people and make enough money to actually change anything cannot hide from the law.
So the choice is this: you can either have Bitcoin exist with some small operations in business, or you can have Bitcoin exist with many companies in all shapes and sizes, each in varying degrees of compliance.
....
For Bitcoin to succeed, bridges must be built with the traditional financial system, so that individuals can move back and forth between Bitcoinworld and the normal world. As this gets easier and easier, and people (of all kinds, not just those ideologically motivated) grow comfortable with Bitcoin, it will gradually replace those legacy systems, and perhaps, if this experiment succeeds, those old systems will start crumbling and falling apart, as individuals gradually chose the superior Bitcoin system instead of them.
But this is a process, and can never happen if Bitcoin remains isolated from the normal financial world. A life boat can never save anyone if it does not first go pick up the survivors.
Please make a better poll than this, when looking at some of this stuff I keep getting the feeling you all watch too much Fox News.
Help yourself to creating one if you don't like this one 
Please make a better poll than this, when looking at some of this stuff I keep getting the feeling you all watch too much Fox News.
Good thing banks Aren't democracies 
Is it time to put "freedom fries" back on the menu yet? Looks like sanity's prevailing so far, the shills must have tired themselves out in the announcement thread. Bet there's 100 sockpuppets getting their 5 posts up so they can vote though
Heh. Good thing Paymium is not a democracy 
jesus people
banks are the fucking problem
banks are the fucking problem
No one has voted for last option yet? I'm surprised
Good replies so far. I second that.
How about a option does not effect me but is great for Euro?
Can't vote any of those.
1. It is awesome, yes, but in no way will it improve bitcoin legitimacy, it only improves bitcoin-central legitimacy.
2. It's not only not a bad idea, as stated in 1. it's awesome (and i'm probably gonna use it too).
3. Again, it is not a bad idea, but it will be more or less harmless to the bitcoin project anyway.
4. It's not wrong at all, it's awesome.
I really don't get all the worries.
The only people concerned about this are the ones using bitcoin-central, all other bitcoin-users don't really need to care about it.
1. It is awesome, yes, but in no way will it improve bitcoin legitimacy, it only improves bitcoin-central legitimacy.
2. It's not only not a bad idea, as stated in 1. it's awesome (and i'm probably gonna use it too).
3. Again, it is not a bad idea, but it will be more or less harmless to the bitcoin project anyway.
4. It's not wrong at all, it's awesome.
I really don't get all the worries.
The only people concerned about this are the ones using bitcoin-central, all other bitcoin-users don't really need to care about it.
I'm not sure any poll about the quite controversial recent announcement from bitcoin-central has been created yet.
As far as I'm concerned, at first I was enthusiastic about this news but after having read a few comments I'm not so sure. It's kind of complicated.
Jump to: