Rep doesn't mean squat, really. You're only as good as your last action, so if an exchange has a good rep from day 1, but on day 653, they just up and leave....well that says everything.
Regulation on the other hand, there's consequences, there's rules in place, there's compliance, there's AML/KYC, there's limits etc...
Exchanges or Money businesses less likely to fold up and shop and claim "wallet hack" or "transaction malleability" with a cattle prod up his ass the whole time...
Topic: What matters more in the Bitcoin market? Regulation or reputation? (Read 987 times)
February 18, 2015, 03:36:03 PM
February 18, 2015, 02:52:21 PM
"Reputation" doesn't help for Bitcoin's usual "take the money and run" scams. They can have a great reputation until they disappear with the money.
February 18, 2015, 03:06:47 AM
In case of Bitcoin exchanges and third party services reputation means nothing much. if we dont have them regulated regular ppl will lose some coins and forget about crypto. I hope p2p decentralised exchanges can bring us better security cause in my opinion security is main problem in Bitcoin.
February 18, 2015, 02:27:42 AM
bitcoin itself does not need regulation.
but BUSINESSES that are acting as exchanges/third party wallets DO.
reputation is meaningless in an online world where people can hack an exchange from within and buy a plane ticket to run off, far faster then the time it would take to get any enforcement teams to identify the culprit and knock on the culprits door.
anyone can spend 1-4 years being 'honourable' and then finally become greedy and steal coins (mark karpeles). so reputation is meaningless.
i think all businesses that hold coins (third party wallets/exchanges) need to pay for a insurance policy to cover funds they hold. and be 100% transparent about their real life identity. thus not relying on reputation or a persons ethics. but relying on the fact that the funds are insured and the guy is being monitored.
but BUSINESSES that are acting as exchanges/third party wallets DO.
reputation is meaningless in an online world where people can hack an exchange from within and buy a plane ticket to run off, far faster then the time it would take to get any enforcement teams to identify the culprit and knock on the culprits door.
anyone can spend 1-4 years being 'honourable' and then finally become greedy and steal coins (mark karpeles). so reputation is meaningless.
i think all businesses that hold coins (third party wallets/exchanges) need to pay for a insurance policy to cover funds they hold. and be 100% transparent about their real life identity. thus not relying on reputation or a persons ethics. but relying on the fact that the funds are insured and the guy is being monitored.
February 18, 2015, 02:20:40 AM
I do not mind the whole crypto-scene being regulated as long as it is self regulated outside the government and all the bullshit. That said, I think the Bitcoin Foundation should embrace the whole of crypto and set standards for security and safety.
February 18, 2015, 02:11:40 AM
In the current state of the Bitcoin market where regulation doesn't really exist, reputation sets the new standard. Do you agree?
http://www.btcfeed.net/news/absence-bitcoin-regulation-promotes-reputation-assessment-market/
http://www.btcfeed.net/news/absence-bitcoin-regulation-promotes-reputation-assessment-market/
Jump to: