Pages:
Author

Topic: What would regulation actually look like? (Read 1491 times)

legendary
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4458
July 06, 2014, 02:05:11 PM
#22
...
regulations are reactive, not proactive. meaning until a government agency receives a SAR they usually dont know what is happen between client/business, so you can relax just a little

The case you are describing is correct. But it only means that banks and financial services act as extended arms / outsourced departments of the regulators and that they do the data collecting, analysing and storing for them.

What I described is basically the essence of what regulators want. I do talk to central bankers, police officials and politicians about this internationally and they usually confirm that to me (even though sometimes in a very charming way like in this video from around minute 27 on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaW2iPSPEs0) and that the fact that they do not know how to get do that with Bitcoin is a problem for them. The head of German state police even went so far as to suggest that if this is not possible the only way out he sees is to shut down the internet alltogether (no I am not kidding).

After all we live in a total surveillence society. To have access to the financial data about people is at least as important for the rulers as having their communications data and of course they want ways to embargoe dissidents (like wikileaks).

Joe
 

not really.. after all bank notes exist without every transaction being monitored.. and governments have not stopped printing those.. infact they are printing more then ever before. all governments really care about is that $10k+ amounts are not leaving native circulation, once you peel away the fiction of what money control is really for.

remember HSBC getting away with laundering drug money. but many innocent people at state and international checkpoints are having their money confiscated without any proof of a crime.

as a non american, i can move state to state no issues, even if im not suppose to, i just say im on vacation.. but as soon as they see $10k on my back seat, thats a whole different story
sr. member
Activity: 359
Merit: 250
...
regulations are reactive, not proactive. meaning until a government agency receives a SAR they usually dont know what is happen between client/business, so you can relax just a little

The case you are describing is correct. But it only means that banks and financial services act as extended arms / outsourced departments of the regulators and that they do the data collecting, analysing and storing for them.

What I described is basically the essence of what regulators want. I do talk to central bankers, police officials and politicians about this internationally and they usually confirm that to me (even though sometimes in a very charming way like in this video from around minute 27 on: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaW2iPSPEs0) and that the fact that they do not know how to get do that with Bitcoin is a problem for them. The head of German state police even went so far as to suggest that if this is not possible the only way out he sees is to shut down the internet alltogether (no I am not kidding).

After all we live in a total surveillence society. To have access to the financial data about people is at least as important for the rulers as having their communications data and of course they want ways to embargoe dissidents (like wikileaks).

Joe



 
legendary
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4458
moriartybitcoin (shame on you for not knowing this, especially with you 50+ businesses(it makes you look amateurish and fishy!!))

joecooin
and
ShakyhandsBTCer

all 3 have not quite got it correct.

firstly businesses under THEIR OWN policies (regulation handbook they develop which is tailored to their business) would require user identification when handling FIAT!!

the thing that the 3 people should know is that not every document/account is automatically uploaded to government. most of the time it is just securely stored within the business and accessible at any time should something suspicious get flagged up..

normally then and only then is this info sent as a SAR to a government agency. so dont over dramatize the fact that a business taking information, would automatically pass it on to government. as this is not the case.

regulations are reactive, not proactive. meaning until a government agency receives a SAR they usually dont know what is happen between client/business, so you can relax just a little
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin

Regulators want:

- to know who has what kind of money
- to know who sends what money to whom and what for
- to decides who is allowed to have or send money all together
- to be able to stop any transaction and confiscate any money

And they want all this 100%, not 50% or even 99% will be enough.

Such coin can be built.

Joe
Regulators would not necessarily want to know all of this information. Regulation simply means that the certain aspects of an industry are restricted in one or more ways. There are certain regulations that do not require any information to be reported.
sr. member
Activity: 359
Merit: 250
Regulators want:

- to know who has what kind of money
- to know who sends what money to whom and what for
- to decide who is allowed to have or send money all together
- to be able to stop any transaction and confiscate any money

And they want all this 100%, not 50% or even 99% will be enough.

Such coin can be built.

Joe



 
edit: spelling
hero member
Activity: 560
Merit: 500
★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!
The main purpose of regulation is to de-anonymize bitcoin by controlling the entrance and exit points, ie ensuring that exchanges like coinbase are fully regulated so that when you BUY or SELL bitcoins, you are required to verify your identity. This way, the government knows how much Bitcoin you own at all times and can cross-reference your IRS forms for tax evasion, etc.  Also if they decide to ban bitcoin in the future (as they banned gold ownership during WWII), they can simply write you a letter (or show up at your door ..) and demand your Bitcoin.

So that's the point of regulation, as always, increased control ...

I created https://CoinChimp.com as an ANONYMOUS bitcoin exchange. We NEVER verify identity or require documents from our customers, enabling you to buy and sell btc completely privately.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
It's Money 2.0| It’s gold for nerds | It's Bitcoin
There's always this spectre of 'regulation' hanging over bitcoin. If the US, or Japan or another major country decided to regulate bitcoin, what would we expect to see exactly? How do you think they would approach it? What sort of impact would you think it would have on bitcoin, either positive or negative?

People need to get over their fear of regulation. People won't even realise the regulation. It'll simply bee that people have to start paying taxes on bitcoin purchases or trades into fiat etc.

Regulators need to fear the people. Any bit coin specific regulation would just be government trying to get it's finger into the pie. Bit coin does not need permission.
A small amount of regulation can be healthy for any industry. For example if regulators were to require that exchanges periodically audit their holdings of coins they hold for their customers then the Gox fiasco could never have happened (assuming what they have claimed is true)
legendary
Activity: 4214
Merit: 4458
People seem to be just so anti-regulation because they think bitcoin doesn't need it, but if bitcoin is going to become mainstream it's going to require some in certain areas wether you like it or not.

regulations allow businesses to play with peoples money (fractional reserves)
regulations allow businesses to limit how much people can use their money (ATM limits AML/KYC limits)
regulations allow businesses to simple take money away from people without warning (account freezing, fee's)

which we do not want... but....

consumer protection laws PREVENT businesses doing what they like with peoples money
consumer protection laws PREVENT businesses stealing peoples money
consumer protection laws PREVENT businesses from refusing to hand people their full amount of money

i do not advocate regulation, i do advocate consumer protection.. and thats me saying this, a business owner
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
amarha
People seem to be just so anti-regulation because they think bitcoin doesn't need it, but if bitcoin is going to become mainstream it's going to require some in certain areas wether you like it or not.

What sort of areas are you referring to in particular?
full member
Activity: 214
Merit: 100
People seem to be just so anti-regulation because they think bitcoin doesn't need it, but if bitcoin is going to become mainstream it's going to require some in certain areas wether you like it or not.
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
amarha
bitcoin is already regulated. AML and KYC is regulation.

but you can do everything from that to 80% taxes on every transaction. problem is: other countries will not follow your rules.

Companies that handle money are regulated. That's not quite the same as bitcoin itself being regulated.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
There's always this spectre of 'regulation' hanging over bitcoin. If the US, or Japan or another major country decided to regulate bitcoin, what would we expect to see exactly? How do you think they would approach it? What sort of impact would you think it would have on bitcoin, either positive or negative?

People need to get over their fear of regulation. People won't even realise the regulation. It'll simply bee that people have to start paying taxes on bitcoin purchases or trades into fiat etc.

Regulators need to fear the people. Any bit coin specific regulation would just be government trying to get it's finger into the pie. Bit coin does not need permission.
Neg
full member
Activity: 224
Merit: 100
There's always this spectre of 'regulation' hanging over bitcoin. If the US, or Japan or another major country decided to regulate bitcoin, what would we expect to see exactly? How do you think they would approach it? What sort of impact would you think it would have on bitcoin, either positive or negative?

People need to get over their fear of regulation. People won't even realise the regulation. It'll simply bee that people have to start paying taxes on bitcoin purchases or trades into fiat etc.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1011
they don't regulate his debt ... and they want regulate bitcoin ?  Grin
private people with family budget regulate more efficiently than a political view.  Roll Eyes
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000
bitcoin is already regulated. AML and KYC is regulation.

but you can do everything from that to 80% taxes on every transaction. problem is: other countries will not follow your rules.

its not regulated thats the movement of bitcoin into fiat

but im happy for you to try to explain your side of the story





legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1010
In Satoshi I Trust
bitcoin is already regulated. AML and KYC is regulation.

but you can do everything from that to 80% taxes on every transaction. problem is: other countries will not follow your rules.
legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
amarha
regulation would look like this

complete shutdown of all em/electrical signals in the entire world

which equals impossible

the system is designed to be uncrackable

or replaced with a better uncrackable system if the first one

becomes redundant



Well regulation might not be effective, but how exactly would they try to regulate? What would they even do, attempt to make people register wallets or something? AML/KYC stuff? Is that the main issue?
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1000
regulation would look like this

complete shutdown of all em/electrical signals in the entire world

which equals impossible

the system is designed to be uncrackable

or replaced with a better uncrackable system if the first one

becomes redundant

legendary
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
amarha
If you read the EBA Opinion on ‘virtual currencies’ (http://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/657547/EBA-Op-2014-08+Opinion+on+Virtual+Currencies.pdf) they think that cryptocurrencies need governing bodies that they can then hold accountable for problems.

Like that's going to happen.

Bitcoin Foundation. Tongue

They already do everything but take responsibility. If someone has to take the heat, why not them? Tongue
full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
If you read the EBA Opinion on ‘virtual currencies’ (http://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/657547/EBA-Op-2014-08+Opinion+on+Virtual+Currencies.pdf) they think that cryptocurrencies need governing bodies that they can then hold accountable for problems.

Like that's going to happen.
Pages:
Jump to: