Topic: Why do people fear regulation so much? - page 2. (Read 3121 times)
I think people afraid that regulation will come from people that don't view bitcoin as a protocol and thus it will be irrational.
It depends what you mean by regulation. Most likely you mean the modern government variety. So as related to an exchange it would mean some set of rules some bureaucrats devise to attempt to solve past problems. What do you think the chance the bureaucrat will consider tools so customers can personally validate their holdings or mechanisms for multiple parties to check each other in real time. All technically possible. Or better yet distributed exchanges. Instead they will use the limited technology they know and government force to impose a less efficient and effective set of rules that can't be easily avoided by those who develop better methods. It will also create the pretense the problem has been solved reducing the motivation and profit for providing superior solutions. It might seem to help in the short term but the long term results will be a system in the general sense in less well regulated.
It also creates an incentive for regulatory capture where powerful parties supposedly regulated by government have an incentive to collude with the regulators to have regulations or laws changed to favor them over less powerful competition or even new entrants. This essential gives private organization indirect access to government force.
It also creates an incentive for regulatory capture where powerful parties supposedly regulated by government have an incentive to collude with the regulators to have regulations or laws changed to favor them over less powerful competition or even new entrants. This essential gives private organization indirect access to government force.
We can't give big bad government our IDs and information if we want to use Exchanges, so regulation is bad. *
*but its ok to give your photo, palm print, ssn, bank acct # and name to some no-name company to use their Bitcoin ATM.
*but its ok to give your photo, palm print, ssn, bank acct # and name to some no-name company to use their Bitcoin ATM.
Why do people fear regulation so much ?
Because governments are so often so bad at it, I think.
I don't know - but all I can say for sure is that in the absence of some kind of regulation, in the light of the Gox fiasco, there is little chance that I would have much success in converting my family and friends to BTC (if indeed I had the desire in the first place to talk them into it)
What kind of regulation, exactly?
Why do people fear regulation so much ?
I don't know - but all I can say for sure is that in the absence of some kind of regulation, in the light of the Gox fiasco, there is little chance that I would have much success in converting my family and friends to BTC (if indeed I had the desire in the first place to talk them into it)
And to be fair to them, my families and friends bank deposits in the UK are currently guaranteed up to £85k (per account) by the UK Government - how is BTC going to compete with that ? People entrust their capital to third parties because they offer some kind of insurance and security against loss - and they are prepared to pay for it. At the minute in BTC land you'd be as well off entrusting your BTC to the bloke down the market.
Don't get me wrong - I believe in BTC - but I suspect that a lot of its current price is a reflection not of the few quid people like me (idealists
) have tied up in it, but more the dollars that the likes of this bloke have siphoned into it. Nothing radical in this chap - nothing emancipatory or idealist or libertarian here - just naked self interest. He doesn't want regulation either 
Or is the future of BTC to be one whereby it becomes an unregulated anonymous means by which the IMF is unable to tax the rich to pay for the debt that they (the rich) have forced upon the 90% of the world population ??
I, for one, sincerely hope not.
I don't know - but all I can say for sure is that in the absence of some kind of regulation, in the light of the Gox fiasco, there is little chance that I would have much success in converting my family and friends to BTC (if indeed I had the desire in the first place to talk them into it)
And to be fair to them, my families and friends bank deposits in the UK are currently guaranteed up to £85k (per account) by the UK Government - how is BTC going to compete with that ? People entrust their capital to third parties because they offer some kind of insurance and security against loss - and they are prepared to pay for it. At the minute in BTC land you'd be as well off entrusting your BTC to the bloke down the market.
Don't get me wrong - I believe in BTC - but I suspect that a lot of its current price is a reflection not of the few quid people like me (idealists
) have tied up in it, but more the dollars that the likes of this bloke have siphoned into it. Nothing radical in this chap - nothing emancipatory or idealist or libertarian here - just naked self interest. He doesn't want regulation either Or is the future of BTC to be one whereby it becomes an unregulated anonymous means by which the IMF is unable to tax the rich to pay for the debt that they (the rich) have forced upon the 90% of the world population ??
I, for one, sincerely hope not.
Go buy some mintchip or some other government-backed coin if you want a regulated digital currency. But you'll see where it falls down compared to Bitcoin in this article.
One problem with regulation is that a small business has a very hard time complying with all the regulations. As an example, to be a money services business in all 50 states costs millions of dollars. The application fees run into 6 figures, attorney fees are ridiculous, and then bonding requirements in individual states often run between $50,000 and over a million. So that is easy for a company like Western Union. But, not for a small company that tries to compete.
Net neutrality laws, benefit Internet and benefit the end user, even if telecoms don't like them.
How so? Why shouldn't I be allowed to buy whatever Internet service that someone is willing to sell to me?
In the same sense that offering low prices and great service hurts other businesses?
If people have to begin signing "distribution contracts" with Internet providers in order for poeple to be able to access their website
People can't be forced to sign anything.
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.
Enron was required to publish an audit every quarter.
Fine, but there's a difference between deliberate fraud and stupidity.
And you think Gox is the latter? C'mon.
People deliberately can hide cash or facts, and no amount of regulation can prevent that. However, by requiring to publish an audit, it would have forced Mt.Gox to check wether it had enough BTC on had to cover all it's users funds. And their problem would have been found sooner.
Yeah, I don't think so.
My main issue with regulations is that I want to be able to buy whatever I want from whomever I want, so long as I'm not hurting anyone else in the process. If I want to buy pot, or non-neutral Internet access, or bitcoin, I should be able to do so without the government interfering. I'm an adult. Let me make adult decisions.
I agree with that.
You agree that I should be allowed to buy pot? But your drug regulations, which you support, are why I can't. You agree I should be allowed to buy non-neutral Internet access? But your net neutrality regulations, which you support, would say I can't. You agree I should be allowed to buy bitcoin without the government interfering? But your money services business regulations say I can't.
You say you're interested in an intelligent conversation. First off some here are actually anarcho-capitalists, libertarians, anarchist/minarchists and the like. If you're not of that bent, then of course there will be disagreement - I'm open to debate and not saying anyone who disagrees is 'brainwashed' etc. But the decentralized nature of btc is what drew many of us to it in the early days before it was a 'get rich quick' scheme etc. That some of us have gotten rich is not irrelevant but just a different conversation. Those of us who value certain core principles/ideologies are NOT NECESSARILY interested in btc 'going mainstream' per se.
I understand where you are coming from - perhaps this will provide some insight into where those of us who are against ALL regulation come from. I'm not some kid and I've been on this forum since 2011 although not always overly active.
(I know I'll be saying things that will some people will strongly dissagree. But I'm trying to have an intelligent conversation)
Don't get me wrong: any overly restrictive regulation; outlawing bitcoins, etc... would of course be bad.
What I don't get is that some people seem to fear ANY form of regulation whereas reasonable and balanced regulation can, on the contrary, help an industry strive.
The fact that food additive and pharmaeutical is regulated is good: I can trust that they are safe and won't poison me.
YOU think this is good - and it's understandable. I wish the FDA/DEA etc would go away and allow everything to be legal - there would of course be industry groups that rose up to offer some degree of security/labeling - but all would be legal.
Net neutrality laws, benefit Internet and benefit the end user, even if telecoms don't like them.
Net neutrality is bullshit. Sure it's nice - but there is zero reason broadband providers should be forced by anyone to look at web forums and streaming video content in the same way and for the same price
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.
You/we don't need a government to provide this. Consumers need to DEMAND it from exchanges. MtGox has been a trainwreck waiting to happen ever since June 2011 for anyone who was paying attention. Its implosion will be one of the best things to happen to btc in a long time.
In any case, if we ever hope that bitcoin be used as commonplace currency, it should be treated as such. Which means the same taxes, regulation, etc... You may dissagree with those laws, but it is another debate; how much must the governement tax and regulate money. But I think that somebody that really hopes for Bitcoin becoming mainstream, should rejoince at any reasonable regulation that consider bitcoin on an equal footing with regular money.
Don't get me wrong: any overly restrictive regulation; outlawing bitcoins, etc... would of course be bad.
What I don't get is that some people seem to fear ANY form of regulation whereas reasonable and balanced regulation can, on the contrary, help an industry strive.
The fact that food additive and pharmaeutical is regulated is good: I can trust that they are safe and won't poison me.
YOU think this is good - and it's understandable. I wish the FDA/DEA etc would go away and allow everything to be legal - there would of course be industry groups that rose up to offer some degree of security/labeling - but all would be legal.
Net neutrality laws, benefit Internet and benefit the end user, even if telecoms don't like them.
Net neutrality is bullshit. Sure it's nice - but there is zero reason broadband providers should be forced by anyone to look at web forums and streaming video content in the same way and for the same price
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.
You/we don't need a government to provide this. Consumers need to DEMAND it from exchanges. MtGox has been a trainwreck waiting to happen ever since June 2011 for anyone who was paying attention. Its implosion will be one of the best things to happen to btc in a long time.
In any case, if we ever hope that bitcoin be used as commonplace currency, it should be treated as such. Which means the same taxes, regulation, etc... You may dissagree with those laws, but it is another debate; how much must the governement tax and regulate money. But I think that somebody that really hopes for Bitcoin becoming mainstream, should rejoince at any reasonable regulation that consider bitcoin on an equal footing with regular money.
I understand where you are coming from - perhaps this will provide some insight into where those of us who are against ALL regulation come from. I'm not some kid and I've been on this forum since 2011 although not always overly active.
Why do people hate being lied to, mugged, and raped so much?
As long as they give you a pat on the back afterwards, only take half your wallet, and just use the tip it should be fine, right?
As long as they give you a pat on the back afterwards, only take half your wallet, and just use the tip it should be fine, right?
I think a bit of regulation gives government some peace of mind. Full regulation takes away the spirit of bitcoin. I don't think many government knows how to deal with it yet, and hence the controversy.
Net neutrality laws, benefit Internet and benefit the end user, even if telecoms don't like them.
How so? Why shouldn't I be allowed to buy whatever Internet service that someone is willing to sell to me?
It's one of the beneftis of Bitcoin too, that it's neutral! There is no processor that can chose wether to let go a transaction or not.
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.
Enron was required to publish an audit every quarter.
Fine, but there's a difference between deliberate fraud and stupidity. People deliberately can hide cash or facts, and no amount of regulation can prevent that. However, by requiring to publish an audit, it would have forced Mt.Gox to check wether it had enough BTC on had to cover all it's users funds. And their problem would have been found sooner.
My main issue with regulations is that I want to be able to buy whatever I want from whomever I want, so long as I'm not hurting anyone else in the process. If I want to buy pot, or non-neutral Internet access, or bitcoin, I should be able to do so without the government interfering. I'm an adult. Let me make adult decisions.
I agree with that.
What I don't get is that some people seem to fear ANY form of regulation whereas reasonable and balanced regulation can, on the contrary, help an industry strive.
Generally such people are using the term "regulation" to mean "a law I don't like.
The fact that food additive and pharmaeutical is regulated is good: I can trust that they are safe and won't poison me.
Well, it's nice that there are laws against poisoning people, but the current regulations go way too far.
Net neutrality laws, benefit Internet and benefit the end user, even if telecoms don't like them.
How so? Why shouldn't I be allowed to buy whatever Internet service that someone is willing to sell to me?
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.
Enron was required to publish an audit every quarter.
But I think that somebody that really hopes for Bitcoin becoming mainstream, should rejoince at any reasonable regulation that consider bitcoin on an equal footing with regular money.
I think I can agree with that. On the other hand, there are currently a lot of bad regulations over "regular money".
My main issue with regulations is that I want to be able to buy whatever I want from whomever I want, so long as I'm not hurting anyone else in the process. If I want to buy pot, or non-neutral Internet access, or bitcoin, I should be able to do so without the government interfering. I'm an adult. Let me make adult decisions.
Some regulation would be okay I assume, but the governments tend to take a bad stance here.
Just try to imagine Ben Barnake and Christine Lagarde in the board of the Bitcoin Foundation... Scary stuff 
.
. 
The fact that food additive and pharmaeutical is regulated is good: I can trust that they are safe and won't poison me.
Regulation promises no such thing... What it promises is that there is less potential chance for being poisoned (except for the "known" side-effects/poisons), and if poisoned beyond that known poison, the company who sold you the poison, will be held responsible.
There is no claims of "safety", in regulation.
Drugs get pulled off the "regulated market", which were once regulated. Items get pulled for being unsafe. People still get screwed by regulated markets...
Enron
NYSE
AOL
Microsoft
DOW
Just to name a few "regulated" things that have been the source of some major "non-good", and "distrust".
Why do we fear it... Because it costs us, to regulate. It rewards only those regulating it. It offers little protection, and even less enforcement is actually done. The majority of regulation is simply to do nothing, and get something. "Comfort foods" for the mind.
However... Since it is "comfort food", it does fill more peoples bellies than the distasteful fear of unregulated markets. (However, it should not be forced. What should be forced is alerting people that they are participating in an unregulated market. So they are aware of the lack of "comfort food" that they will never not get.)
Regulation has many faces...
We are not talking about price regulation... We are talking about accountability and proof, regulation.
I don't fear regulation because Bitcoin.
Regulation fears bitcoin. a) good regulation: makes sure no one gets mugged, cash is checked for counterfeit
b) bad regulation: outlaws this via AML and KYC in the first place, enforces a horrible bureaucracy, plus taxes. in many countries even the withdrawal or deposit of cash from your own bank account is severely restricted!
That's my point. We should be happy with good regulation.b) bad regulation: outlaws this via AML and KYC in the first place, enforces a horrible bureaucracy, plus taxes. in many countries even the withdrawal or deposit of cash from your own bank account is severely restricted!
As for AML and KYC law, well... That's USA being stupid. The rest of the world is not crazy as you. For example, Canadian banking system is one of the most sane; during the 2008 crisis, we were almost not affected. (Well, we suffered because our main trading partner was the US, and they were hit hard; the point is, up here, the forclosure rate or the employement rate did not go up that much.)
that is why people fear regulation, for the same reason they fear bacteria, because most of them make you ill
I'm sorry to tell you, but there are more bacterias in your body than there are of your own cell. Your digestive system contains several kind of bacteria that help to keep you alive. (The once did an experiment in which they raised mice in a sterile environnement; they died) 
If you let bankers and politicians to your table they never ever will leave. Probably you have to abandon your table. This is why I'm afraid of regulation.
Jump to: