we're going to be discussed at the world bank 6/14

Ente

legendary

Activity: 2126

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Phinnaeus Gage on June 24, 2013, 11:42:57 PM

Quote from: cbeast on June 21, 2013, 03:56:28 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 21, 2013, 01:11:47 PM

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

I suppose that would be like saying the mailman is a money transmitter for carrying my checks to the utility company. You can try to interpret what FINCen is trying to say, but they haven't done a very good job of elaborating yet. There isn't any practical way to hold miners accountable for their accounting, so unless they want to be heavy handed and make an example out of someone as seems to be the practice of our land of laws, I wouldn't worry about it.

I have an idea. Let's turn the tables on FINCen.

Since they have such a difficult time elaborating, let's help them. Besides, it's inevitable, so let's accelerate the process. The TBF could sit down side-by-side with them drafting what needs to be drafted, allowing FINCen to take it to any direction they desire. Once completed, we'll know exactly what we have to do on our part.

This would help Bitcoin and Bitcoin-projects a lot.
Yes, this would be stuff I (would have) expect (-ed) TBF to work on.

Ente

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: Phinnaeus Gage on June 24, 2013, 11:42:57 PM

Quote from: cbeast on June 21, 2013, 03:56:28 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 21, 2013, 01:11:47 PM

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

I suppose that would be like saying the mailman is a money transmitter for carrying my checks to the utility company. You can try to interpret what FINCen is trying to say, but they haven't done a very good job of elaborating yet. There isn't any practical way to hold miners accountable for their accounting, so unless they want to be heavy handed and make an example out of someone as seems to be the practice of our land of laws, I wouldn't worry about it.

I have an idea. Let's turn the tables on FINCen.

Since they have such a difficult time elaborating, let's help them. Besides, it's inevitable, so let's accelerate the process. The TBF could sit down side-by-side with them drafting what needs to be drafted, allowing FINCen to take it to any direction they desire. Once completed, we'll know exactly what we have to do on our part.

I think FINCen already has what they want - regulations that are so vague they can swing the hammer in any direction and hit something.

Phinnaeus Gage

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1570

Bitcoin: An Idea Worth Spending

Quote from: cbeast on June 21, 2013, 03:56:28 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 21, 2013, 01:11:47 PM

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

I suppose that would be like saying the mailman is a money transmitter for carrying my checks to the utility company. You can try to interpret what FINCen is trying to say, but they haven't done a very good job of elaborating yet. There isn't any practical way to hold miners accountable for their accounting, so unless they want to be heavy handed and make an example out of someone as seems to be the practice of our land of laws, I wouldn't worry about it.

I have an idea. Let's turn the tables on FINCen.

Since they have such a difficult time elaborating, let's help them. Besides, it's inevitable, so let's accelerate the process. The TBF could sit down side-by-side with them drafting what needs to be drafted, allowing FINCen to take it to any direction they desire. Once completed, we'll know exactly what we have to do on our part.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 21, 2013, 01:11:47 PM

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

for those in america.. please actually give a shit about any bitcoin business which also deals with FIAT. EG Eclipse mining pool pays out in fiat. bitpay pays out in FIAT
but dont worry about bitcoin businesses that only handle bitcoin EG solo mining, bitcoin QT. and other pools services that only hand bitcoin.

now that the separation between what businesses should worry about government law. a hopeful bit of peace and calm rational thinking should happen

Quote from: cbeast on June 21, 2013, 03:56:28 PM

I suppose that would be like saying the mailman is a money transmitter for carrying my checks to the utility company. You can try to interpret what FINCen is trying to say, but they haven't done a very good job of elaborating yet. There isn't any practical way to hold miners accountable for their accounting, so unless they want to be heavy handed and make an example out of someone as seems to be the practice of our land of laws, I wouldn't worry about it.

in the UK financial regulations it has been highlighted that the mail service although they do transfer money, have been given special circumstances to be exempt from requiring a licence.
the same i believe has happened in most regulated countries.

EDIT: indeed fincen exempts the us postal service from needing a licence
http://www.fincen.gov/financial_institutions/msb/definitions/exceptions.html

peonminer

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 531

Crypto is King.

Quote from: molecular on June 12, 2013, 05:49:41 PM

just saw this on twitter

(click image for link)

Quote

Moderator

Massimo Cirasino, World Bank, Financial and Private Sector Development

Speakers

David Mills, Federal Reserve Board of Governors]
Emery Kober, USA Department of Treasury
Iddo De Jong, European Central Bank
Ernie Allen, International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children
Jason Thomas, Thomson Reuters

Co-Sponsored by:

Legal Vice-Presidency and FPD Financial Infrastructure & Remittances
International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children

Oh man would I love to listen in on that shit!

Oh fuck. We're fucked.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: cbeast on June 24, 2013, 05:12:45 PM

Quote from: Rez on June 21, 2013, 08:01:22 PM

Quote from: solex on June 12, 2013, 06:11:04 PM

Quote from: molecular on June 12, 2013, 05:49:41 PM

just saw this on twitter
....

Ernie Allen, International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children

...

Hmm. What is he doing in a World Bank forum?, and look at what this site thinks of him...
http://bringvarvarahome.org/ernie_allen.php

Because BITCOIN is used to BUY AND SELL CHILDREN and WHY WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!??!11

You are confusing it with paedocoin after the hard fork with humantrafficoin. Mind your altcoins, Sir!

lol - Those are coming right after Sexcoin and Vaginacoin.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: Rez on June 21, 2013, 08:01:22 PM

Quote from: solex on June 12, 2013, 06:11:04 PM

Quote from: molecular on June 12, 2013, 05:49:41 PM

just saw this on twitter
....

Ernie Allen, International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children

...

Hmm. What is he doing in a World Bank forum?, and look at what this site thinks of him...
http://bringvarvarahome.org/ernie_allen.php

Because BITCOIN is used to BUY AND SELL CHILDREN and WHY WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!??!11

You are confusing it with paedocoin after the hard fork with humantrafficoin. Mind your altcoins, Sir!

Rez

full member

Activity: 132

Merit: 100

Quote from: solex on June 12, 2013, 06:11:04 PM

Quote from: molecular on June 12, 2013, 05:49:41 PM

just saw this on twitter
....

Ernie Allen, International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children

...

Hmm. What is he doing in a World Bank forum?, and look at what this site thinks of him...
http://bringvarvarahome.org/ernie_allen.php

Because BITCOIN is used to BUY AND SELL CHILDREN and WHY WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!?!?!??!11

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: cbeast on June 21, 2013, 03:56:28 PM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 21, 2013, 01:11:47 PM

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

I suppose that would be like saying the mailman is a money transmitter for carrying my checks to the utility company. You can try to interpret what FINCen is trying to say, but they haven't done a very good job of elaborating yet. There isn't any practical way to hold miners accountable for their accounting, so unless they want to be heavy handed and make an example out of someone as seems to be the practice of our land of laws, I wouldn't worry about it.

I'm not worried about it. I stopped mining back when I stopped being able to make at least 3-5 coins a day with my setup and decided to buy coins instead.

I'm amazed that Gavin Andresen and Patrick Murck are using the fear over the new FINCen law and its effect on mining to push their agenda of lobbying Washington on behalf of TBF. The Foundation's agenda is Americentric and only stands to benefit business members in the TBF business core elite (U.S. businesses). By calling attention to the currently illegal nature of mining they are using fear to rally support for their desire to lobby. This will backfire if American support for Bitcoin wanes because miners fear legal repercussions regardless of the unlikelihood of any actual legal action against an individual. Remember, people don't refuse to lie on their taxes because they think the IRS audits 90% of the people. They do it because they want to be sure that if they are one of the 1% that are audited they aren't in trouble.

cbeast

donator

Activity: 1736

Merit: 1006

Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 21, 2013, 01:11:47 PM

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

I suppose that would be like saying the mailman is a money transmitter for carrying my checks to the utility company. You can try to interpret what FINCen is trying to say, but they haven't done a very good job of elaborating yet. There isn't any practical way to hold miners accountable for their accounting, so unless they want to be heavy handed and make an example out of someone as seems to be the practice of our land of laws, I wouldn't worry about it.

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

I have to conclude that you people didn't read what I posted or understand what mining does so I'll post the important part alone. I don't usually like doing that because it positions peoples ideas out of context.

Here it is: "since they are enabling transactions for a profit."

It's not the reward that he's talking about. It's relaying transactions which do involve exchange for fiat.

I don't think anyone will argue that Bitcoin is not used in just the USA so you all can stop parroting that over and over. However, the lead dev and, in fact, many of the devs live in the USA. BitInstant and quite a few other big businesses are based in the USA. So, for the sake of argument, let's pretend that we give a shit about how the legal system in the USA is reacting toward Bitcoin. Thank you.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: newtothescene on June 21, 2013, 10:25:53 AM

I can see the company being required to register as a MSB,

MSB is a product of US government and Euro government laws.

bitcoin is not owned by them

however a "data miner" that creates items for a FIAT value.,. then that would involve MSB.

i live in england why should english miners have to follow american laws such as what you interpret it to be.

other people in thailand will also ask why should they follow the laws of euro and USA..

now i hope for the 5th time you realise bitcoin is not owned by europe or america. so it does not have to follow those laws

newtothescene

full member

Activity: 147

Merit: 100

Quote from: hacknoid on June 21, 2013, 08:34:20 AM

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 20, 2013, 08:53:04 PM

Quote from: molecular on June 20, 2013, 04:21:32 PM

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

Quote

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

Even if it were true that miners would be considered MSBs, I can't see how that would possibly apply if you were mining in a pool. I don't receive newly minted coins for the work I do for a pool... The pool does. They then pay each miner based on their contribution of work. So while I am working for the pool, all I am doing is processing what they are asking me to process. They then pay me for that work.

I guess it could be argued I am still enabling transactions, but in an indirect way. I get paid to solve work for the pool. The pool gets paid for the work, and then they choose to pay me. More like a subcontractor.

I tend to agree with this line of thinking. If I worked for a company generating physical items with my tools/hands that contributed to a larger product that the company sold for profit then it would be a similar situation. Maybe they pay me for my work in portions of that larger product. I can see the company being required to register as a MSB, but the workers?? Seems to be a case of "doing something with computers, so we need to regulate it more heavily than if it was only done in meatspace." Obviously more of a gray area since the product is a type of currency but still...

hacknoid

sr. member

Activity: 418

Merit: 252

Proud Canuck

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 20, 2013, 08:53:04 PM

Quote from: molecular on June 20, 2013, 04:21:32 PM

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

Quote

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

Even if it were true that miners would be considered MSBs, I can't see how that would possibly apply if you were mining in a pool. I don't receive newly minted coins for the work I do for a pool... The pool does. They then pay each miner based on their contribution of work. So while I am working for the pool, all I am doing is processing what they are asking me to process. They then pay me for that work.

I guess it could be argued I am still enabling transactions, but in an indirect way. I get paid to solve work for the pool. The pool gets paid for the work, and then they choose to pay me. More like a subcontractor.

franky1

legendary

Activity: 4214

Merit: 4458

Quote from: QuestionAuthority on June 20, 2013, 08:53:04 PM

Quote from: molecular on June 20, 2013, 04:21:32 PM

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

Quote

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

this is where a guy in the bitcoin foundation patrick Murck. is failing as a bitcoin fanboy..

he is living on the rules of a country that bitcoin is not owned by

bitcoin is not US property or Euro property or British property. so how can a country that does not own bitcoin say that mining is considered MSB..

its not in any countries remit to categorise another economies actions under their own laws.

Fincen can only control and categorise the Dollar....

patrick Murck needs to hand in his resignation letter for this mega boo boo of not understanding bitcoin.

think of it this way. if i made some poker chips would i need a licence. no

if i was hasbro and made monopoly money would i need a licence. no

if i was a world of warcraft player making gold would i need a licence. no

if i was all of these companies/people above and sold coins/paper play money or virtual game tokens for fiat. would i need a licence. Yes (if doing more then $1000 per customer per day, and over 100,000 total income(as that is then classed as a FIAT Business))

QuestionAuthority

legendary

Activity: 2156

Merit: 1393

You lead and I'll watch you walk away.

Quote from: molecular on June 20, 2013, 04:21:32 PM

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

Quote

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3071

Quote from: Spekulatius on June 16, 2013, 01:59:36 PM

Quote

De Jong’s presentation went on to describe three different functions of money — as a medium of exchange, a unit of account and a store of value — and added, “Bitcoin does not meet any of these functions.”

http://www.coindesk.com/world-bank-forum-weighs-pros-cons-of-virtual-currencies/

How can he say such a thing?

He either:
- Has no idea what he is talking about
- Somehow tries to protect Bitcoin by talking it smaller then it is
- Blatantly ignores the well researched publication "Virtual Currency Schemes October 2012" by his own expert committee:

Quote

In essence, virtual currencies act as a medium of exchange and as a unit of account within a
particular virtual community. The question then arises as to whether they also fulfil the “store of
value” function in terms of being reliable and safe, or whether they pose a risk not only for their
users but also the wider economy.

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf

- Is mirepresented by the source I am citing (coindesk)
- doesn't want to speak in any way that could legitimise the properties of the system that could remove him of his job and status

(you missed one)

It's the same reason why people are even interested in what the World Bank has to say, their opinions are thought to be amongst the most authoritative available

There is a long, long list of people that lose their job and status in a world where Bitcoin is gaining adoption

Spekulatius

legendary

Activity: 1022

Merit: 1000

Quote

De Jong’s presentation went on to describe three different functions of money — as a medium of exchange, a unit of account and a store of value — and added, “Bitcoin does not meet any of these functions.”

http://www.coindesk.com/world-bank-forum-weighs-pros-cons-of-virtual-currencies/

How can he say such a thing?

He either:
- Has no idea what he is talking about
- Somehow tries to protect Bitcoin by talking it smaller then it is
- Blatantly ignores the well researched publication "Virtual Currency Schemes October 2012" by his own expert committee:

Quote

In essence, virtual currencies act as a medium of exchange and as a unit of account within a
particular virtual community. The question then arises as to whether they also fulfil the “store of
value” function in terms of being reliable and safe, or whether they pose a risk not only for their
users but also the wider economy.

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf

- Is mirepresented by the source I am citing (coindesk)

molecular

donator

Activity: 2772

Merit: 1019

what the...

Quote from: http://techliberation.com/2013/06/13/mr-bitcoin-goes-to-washington/

Today I had the great pleasure of moderating a panel discussion at a conference on the “Virtual Economy” hosted by Thomson Reuters and the International Center for Missing and Exploited Children. On my panel were representatives from the Bitcoin Foundation, the Tor Project, and the DOJ, and we had a lively discussion about how these technologies can potentially be used by criminals and what these open source communities might be able to do to mitigate that risk.

Jerry Britto seems to have hosted this. thread: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/2013-06-13-techliberationcom-mr-bitcoin-goes-to-washington-233823

Topic: we're going to be discussed at the world bank 6/14 (Read 11414 times)