Can you explain why *you* think impressing Washington D.C. is at the forefront of the foremost foundation in bitcoin?
Do not misconstrue my line of questioning: I appreciate the fact that transparency, compliance, and public perception are easily overlooked necessities in our movement. Especially to a bunch of cryptoanarchic punks who are solely self-sufficient, trustless, open-source etc, btc, etc. I am not one of the latter, I do find it concerning however that this is what a person of your stature in the community chooses to enunciate of all things.
I agree that getting these two new players in TBF is bold moves for bold guys/gal. I'm uncertain whether or not any direction the bitcoin foundation has captained is truly in the greater good's interest..
1BTCitsmartgui
If you are asking "me" I can only say the the major bitcoin conversation was being driven by Law Enforcement. After the Gawker article in June 1st of 2011,
http://gawker.com/the-underground-website-where-you-can-buy-any-drug-imag-30818160 bitcoin came on the public radar soley for it's ilicit use. There was no mention of is's previous 3 years of development not the 10 years of cryptographic advancements and the emerging computer science field of distributed consensus that made the bitcoin protocol possible.
Then on June 5th of 2011 US Senator and Senate Banking Committee Member Chuck Schumer jumps on television and demands the shutdown of silkroad which uses the "anonymous" cryptocurrency bitcoin.
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Schumer-Calls-on-Feds-to-Shut-Down-Online-Drug-Marketplace-123187958.htmlThen in April of 2012 the FBI report was leaked.
http://cryptome.org/2012/05/fbi-bitcoin.pdf This probably took about 6 months to assemble so the investigation started that Fall.
It wasn't until September of 2012 that the Bitcoin Foundation was created.
Meanwhile the crypto anarachists and libertarians continued to buy drugs on silk road and allow money laundering through its unregulated use of cryptocurrency.
Who do you think was going to win that argument?
So if it not for the efforts of the Foundation in Washington, we could have had a very different outcome at the November 2013 Senate Hearing and I guarantee you Ben Lawasky would not be calling for a Bitcoin license if interested parties were not interacting with these regulators and legislators to aid them in understanding the amazing potential benefits of the technology.
This paper was circulated to policymakers, legislator and regualtors in washington.
http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/Brito_BitcoinPrimer_embargoed.pdfThis is a Great article about how effective the Foundation was in Washington, helping guide the bitcoin debate.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/11/21/heres-how-bitcoin-charmed-washington/Just me 2c.