Topic: What happens to the BitLicense if everyone leaves NYC? (Read 1047 times)
NY is the home of financial heavyweights and that's what they want to attract and retain. If the bitlicence only leaves well-funded players then that'll probably warm the cockles of their hearts.
No problem for Bitcoin at all.
Look at this:
"Meet the one city in America where cars have been banned since 1898"
http://www.treehugger.com/culture/one-city-in-america-where-cars-have-been-banned-1898.html
No problem for automobiles at all. The small city is happy without cars, and cars are happy without Mackinac. Bitcoin will do just fine without NY.
(to be honest I think the Bitlicense thing will not survive if BTC becomes truly sucessful but even if it does survive, it won't affect BTC)
Look at this:
"Meet the one city in America where cars have been banned since 1898"
http://www.treehugger.com/culture/one-city-in-america-where-cars-have-been-banned-1898.html
No problem for automobiles at all. The small city is happy without cars, and cars are happy without Mackinac. Bitcoin will do just fine without NY.
(to be honest I think the Bitlicense thing will not survive if BTC becomes truly sucessful but even if it does survive, it won't affect BTC)
NY is still going to have bitcoin. Gemini when it come online will probabaly have more volume then any other exchange within 2 years if the twins can really attract institutional interest. ITbit is already based out of NY. People are blowing this out of proportion.
I've already moved all my funds from Poloniex because they were asking me for my name and surname to even trade in between cryptocurrencies, what a complete joke, i just entered a fake name and surname and got my ass out of there. They don't even want us to be private for crypto->crypto trading.
New York needs to realize that this revolution is going to happen. Eiter with or without them. The more they try to oppress and over-regulate it, the more we'll flee to other parts.
And everybody understands this whole BitLicense has nothing to do with the safety and wellbeing of New Yorkers, and everything with protecting the monopolies of powers that be.
And everybody understands this whole BitLicense has nothing to do with the safety and wellbeing of New Yorkers, and everything with protecting the monopolies of powers that be.
That's true but A regulated market, even over regulated market, will do alot to push forward the bitcoin revolution since almost all businesses and financial investors would choose not to invest in btc using an unregulated entity. A nyc based engaged does alot to improve bitcoin's image which will lead to faster addoption rates. If btc goes mainstream it will change the word for the better but that can't happen without atleast the tacit approval of regulators.
No problem for Bitcoin at all.
Look at this:
"Meet the one city in America where cars have been banned since 1898"
http://www.treehugger.com/culture/one-city-in-america-where-cars-have-been-banned-1898.html
No problem for automobiles at all. The small city is happy without cars, and cars are happy without Mackinac. Bitcoin will do just fine without NY.
(to be honest I think the Bitlicense thing will not survive if BTC becomes truly sucessful but even if it does survive, it won't affect BTC)
Look at this:
"Meet the one city in America where cars have been banned since 1898"
http://www.treehugger.com/culture/one-city-in-america-where-cars-have-been-banned-1898.html
No problem for automobiles at all. The small city is happy without cars, and cars are happy without Mackinac. Bitcoin will do just fine without NY.
(to be honest I think the Bitlicense thing will not survive if BTC becomes truly sucessful but even if it does survive, it won't affect BTC)
I suggest not using any service that complies if you don't want every shred of your info shared with any government agent who was it for any reason whatsoever. The reach of these unethical laws is far greater than is realized
Agree in every word. For instance if you use Coinbase they will have all your informations. They will track how spend your coins. And if you do something with your coins what they don't like your account will get frozen. Coinbase has become the paypal of crypto.
Yes, but these new regulations require companies to hand over all private information, even if requested for no reason other than a bored agent
That is extremely dangerous and against what everybody around here is trying to build. I guess most of the current bitcoiners will avoid these companies sooner rather than later..
I suggest not using any service that complies if you don't want every shred of your info shared with any government agent who was it for any reason whatsoever. The reach of these unethical laws is far greater than is realized
Agree in every word. For instance if you use Coinbase they will have all your informations. They will track how spend your coins. And if you do something with your coins what they don't like your account will get frozen. Coinbase has become the paypal of crypto.
Yes, but these new regulations require companies to hand over all private information, even if requested for no reason other than a bored agent
New York needs to realize that this revolution is going to happen. Eiter with or without them. The more they try to oppress and over-regulate it, the more we'll flee to other parts.
And everybody understands this whole BitLicense has nothing to do with the safety and wellbeing of New Yorkers, and everything with protecting the monopolies of powers that be.
And everybody understands this whole BitLicense has nothing to do with the safety and wellbeing of New Yorkers, and everything with protecting the monopolies of powers that be.
New York City needs to understand that regulations are not always the key to arrange everything. Too much laws are not always good idea.
In case stomping on new technology and startups which can grow and generate millions and more revenue in taxes for NYC is just insanely stupid idea.
In case stomping on new technology and startups which can grow and generate millions and more revenue in taxes for NYC is just insanely stupid idea.
BitLicense is good for users protection and nothing will happen to it.Sooner or later it will be extended to other states and it will become needy for bitcoin related business providers to get registered under this license.
I suggest not using any service that complies if you don't want every shred of your info shared with any government agent who was it for any reason whatsoever. The reach of these unethical laws is far greater than is realized
Agree in every word. For instance if you use Coinbase they will have all your informations. They will track how spend your coins. And if you do something with your coins what they don't like your account will get frozen. Coinbase has become the paypal of crypto.
i sure there will be a few shady services that people can use if they want to not have to give personal info. As I already stated you can just transact in bitcoin. Paradoxally the exchanges that operate under regulation could lead to making it easier for those who want to transact without their identity. Exchanges like gemini and ITbit could lead to bitcoin gaining steam in its mainstream use and leading to much greater acceptance . Perhaps this could make it easy for people to transact in bitcoin the way they do with credit cards eliminating the need to convert into fiat.
I suggest not using any service that complies if you don't want every shred of your info shared with any government agent who wants it for ANY reason whatsoever. The reach of these unethical laws is far greater than is realized
I think we must ask Roselyn Hamilton
BTW circle is funded in part by Goldman Sachs. I really doubt their investors will be ok with them leaving the most important financial market in the world. When i signed up for circle I had to give them my personal info including a copy of my driver licence so they are already complying with kyc/aml.
There is big money in NY, its the center of the finance world. Most established players will comply and few will leave. Most countries will probably require a license at somepoint as bitcoin goes mainstream and they will have to follow similar standards elsewhere. At that time time only players large enough to comply with compliance will remain as most people would rather transact with a licensed business. Anyone who is runing a business that exchanges fiat for btc had to expect these things would happen eventually. Really I dont understand why people are freaking out if you didn't know this was coming then you don't know the world works. If you don't like it transact in bitcoin and not fiat the government can't control that. Remember that once business like Gemini go online and bigg players start buying in there will be an increased adoption rate and bitcoin will be excepted as the default currency of the internet. You can just use BTC and now worry about converting to Fiat. If you want to trade btc your gonna have to deal with KYC/AML requirements ..its just the way the world works.
According to the latest news we are seeing, literally every business and venture related to Bitcoin is leaving New York City due BitLicense not so cool regulations. My question is, if everyone leaves, what's the point for a BitLicense to stay? Will the BitLicense stay even if there are 0 businesses there?
Will this set and example and make other places consider implementing a BitLicense type regulation twice?
Will this set and example and make other places consider implementing a BitLicense type regulation twice?
Some are still staying... Anyways, if everyone leaves, too bad for NY, it's a taste of their own medicine. BitLicense will probably stay always, but will be adapted if they have too many people fleeing.
According to the latest news we are seeing, literally every business and venture related to Bitcoin is leaving New York City due BitLicense not so cool regulations. My question is, if everyone leaves, what's the point for a BitLicense to stay? Will the BitLicense stay even if there are 0 businesses there?
Will this set and example and make other places consider implementing a BitLicense type regulation twice?
Will this set and example and make other places consider implementing a BitLicense type regulation twice?
That is false.
Complying (filing for BitLicense)
BitStamp (https://mobile.twitter.com/nejc_kodric/status/630309296245489664)
Coinbase (no recent source, but assuming based on previous comments, e.g. https://blog.coinbase.com/2014/09/10/coinbase-responds-to-new-yorks-recently-proposed/)
Coinsetter (http://www.coinsetter.com/blog/2014/03/11/coinsetter-apply-new-york-state-bitlicense/)
DCG - Bitcoin Investment Trust (https://mobile.twitter.com/DCGco/status/629703816687038465)
MonetaGo (https://mobile.twitter.com/Monetago/status/628612332466405376)
Complying (via trust charter)
Gemini (https://bitcoinmagazine.com/21342/winklevoss-twins-file-trust-application-nydfs-gemini-bitcoin-exchange/)
itBit (https://www.itbit.com/blog/questions-from-the-community-itbits-trust-charter)
Leaving (blocking NY residents)
BitFinex (https://www.bitfinex.com/pages/announcements/?id=51)
Bitcoinpaygate (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3gcedf/bitlicense_the_rundown/ctwu8uk)
Circle? (no recent source, but assuming based on previous comments, e.g. http://www.coindesk.com/circle-bitlicense-block-new-york-customers)
Coinfloor (https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/3gcedf/bitlicense_the_rundown/ctwwe6s) Blocks all US customers
Kraken (http://blog.kraken.com/post/126244351097/farewell-new-york)
Paxful (http://blog.paxful.com/paxful-cannot-service-new-york-state-residents/)
Poloniex (https://twitter.com/Poloniex/status/627647475638210560)
ShapeShift (http://www.cnbc.com/2015/06/10/company-leaves-new-york-protesting-bitlicense.html)
Maybe Kraken will join in 1-2 years.
According to the latest news we are seeing, literally every business and venture related to Bitcoin is leaving New York City due BitLicense not so cool regulations. My question is, if everyone leaves, what's the point for a BitLicense to stay? Will the BitLicense stay even if there are 0 businesses there?
Will this set and example and make other places consider implementing a BitLicense type regulation twice?
There won't be any bitlicense business anymore, thats it, nothing more.Will this set and example and make other places consider implementing a BitLicense type regulation twice?
Its too expensive, giving too little back if anything.
If BitLicense remains in NY, then only those businesses who already have established state in their share of New York will remain and will comply, and the rest who only gets a small fraction of attention in NY will probably leave, especially if applying for a BitLicense > their actual sales. Good for those services who remain and applied because there will be less competition around.
Jump to: