Topic: Why do people fear regulation so much? (Read 3121 times)
Consenting to be regulated is like saying that you don't have the authority to act of your own accord and that you don't have the intelligence to make your own decisions. You don't need to ask for permission to do something as long as you are not harming anyone else.
Word of the day..
Liberty
We already have highly regulated money systems that... are not working.
It's time to have other options.
Bitcoin needs to stay as it is.
I do agree that regulations be in place when bits convert to fiat (exchanges are a good example).
My concern is that regulators will attached old rules to a new technology and drag it down.
We will see?
It's time to have other options.
Bitcoin needs to stay as it is.
I do agree that regulations be in place when bits convert to fiat (exchanges are a good example).
My concern is that regulators will attached old rules to a new technology and drag it down.
We will see?
Then governments will go ahead and break Bitcoin if they so choose.
Or, more likely, they will require all merchants and banks and exchanges and everyone else to reliably prove that the Bitcoins they have just accepted were not from an illegal source or were part of a money laundering transaction. Just like they are doing with cash today. Which you can't because that would "break bitcoin". Which will mean, that you won't be able to use Bitcoin to buy anything in any developed country. Which makes it a fun experiment but after all pretty much useless.
There will have to be some kind of assurance that basic standards of AML assurance are maintained. Otherwise Bitcoin can never break out of it's current role and go "mainstream". Governments will simply not allow it and while they can not shut it down, they can make it effectively worthless.
I absolutely agree that blacklisting is pointless and stupid. I also think we will have to think of something else to achieve the desired effect.
Or, more likely, they will require all merchants and banks and exchanges and everyone else to reliably prove that the Bitcoins they have just accepted were not from an illegal source or were part of a money laundering transaction. Just like they are doing with cash today. Which you can't because that would "break bitcoin". Which will mean, that you won't be able to use Bitcoin to buy anything in any developed country. Which makes it a fun experiment but after all pretty much useless.
There will have to be some kind of assurance that basic standards of AML assurance are maintained. Otherwise Bitcoin can never break out of it's current role and go "mainstream". Governments will simply not allow it and while they can not shut it down, they can make it effectively worthless.
I absolutely agree that blacklisting is pointless and stupid. I also think we will have to think of something else to achieve the desired effect.
Cash is accepted everywhere without proof to show it hasn't been laundered or obtained via illicit means, so I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit on that. Also, governments aren't going to waste "their" money enforcing rules on something they're not going to profit from. There's no incentive for them to want to regulate it. The US has already said they have no place in regulating it, so you might wanna go buy mintchip or something if you think regulation is the way forward.
Then governments will go ahead and break Bitcoin if they so choose.
Or, more likely, they will require all merchants and banks and exchanges and everyone else to reliably prove that the Bitcoins they have just accepted were not from an illegal source or were part of a money laundering transaction. Just like they are doing with cash today. Which you can't because that would "break bitcoin". Which will mean, that you won't be able to use Bitcoin to buy anything in any developed country. Which makes it a fun experiment but after all pretty much useless.
There will have to be some kind of assurance that basic standards of AML assurance are maintained. Otherwise Bitcoin can never break out of it's current role and go "mainstream". Governments will simply not allow it and while they can not shut it down, they can make it effectively worthless.
I absolutely agree that blacklisting is pointless and stupid. I also think we will have to think of something else to achieve the desired effect.
Or, more likely, they will require all merchants and banks and exchanges and everyone else to reliably prove that the Bitcoins they have just accepted were not from an illegal source or were part of a money laundering transaction. Just like they are doing with cash today. Which you can't because that would "break bitcoin". Which will mean, that you won't be able to use Bitcoin to buy anything in any developed country. Which makes it a fun experiment but after all pretty much useless.
There will have to be some kind of assurance that basic standards of AML assurance are maintained. Otherwise Bitcoin can never break out of it's current role and go "mainstream". Governments will simply not allow it and while they can not shut it down, they can make it effectively worthless.
I absolutely agree that blacklisting is pointless and stupid. I also think we will have to think of something else to achieve the desired effect.
If there were a practical way to do it without breaking the purity of a two party transaction, sender and receiver, someone would have made an alt that does it already. All regulation will do is add middlemen. If anything, the situation with gox proves beyond all doubt that adding third parties to mix is a recipe for disaster.
As usual, Andreas says it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy6XIBnThpY
Minutes 15:00 through 21:00 are the parts you need to watch if you think regulation is needed or wanted.
But really you should watch the whole thing to fully understand how this currency actually works.
As usual, Andreas says it best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jy6XIBnThpY
Minutes 15:00 through 21:00 are the parts you need to watch if you think regulation is needed or wanted.
But really you should watch the whole thing to fully understand how this currency actually works.
But to be realistic, there will have to be some form of regulation by the time Bitcoin really breaks out into the mainstream. Governments, and a large part of the public in my opinion, will expect a certain minimum standard of regulation i order to allow Bitcoin to have a meaningful role in the payment system.
There will have to be rule to ensure that Bitcoin does not become the favorite tool of child porn producers, extortionists and terrorists (just to foreshadow some inflaming headlines we are sure to see at some point) which means thare has to be some kind of effective Anti Money Laundering regulation.
The developed countries will also have to make sure that Bitcoin does not lead to rampant tax evasion. They have barely managed to effectively close the tax evasion heaven that was the Swiss banking system and now there is Bitcoin. Taxes will have to be levied regardless what kind of currency a transaction is performed in because the states need the money and will get it this or that way. Now obviously, this might lead to a major change in our system of taxation towards a consumption based system because it would be easier to control but taxation there will be non the less.
Now right now nobody knows how that regulation will look but it will surely come...
Lets just hope they take the time to actually think of new regulations for bitcoin. Regulations adapted to the new kind of system Bitcoin is instead of just saying "all the old rules apply and then some" grinding the whole process to a screeching halt.
There will have to be rule to ensure that Bitcoin does not become the favorite tool of child porn producers, extortionists and terrorists (just to foreshadow some inflaming headlines we are sure to see at some point) which means thare has to be some kind of effective Anti Money Laundering regulation.
The developed countries will also have to make sure that Bitcoin does not lead to rampant tax evasion. They have barely managed to effectively close the tax evasion heaven that was the Swiss banking system and now there is Bitcoin. Taxes will have to be levied regardless what kind of currency a transaction is performed in because the states need the money and will get it this or that way. Now obviously, this might lead to a major change in our system of taxation towards a consumption based system because it would be easier to control but taxation there will be non the less.
Now right now nobody knows how that regulation will look but it will surely come...
Lets just hope they take the time to actually think of new regulations for bitcoin. Regulations adapted to the new kind of system Bitcoin is instead of just saying "all the old rules apply and then some" grinding the whole process to a screeching halt.
The problem is not regulating, the problem lies in how it is going to get regulated.
...The fact that ...pharmaeutical is regulated is good: I can trust that they are safe and won't poison me.
You need to distinguish between what is seen and what is not seen.
You see the "good" effects of regulation. You don't see the bad. Pharmaceutical regulation raises the cost of drug development and medical research by orders of magnitude. The consequence of that is that many life-saving medicines and treatments never reach the market at all.
Thus millions die. It's just that you don't know who they are.
they don't its just the forum hierarchy and their legion of alts they are the biggest scam crew you can think of look at how much they have gotten away with at gox all in it together, they will be throwing a big party at Mark's cayman islands mansion you can bet on that
bitcoin will get a regulation eventually, it is inevitable. mtgox will just make it sooner.
I'd like to see them try to regulate bitcoin. The max they can do is just govern bitcoin exchanges...
bitcoin will get a regulation eventually, it is inevitable. mtgox will just make it sooner.
In the same fashion, imagine that law required that bitcoin exchanges are required to publish an audit every quarter. The Mt.Gox fiasco would have never happened.
Horrible errors like this die out due to market forces; akin to how unfit species die out due to evolutionary forces.
Once upon a time, the main way of buying and selling bitcoins was via PayPal. It took a long time for this to break down, but it did in the end, without state coercion.
Once upon a time, most mining pools employed the dreadfully flawed "proportional reward system". It took more than a year for the market to shake this off, but it managed eventually, even without new laws.
I'm fully confident that, without any threat of violence at all, events such as the Mt.Gox fiasco will become relics.
historically regulation makes more bad than good, and also put everything in the hands of thosze who already have power
History repeats itself? whos talking about regulating bitcoin.
Just the end points like exchanges, where it is necessary to entrust both fiat and BTC to a third party in order to be able to trade in real time.
Just the end points like exchanges, where it is necessary to entrust both fiat and BTC to a third party in order to be able to trade in real time.
Like when I buy a cheeseburger "in real time" at a restaurant and have to entrust both fiat and a cheeseburger to a third party?
Read above: requiring a license to exchange BTC and USD is what causes the consolidation, which is what causes the massive heists. If I could convert BTC/USD at my coffee shop in the morning, I wouldn't have to store BTC in Mt. Gox (nor USD in My Bank, for that matter).
Would a coffee shop be willing to set up a terminal where they can offer this? I think you could convince them to do so. A coffee shop probably isn't going to be willing to get licensed as a money services business, though.
Does that require trust? Yeah. Buying $100 of BTC from a coffee shop requires about as much trust as buying $100 of electronics equipment from an electronics store.
whos talking about regulating bitcoin.
Just the end points like exchanges, where it is necessary to entrust both fiat and BTC to a third party in order to be able to trade in real time.
Another interesting regulatory application would be tracing stolen coins to the point of exit: BTC to fiat or a product/service with the help of non Gov body such as Bitcoin Foundation+law enforcers in respective end points(where the BTC got changed to fiat/product/service). And ability to return stolen coins to the owner.
Just the end points like exchanges, where it is necessary to entrust both fiat and BTC to a third party in order to be able to trade in real time.
Another interesting regulatory application would be tracing stolen coins to the point of exit: BTC to fiat or a product/service with the help of non Gov body such as Bitcoin Foundation+law enforcers in respective end points(where the BTC got changed to fiat/product/service). And ability to return stolen coins to the owner.
Because trading is not a crime, and this so-called "regulation" criminalizes trade. If you and I agree to exchange bitcoin for dollars, that is not a crime. There is no victim. We have a right to voluntarily exchange our property.
If, on the other hand, you steal my bitcoins or my dollars (or otherwise obtain them fraudulently), then that is a crime - an actual crime with a real flesh-and-blood victim and actual provable damages. There are LAWS against crimes like THEFT and FRAUD. There have been since...forever. Those laws are essentially just. It would be nice if they were properly enforced.
Please note that the existence of laws against theft and fraud do not magically stop people from committing such crimes. Likewise please note that criminalizing trade through "regulation" does not magically stop people from committing crimes either, but it does introduce something new into the picture - the punishment of provably innocent parties, and the intentional distortion of markets by government and corporate forces bent on power and control.
If we want to see some measure of justice, we should advocate that laws against theft and fraud be properly enforced, not that innocent people be punished for non-crimes or that certain groups be given control over markets other than the people who voluntarily participate in them.
If, on the other hand, you steal my bitcoins or my dollars (or otherwise obtain them fraudulently), then that is a crime - an actual crime with a real flesh-and-blood victim and actual provable damages. There are LAWS against crimes like THEFT and FRAUD. There have been since...forever. Those laws are essentially just. It would be nice if they were properly enforced.
Please note that the existence of laws against theft and fraud do not magically stop people from committing such crimes. Likewise please note that criminalizing trade through "regulation" does not magically stop people from committing crimes either, but it does introduce something new into the picture - the punishment of provably innocent parties, and the intentional distortion of markets by government and corporate forces bent on power and control.
If we want to see some measure of justice, we should advocate that laws against theft and fraud be properly enforced, not that innocent people be punished for non-crimes or that certain groups be given control over markets other than the people who voluntarily participate in them.
Very well said. In addition, in the case of Bitcoin, I think the money services regulations are a big contributor to making things less safe for us all. If it weren't for these regulations I think you'd see a lot more in-person exchange to/from BTC, and therefore a lot more people holding their BTC in personal wallets rather than at these huge exchanges.
The fact that people are in jail for selling BTC in-person without a license is just appalling, and anyone who claims to be a supporter of Bitcoin ought to agree with that.
historically regulation makes more bad than good, and also put everything in the hands of thosze who already have power
Because trading is not a crime, and this so-called "regulation" criminalizes trade. If you and I agree to exchange bitcoin for dollars, that is not a crime. There is no victim. We have a right to voluntarily exchange our property.
If, on the other hand, you steal my bitcoins or my dollars (or otherwise obtain them fraudulently), then that is a crime - an actual crime with a real flesh-and-blood victim and actual provable damages. There are LAWS against crimes like THEFT and FRAUD. There have been since...forever. Those laws are essentially just. It would be nice if they were properly enforced.
Please note that the existence of laws against theft and fraud do not magically stop people from committing such crimes. Likewise please note that criminalizing trade through "regulation" does not magically stop people from committing crimes either, but it does introduce something new into the picture - the punishment of provably innocent parties, and the intentional distortion of markets by government and corporate forces bent on power and control.
If we want to see some measure of justice, we should advocate that laws against theft and fraud be properly enforced, not that innocent people be punished for non-crimes or that certain groups be given control over markets other than the people who voluntarily participate in them.
If, on the other hand, you steal my bitcoins or my dollars (or otherwise obtain them fraudulently), then that is a crime - an actual crime with a real flesh-and-blood victim and actual provable damages. There are LAWS against crimes like THEFT and FRAUD. There have been since...forever. Those laws are essentially just. It would be nice if they were properly enforced.
Please note that the existence of laws against theft and fraud do not magically stop people from committing such crimes. Likewise please note that criminalizing trade through "regulation" does not magically stop people from committing crimes either, but it does introduce something new into the picture - the punishment of provably innocent parties, and the intentional distortion of markets by government and corporate forces bent on power and control.
If we want to see some measure of justice, we should advocate that laws against theft and fraud be properly enforced, not that innocent people be punished for non-crimes or that certain groups be given control over markets other than the people who voluntarily participate in them.
I think the question is too vague...
You would have to elaborate on what regulations... (Not all regulations are feared.)
I like regulation that saves me from potential losses. (Even if only self-regulated.)
I don't like regulation that operates under the ploy of protecting me, (though it might in some rare way), creating limitations on how, where, or why I spend my earned income.
You would have to elaborate on what regulations... (Not all regulations are feared.)
I like regulation that saves me from potential losses. (Even if only self-regulated.)
I don't like regulation that operates under the ploy of protecting me, (though it might in some rare way), creating limitations on how, where, or why I spend my earned income.
One of the major problems with regulations would be the state and government licenses. The exchanges, or business may be forced to be licensed in each state or country that a person is trying to purchase bitcoins from. Not to mention that you may need to register with all appropriate forms of ID, any place that you purchase or store bitcoins. Major un-needed headache
I agree, it's a major barrier to entry for the little guy. I don't really mind if you need a license but they should have affordable, a money transmitter license is simply not something the average business person can afford and that's what should change.
Jump to: