Ben Lawsky: We Can Police the Dark Web/Bitcoin – ValueWalk ...

Circle has still not responded to Peter Todd about whether they are implementing censorship or surveillance technology

so let me summarise,
mike hearn is a developer that has been pushing for blacklists, censorship, supporting regulation .etc he is a crony in the worst way.
peter todd is the developer who has done loads for bitcoin. the anonymity techniques in dark wallet were invented by him. he works for the people.
mike hearn wants to censor peter todd.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=418071.msg6412027#msg6412027
circle is a new company that is always promoted by the foundation and their crew of people. they always appear at the top of conference lists for finance .etc
http://bitcoin2014.com/ http://www.bitfin.com/
jeremy allaire (circle ceo), makes statements that bitcoin needs to abandon its libertarian roots. we need to take this plaything away from the anarchists kind of attitude.
http://www.coindesk.com/bitcoin-abandons-anti-establishment-wall-street/
mike hearn is working with circle:
http://www.coindesk.com/circle-advisory-board-members-burns-appointment/
circle is working on tracking and surveillance tech:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=418071.msg6403720#msg6403720
they refuse to answer questions (this is one of many, can't find the rest):
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/25ou9f/good_morning_reddit_we_know_youve_been_wondering/
mike hearn says the bitcoin dev model needs to change. backing up gavin (chief scientist of bitcoin foundation who is actually more like a figurehead to legitimise the foundation)... this is his way of pushing out elements by formalising the dev process to stop people to participate and take control.
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/28zts3/mike_hearn_interview_quotes_progress_on_the/
circle also this month made a similar statement (on coindesk):
http://www.coindesk.com/circle-ceo-jeremy-allaire-issues-challenge-bitcoins-core-developers/
note how he says "unwelcoming to new participants" - same words as mike hearn.
if you want to dev bitcoin, there's nothing stopping you. go write code or participate. don't try to assert control.
it's all related, bitcoin foundation being official with their claim to legimitimacy but no merit to back that up.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=322328.msg3460051#msg3460051 "Just got a call from the bitcoin foundation. They wouldn't go on the record to comment on the article but just kept telling me "off the record" that you lot [Dark Wallet] have no credibility and that a much better story is some venture capitalist yesterday investing $9m in bitcoin..." ~email from journalist when we were doing DarkWallet crowdfunding.
btw check this,
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/2646ei/bitcoin_foundation_has_4600000_in_assets_90_in/
and despite all those resources they have done jack shit for bitcoin.
there is some big corruption going on here. foundation people are all flying all-expense paid fancy trips, paying themselves high salaries whilst most wallet developers and the opensource projects (which people use) in this space are without resources. they have contributed nothing to the community. there's been no proof otherwise besides some minor grants for ~$10k or so.
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/2aycxs/hi_this_is_ben_lawsky_at_nydfs_here_are_the/
people are like "oh dear, we need better legislation" without realising the foot in the door danger. it's like the used car salesman who rips you off with an overpriced crappy car which you jump on after "he speaks to the boss" (i.e smokes a ciggy), knocking down his initial high offer. wow! what a bargain!
G8 magazine, June 2013 "Protecting digital economies": "If the leaders of the European Union and United States could be convinced to take a lead on these initiatives [banning Bitcoin], that would be a huge contribution to making the internet a safe place for financial transactions. At the same time, it would also strike a blow against those who would try to destroy the fabric of our world’s well-being."
JP Morgan, Feb 2014 "The audacity of Bitcoin": "But followers of financial history know the limitation of a system based on a fixed or slow-growing money supply: it imposes uncomfortable financial discipline on governments, households and corporates. [i.e governments, consumers, the corporations" (goes on to talk about how printing dollars was used to fund WW1 and the Vietnam war as a good thing)
ECB, Oct 2012 "Virtual currency schemes": "Authorities need to consider whether they intend to formalise or acknowledge and regulate these schemes. In this regard, a likely suggestion could sooner or later involve virtual currency scheme owners registering as financial institutions with their local regulating authorities. This is a similar trajectory to the one PayPal has undergone, as it was granted a banking licence in Luxembourg in 2007 after its service became popular. This is not an easy step, but it looks like the only possible way to strike a proper balance between money and payment innovations on the one hand, and consumer protection and financial stability, on the other."
Mark my words. The problem is not with this regulation needing to be fixed. They will probably tone down the proposal and it will be hailed as a victory within the community, yet be another step toward normalisation of their activities.
http://www.coindesk.com/ben-lawsky-friend-foe/
"The choice for the regulators is: permit money laundering on the one hand, or permit innovation on the other, and we’re always going to choose squelching the money laundering first. It’s not worth it to society to allow money laundering and all of the things it facilitates to persist in order to permit 1000 flowers to bloom on the innovation side.” ~ Ben Lawsky
funny he's affiliated with chuck schumer too who is a populist and someone who in the early days was very anti-bitcoin (silk road).
i love the whole tone of this propaganda piece which is like "he's such a nice guy". I bet he has good manners too.
maybe you all appreciate this article,
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-dark-wallet-developers-plan-for-startup-governments-run-on-bitcoin
submitted by genjix to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Dear Ben Lawsky--Yesterday, Coinbase put something into the world that will protect more consumers than any regulations you could hope to enact

Dear Ben Lawsky,
Yesterday, Coinbase put something into the world that will protect more consumers than any regulations you could hope to enact: multi-signature wallets.
With multi-sig wallets, there’s no way the money deposited at Coinbase can be “Goxxed”. Nor can it be part of a fractional reserve system. Consumers’ deposits are under their control, not anyone else’s. This is something that’s possible with Bitcoin but not traditional money.
Why did Coinbase create this service? After all, there was no regulation requiring them to do so. What motivation does Coinbase have to come up with a multi-sig wallet without a regulator cracking the whip?
Well, they’re a business, and they want happy costumers. They want to make money and not worry about possibly going to jail. And customers want peace of mind knowing their Bitcoins cannot be lost in a Mt. Gox-style disaster.
I know, I know—most businesses cannot be trusted to police themselves. But I submit they have a much greater incentive to protect customers than you do. If they do a poor job, they go out of business. Not every company will innovate, but get enough companies in the space and some of them surely will, and the others will have to keep up or go out of business.
You see, in the Bitcoin space, the way to protect consumers is by innovation, not by regulations. We need an ecosystem of dozens of Coinbases. Yes, some will fail, and yes, along the way, some people will lose money. But that’s the type of environment in which best practices evolve. Let’s face it, the gauntlet has been thrown down: Circle had better come up with something fast to match Coinbase. No future online wallet startup could hope to compete without a multi-sig feature, and if they really want to steal customers, they’ll have to come up with something even better.
So what should you do? What is your role? I submit that the best thing you can do is wait and watch. Let the next 5 years play out. Don’t rush in with hasty regulations based on the old system that harm competition and empower entrenched companies.
In the Bitcoin world, consumer protection happens via evolution, not regulation.
submitted by pdtmeiwn to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

There is a 30 day comment period for the current Bitlicense proposal. Unless there are substantial changes, New York will be a Bitcoin dead zone

The 30 day comment period starts next week. Bitlicense, as proposed will force most companies that store customer BTC deposits to block New York IP addresses. There is very little chance that Lawsky will make any further changes to it, so what will this mean for Bitcoin around the world?
EDIT, as a reminder:
This is how the Bitlicense will affect Bitcoin businesses, taken from here:
http://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/2aycxs/hi_this_is_ben_lawsky_at_nydfs_here_are_the/cizyqyz
(I've added modifications in light of changes in the new proposal and information that I found was missing in the original write-up)
Entities are considered dealing in virtual currencies if:
.. to any resident in New York. Web services, even those incorporated overseas, must either comply or block access for NY users. (200.2n)
Entities 'dealing in virtual currency' must:
Added:
The (only?) good news: Merchants do not need a BitLicense to accept Bitcoin for a good or service. (200.3c2).
> This post was created for general guidance, and does not constitute legal advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific advice from a professional. No representation or warranty (expressed or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this post.
EDIT 2, targetpro suggested expressing any concerns you may have about the proposed regs to the NY Dept. of Finan. Services:
submitted by aminok to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Of Wolves and Weasels - Day 191 - Barking Mad

Hey all! GoodShibe here!
I'm technically still on vacation, but in light of the news out of New York... I feel the need to comment.
If you're not aware of what's going on, the New York State Department of Financial Services is proposing a new regulatory framework for how all Cryptocurrencies work for the residents of New York State.
However, the way that it's worded, the way that it's been presented, it's incredibly vague in some areas while being incredibly strict in others.
They're designed to take 'untraceable digital cash' and, at pretty much every point along the chain, put someone's face and name to who had what and when.
This, of course, weakens Cryptos immediately in compared to, well, cold, hard cash -- which is largely untraceable. This bill, as it has been designed, seems to try and have a massive chilling effect on cryptocurrencies in general.
You can use cryptos, sure, but by the time they're done with them... why would you want to?
You can read the proposed Regulations here.
AmericanBitcoin has put together a TL;DR of the proposed reglations
goldcakes has put together a TL;DR of some of the ramifications
If you'd like to see a quick breakdown of exactly what's wrong with the proposal, I highly recommend you read this comment by MrMadden over in /Bitcoin, which is utterly fantastic.
dalovindj also has a great post on how this would effect our fellow Shibes.
Here's the thing: We always knew that this was going to be a problem. The idea that somehow the old, established system would just roll over and let the next generation step up to the plate without a fight is laughable.
And now we've seen the first volley. The warning shot off the port bow, so to speak.
The regulations that are coming out are, well, typical government overreach designed, specifically, to elicit the reaction that they are. They're big and scary and over-reaching.
But they're also designed so that, IF there's a public outcry, at a large enough scale, they can 'pull back' the more offensive over-steps and still come out of this with the regulation that they REALLY want.
If nobody stands up to complain or fight back about it... then bonus for them. The city of New York then gets global over-reach on a massive scale all under the guise of 'protecting it's citizens'.
Incidentally, if you hadn't noticed, Canada set the wheels in motion recently, with the first 'Bitcoin Law' which caused quite an uproar (remember when DogeDice closed down rather than meet the Canadian Government's new regulations?).
Here's the thing - and it's a truth that's as immutable as time itself:
Governments are going to Govern.
They will always move to exact as much power as we let them have over any new or emerging technology, especially where money is involved.
So... what can we do about it?
For those who don't live in the US, the best thing you can do is learn about this regulation - because, whether you like it or not, the Government of the State of New York is making it your business. Because anyone who does business with residents of the State of New York will have to submit to these regulations as well.
Meaning that if you do business with a business that does business with the state of New York, you will be subject to those same overreaches.
The long and short of the problem is this:
You have 45 days, starting on July 23rd, once the Regulations are formally published, to make a case to the people of New York that, whether they realize it or not, this bill is trampling their rights.
Because, that's how you defeat this issue.
We need to get NEW YORKERS to care about this issue.
If you're not in New York, your job is now to find a way to help make New Yorkers care about this issue.
I don't care which banner your coin flies - Bitcoin, Litecoin, Dogecoin, Reddcoin, Potcoin... this is effects us all and it's only just getting started.
How will this bill effect them? It might not, directly, lots of people aren't using cryptos yet. But it's the first step in something larger.
If this goes through unchallenged, then I foresee a whole new legal arms race to 'protect' ones citizens from, well, anything they like.
Because this is '... but think of the children!' for a whole new era.
This is classic government overreach.
If you're living in New York, you need to get in touch with your local representatives and let them know, unequivocally, that this is a voting issue for you.
That you will be watching to find out if they support this bill, and that if they do, you will be voting for the other guy.
The best way to deal with this problem is not to 'get angry'.
It's to 'get angry and get to work'.
Forget waiting for the Lobbyists and their big money to tell you how it's going to be.
If you want cryptos to survive - and this legislation, as stated, would make illegal having a QT wallet/node running on your computer - then -- every crypto-user on this planet -- is now a Lobbyist.
And, for my fellow Shibes, if there's one thing that /Dogecoin has proven good at, it's in getting the word out there.
We're smart, we're media savvy - we know how to get attention!
So, let's get organized.
Bring everyone on board - every coin, every crypto-user in every corner of the world.
Let's get active.
Because we've still got time to fight this.
Together!
It's 8:50AM EST and we've found 87.62% of our initial 100 Billion DOGEs -- only 12.38% remains until our period of Hyper-inflation ends! Our Global Hashrate is up from ~44 to ~46 Gigahashes per second and our Difficulty is up from ~641 to ~815.
As always, I appreciate your support!
GoodShibe
EDIT: I've created this brainstorming thread to try and help get ideas moving. Come join me!
EDIT 2: I've also started this post to ask for the community's permission/support to reach out to /bitcoin and other communities to try and organize a crypto-wide response to these regulations.
submitted by GoodShibe to dogecoin [link] [comments]

Tragic implications of the BitLicense with respect to Bitcoin 2.0 applications, smart contracts, smart property, Bitcoin law, digital voting and Ethereum?

Now granted, I am not a lawyer. I am a commercial pilot by trade and as such please forgive any misconceptions that I may have picked up as a layman in the Bitcoin universe, for my intellect is small but my aspirations are lofty.
It has occurred to me, however, that this proposed BitLicense represents problems for the Bitcoin ecosystem so far and above what may be evident at the moment. Mostly because regulators are attempting to square a circle and apply existing banking-type regulations to a digital and software controlled payment network/protocol. And not only that, if there is one thing that being in this community has taught me, it is to never underestimate the brilliance of these young new innovators in creating radical new concepts for the future... many of which (to me at least) would seem to be on a direct collision course with these BitLicenses. If I am wrong, please tell me why. Here is what I see so far...
1.) Smart contracts. If I enter into a smart contract facilitated by a lawyer's office and said office (as a part of its legal services) holds said private key/contract for me or transfers it to a third party as part of a multi sig transaction (let's say a will, deed or trust), would this lawyer now be considered a bitcoin business and as such be required to maintain all of the same onerous requirements as large exchanges and so forth? And more troublesome would seem to be the reporting requirements of this transfer. If attorney-client privilege is paramount and necessary, would not digital contract transferrence reporting requirements under the BitLicense now expose lawyers and/or their clients dealings to the public? Indeed, a promising aspect of digital bitcoin contracts/colored coins/etc would undoubtedly be their anonymity. What other businesses would undoubtedly try to harness Bitcoin for their purposes and what other unintended consequences could this regulation bring about?
2.) Ethereum presents us with the possibility to invent an entire universe of new digital financial products and contracts. Would each of these contracts require the transferring parties to be BitLicense holders as well? Would not DAC (digital autonomous corporations) touted by the Ethereum team also be vastly hampered by the reporting and financial requirements of the BitLicense? After all, such corporations would aim to be autonomously handling Bitcoin transactions of a global nature. This would seem to greatly hamper the innovative capacity of Ethereum which aims to allow multitudes of trustless decentralized systems in place of entrenched banking establishments.
3.) Would innovators designing new types of cryptocurrencies on potential sidechains to the Bitcoin network also be required to have BitLicenses? If those cryptocurrencies are actually pegged Bitcoin transactions on a side chain, do they even represent a "new" cryptocurrency at all for the purposes of regulatory oversight? What about test nets? Are these considered true cryptocurrencies at all if they only serve the purpose of being a testbed?
4.) Digital Ecosystem: If a decentralized, autonomous taxi cab service of the future (let's just imagine such a service for a moment, shall we?) employs a wallet service provider such as Blockchain.info, would this not subject each and every rider to the same strict identity requirements as those transacting with Bitcoin exchanges? I realize it depends on how the individual company handles the taxi cab transaction, but I venture to guess that most companies would elect to have a third party do this for them, and as such would not the third party be required, as a licensee, to identify the fares? I use a taxi cab as an example because this would seem to be a use case for forthcoming google cars and what not. I am sure that if you use your imagination you can envision a future where almost all services interact digitally using Bitcoin...
5.) Voting: If a cryptographic election system is put into place, and used in the state of New York, would such a system be subject to the BitLicense requirements? And If I use a satoshi or other discrete transaction to cryptographically verify on the Blockchain that I have cast my vote at the booth, and you process it, are you, as the voting authority not then required to identify me and keep those records on file? I am grasping on this one, but it does not seem out of the realm of possibility.
As a mere layman, I am very troubled by the onerous requirements of the proposal set forth by Ben Lawsky. If even I, with my hamster brain, can envision such a universe of potential problems erupting from these regulations what does that say about the current state of our regulators? Am I wrong on many of my assumptions? Am I misreading the BitLicense? It would seem that perhaps regulators should adopt a wait and see approach before diving into this fray. Even the "experts" themselves do not truly know the implications of many of these evolving technologies. How will they interact? What innovative constructs will they give rise to? If even one of these constructs evolves to be the next "killer app" for Bitcoin what unintended consequences to the state of New York could this bring in hampering a potential supernova of innovative capacity and economic activity?
As a regulator, you need to be asking yourself, "What is the purpose of my regulation, and how best can I adapt it to suit and protect the public which I serve. How can I foster innovation and invention while still creating a legal, stable and sound baseline for infrastructure to grow?" If said regulation hampers and stifles innovation, particularly with a global peer to peer network such as Bitcoin, it would seem to be trivial to push such innovation elsewhere, at the expense of your own tax coffers and revenues. More digital business=more money for you, the regulator. More regulation=less digital business.
But most troublesome of all is the notion that many other states or governments might look on the proposed BitLicense as a template for their own misguided approaches at regulating the nascent and undiscovered land that is digital currency. I personally would be scared to death of approaching this task with haste. You simply DO NOT KNOW what you are doing, because none of us truly know yet. As such, you owe it to the people of the state of New York to start with a bare minimum and ADD TO. We all know that in the government, it is much easier to add to, than take away. On a slightly humorous note, it would seem that you are trying to square a circle, when in fact you should be looking at this is as trying to "infinity an infinity".
Edit: I have contacted the NYDFS directly [email protected] to make an attempt to publicly comment on their proposal but have yet to receive a reply on the proper correspondence address.
submitted by AstarJoe to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A bitcoin search safari: Bitcoiners and the Jewish Religion.

https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1rj0r6/bitcoin_attention_in_israel_is_going_insane_a/cdnryo6
If the Jews are buying bitcoin, I'm sold.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/3flyi2/bitlicense_new_york_cronyism_state_of_mind/ctpzkrv
The talmud allows Jews to lie and cheat none Jews. Why is anyone surprised they got swindled by Ben Lawsky? People were warning about him being a two face and they were actively downvoted by this subreddit. Wake up dummies..
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/325dby/israeli_bank_busters_start_accepting_bitcoin/cq87th3
The Israeli government and the Israelis are also under control of the bankers, tycoons and the US.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/3zaxmd/my_coinbase_wallet/
My coinbase wallet has the words "gay Jew" written into it- am I being punked?
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/4lhkx7/bitcoin_is_soaring_on_unprecedented_burst_in/d3ncxaw
Ironically, being into bitcoin is akin to being a jew.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/4lhkx7/bitcoin_is_soaring_on_unprecedented_burst_in/d3ntz3w
To be fair BTC is against the Rothschild cartel who appear to be Jewish
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/4lhkx7/bitcoin_is_soaring_on_unprecedented_burst_in/d3ney7g
If anything bitcoin is a huge blow against international jewry.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/3k9qmq/john_mcafee_announces_hes_running_for_president/cuynvmz
That's fine if they are. Most studies show they have a higher iq. The problem is when they run the banks and give their friends and family more loans than others. This is intrinsically unfair and essentially evil
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1zv3uq/another_reason_not_to_trust_newsweek_they_are/cfxilud
Why is it when Christians band together to make money its a cult but when jewish people do it its business as usual?
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/j78lc/need_some_bitcoin_investing_advice/c29qp5d
I'm not Nostradamus, but I'll ballpark it and say by the end of 2013 Bitcoins will be worth anywhere between $200 and $250. Since they're only $12 right now, you're looking at an enormous return on investment; far more than any typical Jewish bank will give you.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1rf3fb/study_suggests_link_between_dread_pirate_roberts/cdmlipy
Please stop posting this Jewish bankemedia attempt to besmirch bitcoin. We are going to see this time and again from the Jewish bankers. This will not be the first time.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1j62wt/tell_rconspiracy_about_bitcoin_money_how_the/cbbslv6
The globalist banking cartel are Jewish supremacists that use their money power to wipe out all racially homogenous nations, especially White nations.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/4hq3rz/david_kleiman_craig_wrights_friend_more_likely/d2rvewi
The libertarian movement is at it's core Jewish.
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/4r2pw5/if_bitcoin_becomes_a_major_currency_then_tens_of/d4y9vr9
If we unite, we can win this war against governments, big corperations and rich Jewish families who pull strings in the background. You think we live in a democracy? It's nothing but an illusion.
https://www.reddit.com/btc/comments/4q5jgu/greenspan_warns_a_crisis_is_imminent_urges_a/d4qgjwg
the current economic mess can be directly traced to Jewish economic practices brought into fruition through Milton Friedman and Alan Greenspan.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/204tot/meet_the_gay_black_republican_selling_guns_online/cfzw1th
Hitler was a Rothschild and so Jewish by decent. But the term Nazi was just a derogatory term coined by Zionists at the time. When you understand that Hitler was actually nothing more than a piece in the Zionist's chess game things become a bit clearer.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1jft60/richard_stallman_on_a_1btc_bill_this_is_so/cbeb3ea
he's just a Jew. This is normal behavior for them since they're miscegenated and later inbred leading to neurosis and mental deviance.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1c6sds/libertybitcom_reviews_cadusd_exchange/c9dkzcg
Cavirtex is owned by a greedy kike, but is necessary to use for high rollers.
https://www.reddit.com/Bitcoin/comments/1l1z6g/the_federal_governments_reaction_to_bitcoin_is_an/cbvbnlt
once you dispel the lies of these filthy thieving kikes and their degenerate goy monkey slaves, will you truly understand what the Nazis were about.
https://www.reddit.com/Buttcoin/comments/55fpp9/a_bitcoin_search_safari_bitcoiners_and_the_jewish/d8ahzu1
The Jewish subconscious is marked by paranoia and fear. I have many Jewish friends and they all atest to this. Now look at the bitcoin 'community' what it tends to project...
And so on.
submitted by Hodldown to Buttcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin Bowl: Football for Bitcoiners 101

Bitcoin Community,
As many of you know, Bitpay is sponsoring the NCAA (college level) Bitcoin Bowl which plays the 26th at 8pm EST. http://stpetersburgbowl.com/
A huge thanks to Tony and the Bitpay team for putting the Bitcoin name out there, over their own company, and all the work done to get hundred of merchants accepting around the stadium.
I'm excited to watch, just to see some crusty football announcers forced to talk about bitcoin.
The Tampa Bay Times put out an article, finishing with a helpful “How Bitcoin Works,” with such gems as,
“Now the QR code, after being scanned, links the merchant and the buyer's bitcoin wallet. The buyer then enters the amount owed, a private access code and payment approval. (You'll still pay tax on certain things. You can still tip your waiter at a restaurant. It's actually not that different. Well, kind of!)”
http://www.tampabay.com/news/business/retail/at-espn-bitcoin-bowl-push-is-on-for-football-8212-and-cryptocurrency/2211278
Few bitcoiners are... traditionally interested in American football. I thought I'd put together a quick guide so that any bitcoiner can watch the game and sound like they know what they are talking about.
With no further ado, How Football Works for Bitcoiners, with some silly analogies. bitcoin – I'm sure you have some far better ones... :)
Quarterback: touches ball every offensive play, hands off to a running back, or passes to a receiver or tight end. Bitcoin analogy: Gavin Andresen. If he isn't on his game, it isn't a guaranteed loss, but everyone else will need to pick up the slack.
Touchdown: Get into the end zone - either end of the 100 yard (91.44 meters for international readers) field yields your team 6 points, with a short kick for an additional point to make it 7 points. Bitcoin analogy: Price bubble – we're going to the moon! Both seem great and unstoppable at the time, there is a lot of irrational celebration, and in both cases, the game is rarely over.
Touchdown celebration: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dmqGg6Ccvw Randy Moss goes to the moon
Price bubble celebration: http://i.imgur.com/UPuMUx8.jpg Bitcoin price goes to the moon
Interception: Quarterback throws a pass, but the defense catches it, you have an interception. Bitcoin analogy: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/11/feds-will-auction-off-19-million-in-bitcoins-from-alleged-silk-road-kingpin/
First Down: When the offense advances 10 yards or more from the line of scrimmage within 4 plays, they get a first down, and a set of new 4 plays. Bitcoin analogy: Block confirmation – this is the lifeblood of a football team, and the bitcoin space. Wait, is bitcoin dead yet? Wait..... http://isbitcoindeadyet.com/
Goxxed: A familiar term to bitcoiners, I propose as new football term to describe a play like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2EOees58eQ
Defense: Tries to halt the offense from advancing down the field and stop a touchdown.
Bitcoin analogy: NY DFS headed by Ben Lawsky. Much like the terribly ranked Jacksonville Jaguars defense, they can't slow this thing down for long. http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/_/name/jax/jacksonville-jaguars
Anyone have any better analogies?
Excited to see what 2015 brings for Bitcoin - Justin Blincoe, Coinapult
submitted by dendxbptybtc to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Bitcoin 2017 a Comprehensive Timeline

Some of the most notable news and events over the past year:
Jan 3:
Jan 10:
Jan 17:
Jan 19:
Feb 8:
Feb 9:
Feb 24:
Mar 1:
Mar 2:
Mar 10:
Mar 12:
Mar 14:
Mar 15:
Mar 23:
Mar 28:
Apr 1:
Apr 5:
Apr 6:
Apr 12:
Apr 20:
Apr 26:
May 2:
May 9:
May 10:
May 21:
May 22:
May 23:
May 31:
Jun 2:
Jun 14:
Jun 29 - Jul 1:
Jun 30:
Jul 12:
Jul 16:
Jul 17:
Jul 22:
Jul 23:
Jul 24:
Jul 25:
Jul 27:
Jul 28:
Jul 31:
Aug 1:
Aug 2:
Aug 3:
Aug 10:
Aug 12:
Aug 15:
Aug 17:
Aug 21:
Aug 22:
Aug 24:
Aug 25:
Aug 28:
Aug 29:
Aug 30:
Aug 31:
Sep 1:
Sep 2:
Sep 3:
Sep 4:
Sep 5:
Sep 6:
Sep 7:
Sep 8:
Sep 9:
Sep 10:
Sep 12:
Sep 13:
Sep 14:
Sep 15:
Sep 17:
Sep 19:
Sep 20:
Sep 21:
Sep 23:
Sep 24:
Sep 25:
Sep 26:
Sep 27:
Sep 28:
Sep 29:
Sep 30:
Oct 4:
Oct 7:
Oct 9:
Oct 10:
Oct 11:
Oct 12:
Oct 13:
Oct 14:
Oct 16:
Oct 27:
Oct 30:
Nov 1:
Nov 2:
Nov 3:
Nov 4:
Nov 7:
Nov 8:
Nov 9:
Nov 10:
Nov 12:
Nov 13:
Nov 20:
Nov 21:
Nov 27:
Nov 28:
Dec 2:
Dec 5:
Dec 6
Dec 7
Dec 9
Dec 10
Dec 11
Dec 12
Dec 13
Dec 14
Dec 15
Dec 16
Dec 17
Dec 19
Dec 20
Dec 21
Dec 22
Dec 23
Dec 25
Dec 27
Dec 29
Dec 30
Dec 31
submitted by BitcoinChronicler to btc [link] [comments]

When NY regulator comes to /r/IAmA to field questions about Bitcoin regulation Reddit uncharacteristically treats him respectfully and asks well informed and insightful questions. LOL JK it's a fucking mess.

Today there was an IAmA by the Superintendent of Financial Services of NY on Bitcoin regulation. Politics + Bitcoin = Bravery Typhoon.
Mr. Lawsky was smart enough to choose questions that weren't too hostile or circlejerky. But the replies to his answers are some of the bravest circlejerking I've seen since MayMay June. Let's take a look:
So if you mean what you say, please explain how HSBC is still in business... +121
Because they paid enough money to have enough time for everyone to forget about it and forge enough proof to end up with the least possible damage. +43
If there is one thing that makes my blood boil with smug Redditors it's ellipses. They are always inserted as some sort of QED, implying the parent is being dishonest, or implying the parent is stupid. I hate it.
If there is one thing that you'll see reoccur often if you read the post, it's droves of Redditors saying "BUT WAT ABOUT THE BIG BANKS!?". As if perfect regulation of a larger industry is required before regulating something else.
Why is HSBC and other banking firms still allowed to operate in NY? +50
JUST KICK EM' OUT. There are like a million WAT ABOUT HSBC comments here.
Also, why does Bitcoin get the hammer when everything else just slides under the radar when it comes to money laundering (I'm looking at HSBC)? +126
Last one, I swear.
I just want to thank you for doing this AMA. We appreciate being involved. +98
I guess doing an IAmA is the only way for a Reddit user to feel like they are being "involved"? There are better outlets. Anyway, these THANKS FOR DOING THIS NO QUESTION XD posts are becoming the norm in IAmAs.
... but not seriously enough to prosecute a single bank executive.... = loss of legitimacy +35
D-D-D-DOUBLE SMUG ELLIPSES BONUS ROUND
Hi XXXXX, you've been sent 8.6550 milli-bitcoins ($5.00) from XXXXX via /changetip. Collect it. +13
Whoa, what just happened here? +10
BenLawsky just got $5 worth of Bitcoin. Instantly. No fees. With a Reddit comment. +24
When will this END? Has the "Whoa, what just happened here" thing just become a meme now, and they're poking fun at themselves? I can't tell.
That's simply because they can't admit to using the NSA to build a parallel case +42
Man, if some NSA /panichistory starts taking root I'm going to have a euphoria overdose
Alright, so there are some brave people that hoped onto Ben's comment to ride the karma train. But there are lots of other brave people who didn't get their totally legit, unloaded, and unbiased questions answered. Let's take a look at those
Since the actual Money Laundry Laws can't be applied to Big Banks & Financial Institutions (HSBC, etc) because of fears that the entire banking system would be destabilized. +25
How can money laundering laws be real if our eyes don't real? Seriously, what the fuck is this? HSBC was prosecuted and fined. You can certainly say that it wasn't sufficient, but obviously the laws exist and are enforced against big banks.
In your opinion should more be done to punish banks that have laundered billions of dollars? Do you think a small fine compared to the money the banks made off laundering is enough? +12
Man, this is so loaded I might have to steal it for an ELI5 post.
Hello Mr. Lawsky, from the news I heard that HSBC was involved in 1,9 bn$ money laundering and no criminal charges have been filed. It seems to me, the issue there is several magnitudes bigger than with bitcoin at the moment? Don´t you think, your time would be spent wiser, to takkle this problem first. +9
Maybe I'll use this one instead
[Bitcoin is] going to replace fiat currency and do away with the need for central banks. Advancements in decentralized and distributed technologies will allow that most other government functions to be replaced as well. +7
There wasn't really a question attached to this. Just some good ole' Bitcoin is gonna topple gubmit circlejerking.
My question is, have you read any of the discussions in /bitcoin about the hearings you've been involved in and the talks you've given? +7
If your goal is to have him take the Bitcoin community seriously you better hope he never sets foot in /bitcoin
What are your intentions for regulations regarding video game currency, since it can be traded/bought/sold for fiat currencies as well? It is a digital currency the same as bitcoin. Will there be fines imposed on people selling or buying their World of Warcraft gold from other people without some kind of license? +5
Eve Money is going to replace the USD. Just wait.
What benefit does your third party regulation bring to me and the person I'm willing to trade with? Can you maybe clarify for me that your financial regulation actually benefit customers and that it exceeds the "hidden costs" caused by your bureau? +4
"Please justify regulation. TYIA."
Maybe a slightly extreme question but if I want to pay someone for the right to assign a number to an address in a virtual ledger what does it have to do with you? +3
NOT IN MY BACK YARD IMAGINARY WALLET
What gives the NYDFS the authority to regulate a jurisdiction-less distributed computer system? Have you received a mandate from the open developer community behind crypto currencies or the majority of their user bases. +4
Does this guy really think the government needs permission from Bitcoin developers to regulate Bitcoin?
I know government is slow on everything, but when do you think the government will finally be able to gather its senses and take bitcoin mainstream? Also, do you see any chances of US government not embracing bitcoin at all? +2
I guess when they are cool without ditching the USD for a deflationary and volatile currency. I mean, I know I would have been totally cool if my mortgage was based in bitcoin and over the past three years the amount I owed grew a thousand fold.
Would you say that most Americans care more about stopping money laundering or creating jobs?
Because they are mutually exclusive?
Considering that it has been well established that the US government itself has been responsible for funding both drug cartels and terrorist organizations and has laundered money to do so, can you please explain what the major concern is over a relatively small and unused cryptocurrency? +3
It's said his fedora grew 3 sizes this day
A majority of the questions are like this. Pages and pages of them. Hundreds.
The worst part of the IAmA was he didn't even answer the important questions
When will Dogecoin reach the Moon? +2
submitted by ONE_GUY_ONE_JAR to circlebroke [link] [comments]

A few thoughts - Friday, July 18, 2014

Good afternoon! Yesterday was the darkest day in at least the recent history of bitcoin, perhaps ever. I'll get into why yesterday was more significant than Mt. Gox and China later, but the end point of this post is going to be that these proposed regulations are a breathtaking expansion of government power into areas of commerce that have never traditionally been regulated. If this passes, we may well find ourselves fighting against bitcoin acceptance.

Some basic truth about The Law

First, it's important to eliminate a common misunderstanding in /bitcoinmarkets. Some users are arguing that this law (lowercase letters) isn't that bad because while it covers a broad range of activity, it is only intended as a tool to fight money laundering (or some other goal, depending on the user). People need to understand that the long arm of The Law (capital letters) does not care what laws were actually intended to do. You either violate them, or you do not. A judge isn't going to allow a business to operate based on the argument that this law was intended for a different purpose.
As you make your evaluation of the effects of this law, you need to consider every possible activity that could be illegal under it. You can't write off certain activities because they were unintentionally added to the law. The Law is not compassionate and does not allow people to get away with things because the creators were trying to prevent some other behavior. There are many examples of poorly-designed laws that have had devastating unintended consequences.

Some examples

Now that we are clear that the intent of the law doesn't matter, I thought it would be worth sharing how a few examples of bitcoin-related activities in New York will work. This section includes three rows each. The first is the activity, the second is an example of what I would consider some reasonable regulations, and the third is the actions needed for compliance under this law. Since there are an absurd number of requirements for each case, I only listed one or two of the most ridiculous for each.
Activity: Operating a tipping bot that sends $0.25 tips to residents of New York that holds balances
Reasonable: Require the tips to be backed with 100% reserve in the tipped currency
Lawsky: Collect personally identifiable information about all people ever tipped, retain it for 10 years, and submit paperwork to the department when tips qualifying as "suspicious activity" are sent
Activity: Changing a variable in the bitcoin code and creating a new blockchain for testing a proposed feature
Reasonable: No regulation
Lawsky: Register with the NYDFS, payi thousands of dollars, wait 90 days, and undergo a background check with the FBI
Activity: Operating the Elgius mining pool, which adds PPLNS payouts to its own blocks, so that users never have outstanding balances
Reasonable: Allow people to take civil action if their payouts don't match what they are owed
Lawsky: Register as a money transmission service, develop compliance programs, and conduct "intrusion prevention" tests against the nonexistent wallets
Activity: Running a business like blockchain.info, which does not hold any balances whatsoever in dollars and pays all employees and vendors in bitcoins
Reasonable: Require recordkeeping of profits and expenses similar to current laws
Lawsky: This business model is expressly prohibited; no business is allowed to take profits in bitcoins
Activity: Operating an altcoin exchange, which takes untraceable litecoins and exchanges them for untraceable nanotokens
Reasonable: Prohibit fractional reserve banking and require that reserves be kept in the currencies they are backing
Lawsky: Requires altcoin exchanges to back its reserves in dollars and to associate every altcoin address with a username. If there is a bubble, the business goes under because it is no longer able to back customers' deposits.
Activity: Being a one-time arbitrator, where two parties trade something and use a multisignature transaction with you as the decider in the case something goes wrong
Reasonable: At most, require background checks on the arbitrator to verify his integrity
Lawsky: File paperwork with security plans, a list of anyone who might help you with collecting evidence to make the decision (even if you are never called upon to do so), and obtain background checks and fingerprints for all of them; pay thousands of dollars to register, wait 90 days to be approved, file suspicious activity report if the transaction is over $3k regardless of whether you are called upon to arbitrate or not
Activity: Modify your mining pool's pay-per-share algorithm to prevent block withholding attacks, or introduce a new algorithm like PPLNS, without branching out into other business areas
Reasonable: No paperwork necessary
Lawsky: File new request with the Department and wait 90 days for the new model to be approved before rolling out the feature, while competitors in other states launch immediately

Businesses no logner possible to be served to New York residents

In addition to the regulation requirements, there are also some types of business models that simply cannot overcome the regulations at all. Here are some of those types of businesses:
Arguably, the following business types could also not operate in New York because of cost concerns:
The greatest problem with these regulations is simply that there is no clause for the amount of money the company has to control. While we plan to take all possible security measures, our pool's greatest security measure is that we automatically pay out balances that are too large, so that we will never owe more than $10k in customer funds. If there were to be a hack, then we would simply eat the cost of less than $10k from personal funds because it is a small amount. The reason this works is because it would cost more than $100k to provide the sort of professional infrastructure that Lawsky is requiring, so even if the site were hacked ten times, and even if we never fixed the security holes, we would still be ahead.
That's why this legislation is irreparably flawed and cannot be salvaged. It makes sense for people holding a billion dollars to be subject to strict regulations. It is nonsensical to require people who hold $5k in customer funds to spend $200k/yr in compliance measures, given that taking 40 hacks are still preferable to such ridiculous regulations.

The likely outcome of these regulations is less protection

Now that we know the local effects on certain types of businesses, we should ask what the end result is going to be a year from now, should these regulations not be completely overhauled. I propose that the end outcome of these regulations is going to be less consumer protection and more crime. The only businesses able to operate in New York will be huge banks and hedge funds. While the banks charge excessive fees and rip customers off, they already are far more trustworthy than Mark Karpeles ever was. They already practice good security anyway because they understand (unlike Mt Gox) that customer service is important. The law isn't going to have much impact on them. Furthermore, these guys aren't even into the bitcoin business yet, so (at least at first), the only people the law effects are the small guys.
Meanwhile, everyone else other than the banks is going to do exactly what we may be forced to do: milk the system by applying for licenses and waiting as long as possible, and then, on the day before compliance is required, ban New York residents from our service and avoid doing business with anyone in New York. However, it will be impossible for us, or anyone else, to eliminate every single New York resident from our system no matter how hard we try or how good our intentions are. Because there is no minimum funds limit, New York residents are going to find that they are excluded from the use of nearly every altcoin, mining pool, exchange, open source project, wallet service, auction site, escrow system, and so on.
They key here is that by making the regulations too hard to comply with, every site is going to be equalized. If the cost of compliance were low, then honest businesses would have no problem complying. When the cost of compliance is high, there is no distinction between honest and scam businesses because New York residents will have to do business illegally. This leads to more scams and losses of money. Whereas now a New York resident who uses a service available in New York can sue the provider of a scam, they have no recourse in this proposed new world. After all, the New York resident was engaging in illegal activity by using a non-licensed business. This allows scammers to directly target people who live in New York because they have fewer legal protections than do people who live in other states.
I'm very glad that I do not live in New York right now, and I actually feel sorry for what those who have been in bitcoins since the beginning and who live in New York are going to be unable to take part in the future.

About money laundering

One of the reasons we got into this mess is because the Federal government ignored consumer protection. While they were issuing regulations about money laundering, people like Mark Karpeles were able to take advantage of a complete lack of attention to consumer protection. The Federal government wasted millions of dollars in its cases against bitcoin_charlie, who is not accused of stealing any money or participating in any violent behavior, while ignoring real consumers who were being ripped off by exchanges operating as fractional reserves like Mt Gox and Vircurex. BenLawsky is now able to seize upon the Federal government's inaction and make himself look like a hero of consumer protection because New York will do what the Feds didn't do.
Proponents of anti-money laundering regulations argue that terrorists have been significantly hindered by restrictions in moving money. Terrorism is a great excuse for many things. Consider the case of airport x-ray screening devices. Every time a person goes through one of those devices, he has a 1 in 30 million chance of developing cancer as a direct result of the x-ray exposure pushing that person over the cumulative radiation exposure threshold at which cancer would develop. The risk of dying in a terrorist attack on the plane before the machines were installed was also about 1 in 30 million. Therefore, we spent hundreds of millions of dollars on machines that kill as many people as the terrorists do. Not only that, but anyone would rather die in a terrorist attack than go through chemotherapy and years of pain in a long, excruciating death.
People seem to accept that money laundering rules are necessary, and are pushing the bar of regulation lower and lower every day. How much would your risk of death really increase if money laundering regulations were loosened? If you have a 1 in 1 million greater chance of death but vastly more freedom in your finances, wouldn't you take that? In a perfect world where people didn't die, that would be an unacceptable compromise. In our world, however, people do die. It is ludicrous that people allow themselves to become obese and then live in fear of a terrorist attack.

The creation of a new kind of criminality?

There were some shameful comments from people like the Winklevoss twins yesterday about how they appreciate regulation of the industry. For those guys, it's all about getting rich, which isn't surprising given how their wealth is largely based on winning lawsuits rather than actually creating stuff. Few people seem to be reading the text of the document and understanding how this goes beyond bitcoins. This is a breathtaking expansion of government power that has never been seen before in the financial world. The regulations in this document expand the scope of financial oversight into industries far removed from anything that is covered by existing financial regulations, like open source development. For the first time, they dictate how businesses may pay out profits and promote inefficiency by requiring a bitcoin -> dollar -> bitcoin conversion, widening the pockets of Coinbase. They signal the creation of a huge bureaucracy that will require ever more taxpayer dollars to process millions of "suspicious activity reports," licenses, and minute software changes.
But most importantly, they require recordkeeping and information gathering of unprecedented scope, and trust so many entities to gather these records that they will be leaked to everyone. People running small mining pools that pay out $0.30 per day will be retaining passport numbers. Some people are viewing this as the "government" collecting information on people, but the government already has all this information. What will happen is that these records will be so prevalent because so many people are mandated to collect them that every hacker in the world will have a copy. In what other area of business are so many people required to keep huge databases of passport photos, utility bills, and other documentation that enables all sorts of criminal activity? These records will exist for at least 10 years, be copied in mergers and acquisitions, and leaked to the media and to the criminals, who will pay record sums for them.
The criminals and rogue insiders can use the data not only to perform identity theft, but to learn everything you ever bought, who your contacts are, where you live, how much you earn, what time of day you are away from your house, and what sites you use. They can phish for passwords at just the sites you use, arrange a theft when they recognize you are on vacation, threaten to phone your employer with false allegations of rape unless you pay up, use stolen wallets to frame you by purchasing child pornography with them, and contact repressive governments to have you arrested for associating with a known dissident.
That brings me back to the opening sentence in these thoughts for today. If these regulations pass and spread to other jurisdictions, we may actually find ourselves opposing the uptake of bitcoins. If more states adopt these regulations and people start adopting, then the stage will be set for an increase in government power to track everything about everyone, and a corresponding increase in criminal activity.
I said in the past that bans on bitcoins would not have an impact on the technology because people would go somewhere else, so they were not a change to the fundamentals. Few anticipated such a dramatic expansion of government power like we saw yesterday. Using the technology to procure unprecedented amounts of data would be a change to the fundamentals which even Nakamoto probably didn't intend.

Other

submitted by quintin3265 to BitcoinThoughts [link] [comments]

Novauri's comments on the BitLicense

Hello, this is Will from Novauri. You almost certainly haven't heard of our company before. We are not planning on releasing it for use until 2015, and we haven't spent a dime on marketing. Still, our team feels strongly about the emerging BitLicense regulations in New York, and I wanted to share the letter we sent to the DFS with the community today.
We already shared our views within days of the proposal being released here, but we've had much more time to craft a formal response. You'll find an abbreviated version below, and a full copy of our letter on our website here.
I know this is a somewhat 'dry' topic, but it's important to the future of bitcoin in the US. Our thoughts on this topic are below. Thank you.
About Novauri
Novauri is a virtual currency startup based in Denver, Colorado and San Francisco, California. Novauri will allow bitcoin users to purchase and sell bitcoin using ACH debits and credits from their bank accounts. The service will be available initially to US consumers in early 2015.
We are different from our competitors in that Novauri will not control the private keys to our customers’ bitcoin addresses. Not only will Novauri never have access to customers’ private keys, but our systems are designed so we will never see private keys in unencrypted form.
We intentionally built this feature into our service as a risk protection measure for our customers. Novauri cannot suffer from the catastrophic failures and massive internal thefts we’ve witnessed at services that pool customer bitcoin and control their private keys because Novauri never has control of our customers’ funds, bitcoin or US Dollars. We feel strongly that this feature is both safer for our customers and cheaper for us as a service provider. Our design requires no expensive security layers around pooled wallets, no insurance for massive, pooled wallets that are vulnerable to insider theft, or regulatory responsibility as a fiduciary holding retail customer deposits like a bank.
Innovation, bitcoin, and concerns about the proposed rules
We believe bitcoin and its underlying blockchain technology is the most significant invention of the century. Bitcoin allows for unique digital information that can exist safely on the open Internet without the protection of a central authority. Bitcoin’s unique combination of cryptography and “hashcash”-based proof of work consensus with an integrated economic incentive to participate in the consensus that also creates an automated, and fully predictable monetary policy is something we’ve never dreamed of before 2009. The applications for this technology extend far beyond payment systems, and have the capability to uniquely identify anything digitally; a possibility that becomes exponentially more exciting when it intersects with other emerging technologies, such as the Internet of things, drone applications, or holograph-based UI and peer-to-peer communications.
That being said, we believe the proposed BitLicense regulation falls short in three key areas:
1) Redundancy with existing regulation, and creates an unfair playing field
Novauri believes that the BitLicense regulation is written in such a way that it will greatly stunt growth and drive innovation to other States or Countries entirely. The regulation contains provisions that exclude existing banks from the rules entirely.
Novauri recommends removing the provisions that exempt banks entirely, and replacing the redundant and overreaching language in these areas with a simple statement: The rules and regulations applying to bitcoin at a Federal level (especially from FinCEN) shall apply to all applicable virtual currency businesses with activities in New York State.
2) KYC provisions and ineffective cyber security provisions are dangerous for consumers
Perhaps the most dangerous aspects of the proposed regulations are the identity verification processes. We’ve already seen the disasters that the data retention provisions in the Bank Secrecy Act have caused in terms of the ongoing identity theft epidemic. Every week another bank is hacked, and more and more personal information goes up for sale on the darknet. We feel that these issues are an unintended consequence of the data retention requirements in the BSA, as well as the decision by certain companies to monetize “big data”. Novauri feels that these are misguided regulations and business decisions, and is vehemently opposed to corporations storing and selling personal information. The economic costs of identity theft greatly outweigh any advertising revenue made by these companies, and the cost to taxpayers in reimbursing billions and billions of dollars in stolen tax refunds each year, to say nothing of the stress these unintended consequences cause normal people when they discover their identities have been stolen.
This issue will be far worse with bitcoin, which features a public ledger. As soon as personal information is leaked, it can be associated with the blockchain and the entire financial history of individuals will be viewable by anyone. As written, Novauri feels the proposed KYC provisions in the BitLicense proposal constitute a potential threat to our National security.
Novauri recommends that the NYDFS delay the requirements around KYC until a more elegant solution evolves that doesn’t risk massive identity theft incidents or violations of personal privacy. We recommend full synchronization with existing regulation, and revision such that an individual’s right to privacy is balanced against the needs of law enforcement. This synchronization should also include checks and balances that are non-existent today.
Regarding “cyber security”, Novauri believes that the regulations are ineffective, as technologies are continuously evolving. Novauri recommends that the NYDFS require businesses that act as fiduciaries for customer deposits and maintain control of private keys to hold deposit insurance for 100% of the value of all fiat and virtual currency deposits. If the business has faulty security, the insurance company can make that determination and increase their premiums. In the event that the business’s security is unsafe, the insurance companies will not issue insurance at all. This is a “future proof” way to ensure cyber security without politicizing the topic or risking that rules and regulations become ineffective and anachronistic with time, as they almost certainly will as written.
3) Failure to create a risk-based system that scales with the risk of the service
The proposed regulation doesn’t differentiate between businesses that exchange fiat for bitcoin while taking control of deposits, those that exchange fiat for bitcoin and do not take control of deposits, or even businesses that exchange no currency at all and have no responsibility as a fiduciary. This will effectively kill all small businesses and startups in the State of New York, and if these rules are used as a model in other States, will drive the industry offshore entirely.
Novauri recommends creating at least two types of businesses under the proposed BitLicense regulation:
Virtual Currency Retail or Investment Banking Providers would be regulated in a manner similar to banks, but Virtual Currency Retail or Exchange Service Providers would be subject to minimal regulation. Again, Novauri highly recommends using insurance as a way to “future proof” the areas of cyber security and KYC provisions.
In closing, given the possibilities presented by this emerging technology, Novauri requests that the NYDFS consider revising the rules heavily, adopting a progressive and risk-based approach that uses insurance in lieu of prescriptive measures, removes duplicative rules and regulations, and gives the technology the room it needs to grow and evolve.
Sincerely,
Will Madden Founder & CEO Novauri, LLC
For a full version of our comments on the BitLicense proposal, please visit our website here.
submitted by MrMadden to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Why Reddcoin is going to the top, part 2

Why Reddcoin is going to the top, part 2
Yesterday I posted part 1 of my article, “Why Reddcoin is going to the top”:
http://www.reddit.com/reddCoin/comments/2bspjm/why_reddcoin_is_going_to_the_top_part_1/
In the first part of the article, I separated the top 20 altcoins on coinmarketcap into three groups, and provided some argument as to why all the coins in the group “Decentralised something-or-other coins” are going to grow slower than Reddcoin.
Today I am moving on to the reasons why coins in the category “Anon currency coins” are not going to be able to keep up with Reddcoin.
Anon currency coins
Ingenious, daring, mysterious... yes. Wanted and desired by your average everyday person? Not really.
Anonymous cryptocurrency projects are and will remain at the fringe. But why? Who is interested in them?
And there are strong indications that the hype bubble is now bursting. Look at the flagship of anonymous coins, Darkcoin. This project has a dedicated dev team and community. I applaud them for their tireless effort to get the complicated functionality of Masternode payments and Darksend working correctly. And it looks like their efforts have paid off. And the code is about to be vetted by a respected cryptographer. So why is the price not taking off? Why does it continue to stagnate and fall? Because Darksend and Masternode Payments have already been priced in, meaning that in the collective mind of investors Darkcoin should have already been fully functioning as planned for a while now. The reason then for the continued decline in prices is that the market is still returning to where it should be after an almighty hype pump.
But there is another reason to doubt the long-term viability of anonymous coin projects: the Darkwallet project, set to launch very soon. Darkwallet will provide anonymising functionality to a Bitcoin wallet, and so as well as being considered short-term or fringe projects, anon currency coins look set to become obsolete in one fell swoop, when the main selling point of all these coins, the fact that Bitcoin transactions are not anonymous, is snuffed out with Darkwallet.
When considering the above factors it is easy to see how Reddcoin has a target audience far, far greater than anonymous cryptocurrency, and also how anonymous coins are likely to face certain significant threats to their survival, threats that Reddcoin will not be subject to.
Of course the above is a general overview of anonymous cryptocurrency. I respect the sincere efforts being undertaken for these projects and readers of this article may know of particular features offered by anonymous coins that they believe will gain traction over the long term. If so I would really appreciate your comments.
The final part of this article comes tomorrow!
submitted by reddibrek to reddCoin [link] [comments]

The official bitshares client will be able to send and receive bitcoin from next week! Decentralized bitcoin hedging is here!

I've heard from a bitshares core dev that the shapeshift API will be integrated directly in the official bitshares full node possibly as early as next week, and will also be included in the light wallet (still in beta). This is huge for both bitcoin and bitshares!
This means that you can now use BitShares as a decentralized hedged bitcoin wallet. You can receive bitcoins from an exchange or from your friends, and hold it in bitUSD, and then send it out again to a bitpay integrated merchant, or lighthouse, or a bitcoin debit card or wherever else you want. All done exactly the same way as you send bitcoins normally using normal bitcoin addresses, except that while you hold the bitcoins they are hedged against volatility so if you send in 100 USD worth of bitcoin you will be able to send out 100 USD worth of bitcoin as well at any point in the future. All this is done without counterparty risk, you hold your own private keys at all times, and you need zero AML, zero anti-terrorism anal probes, and there's no way your money can be seized or frozen - just like bitcoin was always meant to be.
It's this kind of feature that is going to make bitcoin go mainstream. If anyone can hold and use bitcoins without having to worry about volatility we will begin to see an increasing amount of people shifting their money into crypto. As bitcoin is the onramp and offramp for all cryptocurrency, and is the payment rails on which cryptocurrency will be spent, the more money that goes into crypto as a whole the more bitcoin benefits. Bitcoin is already the most convenient way to spend your money in the whole world, with the addition of decentralized volatility hedging by consumers there's no reason why all commerce shouldn't go through the bitcoin network. BitUSD itself will never be a threat to bitcoin as a payments system. No merchant is ever going to accept BitUSD since it's so much easier to accept bitcoin since it has all the infrastructure and enables you to accept bitUSD as well, so bitcoin and bitUSD will never have to compete, but can instead grow side by side.
I know there's still going to be plenty of people who insists that bitUSD is a shitcoin and is useless for anything, but i hope some people will be able to realize that it is something that complements bitcoin rather than competes with it, since it will never be able to match the branding and network effect of bitcoin, but can help with consumer adoption.
As the USD starts to seriously tank it will also be possible to hedge your bitcoins to other assets, such as gold (using bitgold), so until bitcoin itself has become big enough to remove volatility there will be plenty of options to enable people to use it without volatility concerns.
The BitShares ecosystem also has a lot more to offer bitcoin as well. Bitshares has blockchain registered names that are compatible with bitcoin addresses (because bitshares uses the same type of private keys as bitcoin), so in the future we might be able to send bitcoins to human readable names instead of incomprehensible public keys, another important step that will help with mainstream adoption.
Another thing are the paid delegates. Bitshares' "miners" get paid a salary in order to improve and develop the system and blockchain. But as bitshares begins to have more money at the disposal of delegates this method of funding can also begin to benefit bitcoin (since bitcoin adoption and merchant acceptance benefits bitshares directly). Instead of having the bitcoin foundation controlling the bitcoin core developers, some of the core developers could be bitshares delegates and be funded in a completely decentralized manner in order to protect and grow both ecosystems. If the cryptocurrency space (and thus also bitshares) grows enough to afford it we could also see things like lighthouse delegates that use their delegate pay to support open source lighthouse projects that benefits both ecosystems - systems like bitsquare are the future for all cryptocurrencies and it is important they are well funded if we are to succeed.
Finally there's the decentralized exchange itself, which is what BitShares was always meant to be (the whole concept was in fact conceived by the lead dev after mtgox had its funds seized in 2013). It's still not widely used, but bitshares has a bitasset for bitcoin as well, called bitBTC. With BitBTC you can trade the price of BTC and USD directly on the blockchain without any sort of counterparty risk, and as soon as you want real bitcoin again you can convert them instantly through a gateway like meta-exchange or shapeshift (if they add bitBTC in the future). The hope is that one day all bitcoin trade can be done entirely without centralized institutions, making the entire cryptocurrency ecosystem completely immune from ben lawsky and regulatory crackdown.
One last thing before someone calls me out on it, regarding the counterparty risk. Since shapeshift has momentary control of your funds it isn't actually completely free from counterparty risk, however the risk is greatly reduced from other systems like coinbase, bitstamp or paypal that just hold all your funds outright. The worst shapeshift can do is to steal the volume they process over a period of time until the community is alerted. Because the payoff is so low you can be guaranteed it will never happen (assuming they seek profit). Lets assume they take 0.1% fees and will be able to steal 1 hours worth of volume before people stop sending them money (there will likely be automatic alert systems in the wallets making the time significantly less). This means that they will at best be able to steal 40 days worth of income, but lose all future income as a result. It should be obvious that this will never be worth it, especially considering the fixed costs they have put into establishing the business.
submitted by Rune4444 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

Counter-proposal: A new website banner for every bitcoin exchange and ewallet service in the world outside of NY

"Not available for residents of the state of New York, USA. Please contact Ben Lawsky, Superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services, for a detailed explanation."
In my opinion, we should encourage every bitcoin-related website in the world to post this banner on their home page.
We need to unite and send a clear message.
Can someone crafty please create such a banner that we can distribute and display everywhere?
Edit: Even if your bitcoin service doesn't do anything to actually prevent NY residents from using it, and even if you're not running an exchange or wallet, I believe it would still send a very loud message all the way to NYC if it gets displayed everywhere anyways. (Bitcoin Foundation, I'm looking at you!)
submitted by paleh0rse to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

4/23/14 - Bitcoin into space, Atlas ATS pushes forward, & Dorian Nakamoto says thank you

Video: http://www.moneyandtech.com/apr23-news-update/
Here are today's top news stories in Money & Tech:
The blockchain is headed for space. Jeff Garzik’s Dunvegan Space Systems is partnering with Deep Space Industries to build satellites called ‘BitSats’ that will be launched into space as a backup bitcoin orbital system. From orbit, these BitSats will be able to broadcast out transaction data from the blockchain to any users with a downlink. Garzik made the first payment to Deep Space Industries via BitPay, where he is also a senior software developer, and is now accepting bitcoin donations to help complete the project.
Bitcoin trading platform Atlas ATS has formed a partnership with The National Stock Exchange to speed up regulatory approval. By partnering with this self-regulatory organization, Atlas ATS hopes to bypass FinCEN's money-transmitting license in favor of SEC-approved rules that are more tailored to digital currency exchanges. Kraken and CoinMKT are also taking this route, as several exchanges race to become the first fully regulated digital currency exchange.
Nine state banking officials from the US Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS), including New York Superintendent Ben Lawsky, have launched the Emerging Payments Task Force. The new task force plans to investigate bitcoin and other virtual currencies in the hopes of developing state regulation best practices, as well as more educational resources. The discussion will begin with a public hearing on May 16th in Chicago.
With the reluctance of Irish banks to accept bitcoin, ATM provider BitVendo and safe deposit box facility Merrion Vaults have partnered to provide cold storage to BitVendo's local cryptocurrency users. The service allows users to store their bitcoins safely in Merrion Vaults' high quality and secure safe deposit vault in Dublin.
Butterfly Labs has been on rocky ground since this month's lawsuit against the bitcoin mining hardware company, accusing it of collecting payments for false orders and using customer equipment for their own mining. This recent lawsuit is only the latest accusation of fraud against the Kansas-based company. What's more, co-founder Sonny Vleisides has been found in violation of his probation since pleading guilty to one count of mail fraud in 2010, which will likely extend his probation another two years.
Dorian Nakamoto, the man famously falsely identified as bitcoin's creator, has filmed a YouTube video with Andreas Antonopoulos to thank the bitcoin community for its support. Antonopoulos led a fundraising campaign for Nakamoto that raised over 47 bitcoins - worth nearly $23,000 dollars - in a new bitcoin wallet that Nakamoto says he will keep open as a new bitcoin user. Watch that YouTube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7YmJZ-qVW8.
Bitcoin documentary The Rise and Rise of Bitcoin premieres today at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City. Money & Tech will be attending the screening, as well as the film’s after-party hosted by Charlie Shrem. We will be bringing you video coverage and interviews from that event soon.
We will also be attending the next major digital currency event this Friday, Dogecon SF, which will be San Francisco's first dogecoin conference. The event is hosted by Follow The Coin, and will feature prominent industry speakers such as litecoin creator Charlie Lee, industry expert Andreas Antonopoulos, and of course, Dogecoin's own creator, Jackson Palmer. We sat down with Tina Hui and Matt Schlicht from Follow The Coin to talk about what we can look forward to at Dogecon SF. Find that interview here: http://moneyandtech.com/follow-the-coin-dogecon-sf/
submitted by moneyandtech to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Building a United Platform

No matter which coin you're backing (or how many), the regulations coming out of New York State have large, overreaching and severe consequences for all cryptocurrencies.
You can read the proposed BitLicense Regulations here.
AmericanBitcoin has put together a TL;DR of the proposed reglations
In response, you can read the in-progress GitHub Fork of those same regulations here.
If you'd like to see a quick breakdown of examples of what's wrong with the proposed regulations, I highly recommend you read this comment by MrMadden over in /Bitcoin, which is utterly fantastic.
Instead of standing 'against' these regulations, let's stand for:
The problems, right now:
These regulations are vague in some important areas and could have unintended consequences.
For example, here's a great breakdown from goldcakes (originally made here)
Entities are considered dealing in virtual currencies if:
.. to any resident in New York. Web services, even those incorporated overseas, must either comply or block access for NY users. (200.2n)
Entities 'dealing in virtual currency' must:
The (only?) good news: Merchants do not need a BitLicense to accept Bitcoin for a good or service. (200.3c2).
This post was created for general guidance, and does not constitute legal advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific advice from a professional. No representation or warranty (expressed or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this post.
submitted by GoodShibe to CryptosUnited [link] [comments]

Delicious pasta from /r/bitcoin.

Oh look, more rules and regulations for the plebians? That's cute.
You let me know when these laws against money laundering start applying to corporations and political elites and I'll start taking you seriously and maybe even consider obeying your laws. Probably not though, since they're fundamentally unenforceable.
Now if you'll kindly excuse me, I need to get back to downloading TOR, Tails, Dark Wallet, and Bitmessage, all while sharing terrabytes of free culture on the Pirate Bay and smoking ounces of weed.
TL;DR - You have no power here. Fuck your laws, fuck your corrupt oligopoly, and fuck you.
ORDER UP
submitted by scratches to circlejerkcopypasta [link] [comments]

Lawksy's new regulations highlight the twin futures of Cryptocurrency. Whether you advocate for surveillance or fear it, we're all getting what we want.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.
"I'm very excited about what the future could hold for this very powerful technology."
Writes BenLawsky, on bitcoin, 4 months ago in his AMA.
He also writes:
"We're hopeful that clear regulations, if done in a smart, modern way, may incentivize some of these exchanges to come ashore (hopefully here in NY)."
These are the words of a man eager to capitalize on the benefits of a new technology. Bitcoin has existed in a somewhat legal grey area, but Lawsky thinks if he can clarify a regulatory landscape then it will remove any uneasiness that interested but hesitant corporations have shown to adopting bitcoin.
In the same AMA where the word "Laundering" was mentioned 263 times, Lawsky was quick to lay out his own agenda on the issue. He's a regulator who staunchly believes that extensive KYC/AML policies will help stamp out terrorism and other forms of financial crime. Transactions need to be tracked in Lawsky's world, and he's more than willing to force the entire population to submit to that maxim in order to catch a few bad guys. He and others have been barking up the paper trail tree for a very long time, and there's nothing to suggest they will ever stop.
Regulatory clarity is an idea that makes sense on paper at least, and it will cause legitimate well-funded exchanges to spring up that submit to these extensive, and expensive, compliance checks. It will go on to cause 50 different U.S. states to create 50 different nuanced compliance schemes that each exchange will have to take into account. Such is the cost of doing business in the U.S. And yes, it will absolutely drive some business out of the US entirely and cause others to forbid american customers from participating.
It's also worth noting that Lawsky is attempting to prevent another MtGox fiasco by forcing companies that hold customers' bitcoin to provide adequate security measures, keep collateral on hand that effectively insures the deposits, and prevent them from holding any profit in bitcoin.
Bravo Mr. Lawsky. You can have your little regulated corner of the world, and the rest of us will be living in ours.
This is simply not the future of bitcoin. No one asks you for anything when downloading a wallet for yourself. No one asks for your permission, background information, or intentions when moving funds from one address to another. No one can freeze or seize the funds in an address you control. The type of rules being proposed here are the last bastion of federated economy attempting to impose control with the best of intentions. But it's exactly those intentions that will drive virtual currency usage away from government influence.
The truth is that effective money laundering control is impossible in the virtual currency world. Broad and intrusive regulation might catch some of the low hanging fruit at licensed exchanges, but users who are determined to skirt the rules can and will find ways around it, and many already have. While institutions and investors are busy sinking enormous sums of capital into the digital economy, others are busy setting up decentralized exchanges and services that fly free of regulatory scrutiny.
In Lawsky's eyes such activity might look like the golden age of piracy again, but this time it's largely a body of good actors operating under the banner of financial privacy. This is a group that is simply fed up with the big brother state. It does not trust 3rd parties, let alone their own government, to own and scrutinize their spending habits
Every modicum of value that enters the virtual currency ecosystem, even through well-regulated and compliant exchanges, increases the effectiveness of a system that operates entirely independent from this scrutiny. On a fundamental level Lawsky and I may agree that terrorism is heinous, but the days when we can trace financial transactions with any certainty are coming to a close. It's a hard pill to swallow, and it probably won't stop regulators from trying to clamp down extensively, but they're going to have to find other means to nab criminals who are engaging in harmful activities. And no, I don't mean more KYC/AML, I'll repeat this again: the more you try to push down on transaction tracking, the less effective it will be.
I firmly believe that virtual currency in some form, is here to stay, it's foolish to dismiss this. It's equally as foolish to think that all fiat currency may crumble overnight or become obsolete. Perhaps one may win over the other someday, but we're bound to see a lot of resistance to the death of either system and they will be living in tandem for a very long time. Lawsky and the regulators may claim some domain over the fiat world and transition points that convert between bitcoin and cash, but the time is quickly approaching when one is able to depart from the fiat world, and never return again.
submitted by TryAgain_NY to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

A Non-technical Bitcoin Primer (Part 2)

This is a continuation of Part 1.
PSEUDONYMITY Unlike credit card transactions, in which you give your name, Bitcoin transactions are pseudonymous (a pseudonym being an identifier other than your real name). Instead of having your name on your account, you have a public key, which is just a sequence of letters and numbers, like the one below.
3J98t1WpEZ73CNmQviecrnyiWrnqRhWNLy
That's your pseudonym.
People who are concerned with privacy view this as an advantage, since it enables you to make payments without revealing your identity.
Critics worry that this system facilitates crime, and proponents counter that cash is much better for criminals. Why?
Your account may be represented by some random sequence, instead of your name, but all Bitcoin transactions that have ever occurred are available for scrutiny on a public ledger called the blockchain. This data opens up the possibility of investigative methods to which cash is not susceptible.
Also, those who are concerned about criminals may be missing the point. It's sort of like censors in the mid-twentieth century who hadn't conceived of the World Wide Web (preventing kids from being exposed to profanity these days is a bit more difficult, to say the least).
The thing they're missing is that Bitcoin is only one of many cryptocurrencies, and others (such as zerocoin) are being developed that will provide much greater privacy.
File sharing on the internet is another example of how those seeking to overregulate Bitcoin might be missing the point. Early on, we had Napster, which was shut down due to concerns over copyright infringement. The effect of this shutdown appears to have been essentially the opposite of the intended effect. Instead of stopping illegal file sharing, it accelerated the development of file-sharing technologies that were even more difficult to stop. Since demand still existed, Kazaa came to the fore, and now we have BitTorrent.
It's "hard to put the genie back in the bottle," as Ben Lawsky, New York's Superintendent of Financial Services, has pointed out. When it comes to reducing crime, overregulation of Bitcoin could lead to an increased resistance to law-enforcement efforts, as we saw with file-sharing, while at the same time taking away from its many benefits.
THREATS TO BITCOIN'S SUCCESS When evaluating Bitcoin's chances for success or trying to understand price fluctuations, it's important to keep several key issues in mind.
ADOPTION Both merchant and consumer adoption are important, and both have been growing.
On the merchant side, we now have large reputable companies accepting Bitcoin, such as Overstock.com, Expedia, and Dish Network. See, for example, the list of companies working with Coinbase.
On the consumer side, one way to track growth is to look at the number of bitcoin wallets (wallets are to Bitcoin what accounts are to the traditional banking system). This number has also been growing steadily.
The website http://www.bitcoinpulse.com/ is one place to track such things.
Another interesting thing to watch will be the MIT Bitcoin Giveaway, in which $100 in bitcoins will be given to every MIT undergraduate in the fall 2014 semester.
ROBUSTNESS OF THE TECHNOLOGY One possible threat is that some kind of bug or design flaw will cause the system to crash. The technology has been around since 2009, and Bitcoin has been resilient so far. For example, it survived a distributed denial of service attack early this year.
There are a number of design issues to consider, such as scalability, mining centralization, and so forth, but there are a lot of people working on these issues. In fact, Bitcoin is considered by some to be supported by the largest research and development community in the world. Something like 10,000 of the smartest people in the world are working on issues such as scalability and user-friendliness.
COMPETING TECHNOLOGIES There is a chance that another technology that is superior to Bitcoin will emerge to kill it. At present, however, Bitcoin is the clear leader among cryptocurrencies, and it becomes more difficult to overtake as time passes, due to the network effect.
Already, Bitcoin is supported by a massive amount of infrastructure, in the form of mining equipment, exchanges, startup companies backed by venture capitalists like Andreessen Horowitz, software applications, and so forth.
REGULATION There is some chance that governments could slow the growth of the Bitcoin economy, for example by issuing regulations that make it difficult for exchanges to operate.
Regulations in China led to a sharp decrease in the price for a time. Many governments have reacted more favorably. In the U.S., the regulatory outlook has been improving. We've seen increased clarity from the IRS and are expecting favorable regulations to come out of New York sometime this month, which may make it easier for exchanges to get established in New York. This could lead to more liquidity and would reduce the risk of shock from one exchange going down.
Moreover, the U.S. just sold about 18 million dollars' worth of seized bitcoins in an auction, which provides additional legitimacy to the currency.
A FINAL NOTE: SOCIAL AND POLITICAL RAMIFICATIONS For better or worse, one thing large-scale technologies seem to have in common is their unpredictability. Who would have predicted that a social media platform called Twitter with a cute little bird logo would end up facilitating political revolutions throughout the Arab world?
FURTHER RESOURCES This article by Marc Andreessen gives a good overview.
A nice way to get started is also to just check out bitcoin regularly. The users here range from noobs to developers and Bitcoin entrepreneurs. So, you’ll see more technical talk and in depth discussion than you see in typical media stories, and you can ask if you don’t understand.
You can also try the Bitcoin 101 Blackboard Series, which I hear is quite good.
For a quick video on the technical aspects of Bitcoin, you can try the video Bitcoin Under the Hood or the shorter, less technical version of this video.
For another explanation of the technical underpinnings, you might try the Khan Academy videos.
If you're looking to purchase your first bitcoin, then depending on where in the world you live, you might consider getting started with Coinbase. It's reputable and very easy to use. Many people will advise you not to store your coins on a web wallet, but buying a few coins (or a fraction of a coin) on Coinbase is a good way to start as a beginner. Please be aware, though, that this is a new industry and purchasing Bitcoin in any form carries risk, so do your research. I wouldn't want to be the one recommending Coinbase just before someone manages to hack it!
I hope that helps!
Edit: formatting and typos; added quote from Ben Lawsky.
submitted by 11251442132 to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

4/23/14 - Bitcoin into space, Atlas ATS pushes forward, & Dorian Nakamoto says thank you

Video: http://moneyandtech.com/apr23-news-update/
Here are today's top news stories in Money & Tech:
The blockchain is headed for space. Jeff Garzik’s Dunvegan Space Systems is partnering with Deep Space Industries to build satellites called ‘BitSats’ that will be launched into space as a backup bitcoin orbital system. From orbit, these BitSats will be able to broadcast out transaction data from the blockchain to any users with a downlink. Garzik made the first payment to Deep Space Industries via BitPay, where he is also a senior software developer, and is now accepting bitcoin donations to help complete the project.
Bitcoin trading platform Atlas ATS has formed a partnership with The National Stock Exchange to speed up regulatory approval. By partnering with this self-regulatory organization, Atlas ATS hopes to bypass FinCEN's money-transmitting license in favor of SEC-approved rules that are more tailored to digital currency exchanges. Kraken and CoinMKT are also taking this route, as several exchanges race to become the first fully regulated digital currency exchange.
Nine state banking officials from the US Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS), including New York Superintendent Ben Lawsky, have launched the Emerging Payments Task Force. The new task force plans to investigate bitcoin and other virtual currencies in the hopes of developing state regulation best practices, as well as more educational resources. The discussion will begin with a public hearing on May 16th in Chicago.
With the reluctance of Irish banks to accept bitcoin, ATM provider BitVendo and safe deposit box facility Merrion Vaults have partnered to provide cold storage to BitVendo's local cryptocurrency users. The service allows users to store their bitcoins safely in Merrion Vaults' high quality and secure safe deposit vault in Dublin.
Butterfly Labs has been on rocky ground since this month's lawsuit against the bitcoin mining hardware company, accusing it of collecting payments for false orders and using customer equipment for their own mining. This recent lawsuit is only the latest accusation of fraud against the Kansas-based company. What's more, co-founder Sonny Vleisides has been found in violation of his probation since pleading guilty to one count of mail fraud in 2010, which will likely extend his probation another two years.
Dorian Nakamoto, the man famously falsely identified as bitcoin's creator, has filmed a YouTube video with Andreas Antonopoulos to thank the bitcoin community for its support. Antonopoulos led a fundraising campaign for Nakamoto that raised over 47 bitcoins - worth nearly $23,000 dollars - in a new bitcoin wallet that Nakamoto says he will keep open as a new bitcoin user. Watch that YouTube video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7YmJZ-qVW8.
Bitcoin documentary The Rise and Rise of Bitcoin premieres today at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City. Money & Tech will be attending the screening, as well as the film’s after-party hosted by Charlie Shrem. We will be bringing you video coverage and interviews from that event soon.
We will also be attending the next major digital currency event this Friday, Dogecon SF, which will be San Francisco's first dogecoin conference. The event is hosted by Follow The Coin, and will feature prominent industry speakers such as litecoin creator Charlie Lee, industry expert Andreas Antonopoulos, and of course, Dogecoin's own creator, Jackson Palmer. We sat down with Tina Hui and Matt Schlicht from Follow The Coin to talk about what we can look forward to at Dogecon SF.
Find that interview and more videos on the Money & Tech website at http://moneyandtech.com/apr23-news-update/
submitted by alwaysahn to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

[Table] IAmA full-time Bitcoin day-trader, blogger, and explainer. I was a pro TCG player. Here until Midnight EST. AMA!

Verified? (This bot cannot verify AMAs just yet)
Date: 2014-02-20
Link to submission (Has self-text)
Questions Answers
Let's say someone was looking for a stay at home computer job, would you recommend doing what you do? Is it something you can hop into, or is it something a lot of time must be put into before considerable income comes? You handle risk and pressure well, and you don't let your emotions guide your decision-making. Professional Poker and TCG players often develop this skillset.
You have experience working with stocks, bonds, derivatives, foreign exchange, or other financial instruments. If you have a strong mathematical background, that would also likely fulfill this.
You can invest significant capital into trading while remaining financially secure if it all suddenly vanishes.
You are capable of constantly monitoring a situation, waking up in the middle of the night if an alarm goes off, etc. It requires serious dedication.
You are good at keeping up with news, understanding market psychology, and "feeling" shifts in attitude and perception among other market participants.
Of those, I'd be most cautious if you don't meet no. 3. Going bust is a real possibility--day-trading a volatile commodity is inherently extremely high-risk. Nos. 2 and 4 are the easiest to learn or force through routine. No. 1 requires a person who approaches things in an emotionally detached manner. No. 5 is something that comes with investing enough time.
Second question: I'm answering this after that big block of text because this answer will come off like a get-rich-quick scheme. Yes, you can hop into it very quickly, and you can start making very high profits very quickly. I put in a small initial investment to test the waters, and made 10% on it in a few days. If you have the right skillset, composure, and resources, yes. It is a potentially very lucrative and exciting stay-at-home job. It is not for everyone, though.
As much as it would be beneficial for me (being in the industry and all), to tell everyone it's easy and that it will help them provide for themselves I feel that people need to know the real risks that are involved. Regardless, that's all a little irrelevant. We're not playing the house, and we're not flipping coins. We're playing other investors, and we're making actual decisions. You keep saying things like "98% lose money" and "Go onto any FOREX forum, and you will see from the users posts that they pretty much all lose money" but you don't back it up. Cool, yeah, it's a zero-sum game with a rake: a little more than half of the players will lose. That's expected. They'll probably complain about it, too, huh?
Retrospect can have a very positive effect. Got any real account trading statements I can have a look at? Let's see how fast you can come up with excuses not to show me ;) I only have and need one: I have chosen not to disclose my personal valuation for privacy reasons. Same reason I've had all along. I instead publicly disclose my trades, as they happen, on my website. The posts are timestamped, and the ones that are the start of a position contain the price I entered at. Go check the posts, then go check the charts, then go check my archive. But feel free to continue to arbitrarily call my credibility into question--that makes your argument better!
What leverage do you use? In Australia the leverage is typically 100:1, perhaps that's why your not seeing how risky I deem it to be. First, our argument so far has had nothing to do with risk. Second, I told you I am leveraged 2.5:1, two posts ago. Third, you realize I'm trading Bitcoin, not ForEx, correct? And that no one in their right mind would offer 100:1 leverage on Bitcoin due to its volatility?
What's your last year's hourly salary? A year ago I was finishing up college and extricating myself from the TCG business I'd co-founded. I took very little in take-home pay over that period, but kept part ownership of the continuing business. Money isn't just about the number on your bank account--it's also about residual future income.
How many hours a week are you typically on a computer? On a computer, probably 50-55, if you add in time I spend on my phone, I'd say 65-70. Day trading takes constant watchfulness. I imagine it's like an easier version of taking care of a baby.
What are your favorite to sources of news besides waiting for it to get to the front/hot page of /Bitcoin when it's several hours old? I have an IFTTT for /BitcoinMarkets and /Bitcoin that notifies me early on about some posts.
What's the weirdest thing about your mom? She started a bookselling business online in her 50s and makes more money than me.
Or.
She's a little old lady who loves gadgets and technology.
What are your thoughts on Dogecoin and other bitcoin competitors? Do you think any have staying value? LTC.
DOGE.
NXT.
VTC.
Coins that offer something different or that have a strong community to them can be valuable prospects.
LTC is the first-mover scrypt coin - DOGE has the most non-techies interested in its success and is spreading quickly as a result - NXT is a cool generation two coin that has a lot of features BTC doesn't have - VTC is ASIC-resistant
Ok, let me spell it out to you. The retail forex market only makes up 5% of the total forex markets liquidity. The other 95% is from hedge funds and institutions. Therefore, 99% of the retail market losing their money is very possible, as that only makes up 4.95% of the whole market. Is it possible that 4.95% of the market generally loses? Yes. How is that infeasible? Nope. That's a false equivalence. It is possible that 4.95% of the market loses. It is not feasible, that, say, 99% of people with blue eyes lose. What, exactly, in empirical terms, is the difference between retail investors and hedge/institutions that causes this INCREDIBLE disparity? Would you care to respond to my above empirical argument that demonstrates that a zero-decision system is flipping a losing coin? Do you consider it feasible for 99% of people playing a 45-55 game to lose?
Are there options and/or futures markets for Bitcoin? Not really yet, but there will be more prominent ones soon. I hear about a new one pretty regularly, it seems, but nothing that seems truly legitimate has come out. I'm certainly excited for them, though.
Eventually, once Mr. Lawsky and co. get things sorted out, I'm certain we'll see a big-name investment bank start offering them.
From the time you started trading until today, what is your overall percentage return? In USD, my percentage return calculated from investment to current valuation is about 300% over a little more than 2 months.
In BTC, my percentage return calculated from investment to current valuation is about 425% over a little more than 2 months.
Using my average per-coin buy-in price, if I had just bought-and-held, I would have lost about 27% of my initial investment value.
Ben, i told you I'd be here and asking about Hearthstone first. If there's one class that needs a bit of tuning, up or down, which is it and why? I think Mage needs basic, class-level tuning. I'm not sure what needs to be done exactly, but I don't like what the Mage class power does to gameplay. I've thought some about how different it would be if it could only hit minions, and I'd want to know if Blizzard had tried that out. The Mage power is too versatile, and over the long-term I think it will prove to be problematic.
What's your favorite card? Lord Jaraxxus is my favorite card. He has a truly legendary feel to him when you play him, but your opponent can still win, even though he's very powerful.
So, where do you think we go from here? I'm currently short, but I don't expect to be so for a lot longer. I don't think we'll get past 550. I also don't expect this drop to hold on for a really long time.
I haven't seen a good, substantive rationale for what the MtGox situation really has to do with Bitcoin price. Yes, it looks bad, it certainly doesn't help with our legitimacy, but is it really worth the incredible price declines we continue to see? I don't think so. I think we are seeing these impressive declines because the price on MtGox (which is a reflection of trust in MtGox relative to Bitcoin price, not just Bitcoin price) has been declining heavily. I don't expect it to continue forever, especially not with things like the Winkdex and the accompanying ETF launching.
MtGox is basically dead to me, for now at least. The sooner everyone stops paying attention to it, the sooner we can all get back on track, which I, for one, will be quite happy about.
Do you think that it's a good thing for a game when the developers of that game discourage certain playing styles (e.g. mill decks or decks that try to win in unconventional manners) whether in hearthstone, MTG, or other TCGs? It can be. I don't want the developers metaphorically over my shoulder outlawing strategies, but I don't mind if the strategies that are "less fun" for your opponent (Draw/Go, Mill, or Hard Combo from MTG, for example) are also less powerful. Most players prefer a game where the best decks are also among the most fun, because it means that they are playing against fun decks more often. Clearly the 2-cost 3/3 will be played most often. If you fix this by making both 2-cost guys 2/2s or 3/3s, or by making one a 2/3 and the other a 3/2, then you've done something--but it's not that interesting. If you instead make the 2-cost 2/2 have text that says "While you control the 3-cost 3/3, this gets +2/+2" and you give the 3 cost 3/3 text that says "While you control the 2-cost 2/2, it has Taunt" you now have more complex cards that reward players for doing something other than just playing the best stand-alone card.
Which do you think is a better option to encourage diversity in TCGs; improving/buffing cards/decks that hardly see any play versus weakening/nerfing cards that are overwhelmingly played? This is obviously a very simplistic example, but I hope it makes the point. Games are more fun when you give players more relevant choices: buffing and nerfing cards tends not to do that as well as promoting synergies does.
Where/what is the actual money behind bitcoin? If it does exist. You might need to rephrase your question for me to understand what you're asking. If you're asking why a Bitcoin has value, the answer is the same as any other good: because someone is willing to pay it.
If you're asking why someone is willing to pay that amount, my answer would be utility.
I just got started on Bitfinex (using your referral link) and am a little intimidated. What types of trades would I recommend I try as a beginner? From there, just keep careful watch, and see what happens. Be neutral and objective toward your own hypothesis, just like in science. Don't be biased by your hopes, be focused on the reality.
So far I've only done a liquidity swap offer to try it since it seemed (nearly) risk free. Have you done any liquidity swap or is it too low in profit? If I'm not going to be able to check my computer for a day or two, or I'm uncertain of what's going to happen the next few days, I do use the liquidity swap function. It's actually very profitable, relative to traditional investments. And you're right, it is low-risk. I'm a fan. Good job selecting it if you were intimidated--that's a good place to start. As far as actually starting trading, do science. Start with a hypothesis. If you were up at 5 AM today when MtGox published their announcement, a good hypothesis might have been something like: "This announcement is going to be a blow to their credibility, and might panic the markets. We'll probably drop by some amount as a result." Invest based on it, figure out around what price you want to take profits, and at what price you'll cut your losses and get out. Stick to those determinations unless something substantive changes. The time you tell yourself you can afford to not close your position because it will "rebound" back to where you want is also the time you lose your shirt.
Is it true that you like Balloons? No, I <3 them.
Lol to the question about your mom... Ben, from my understanding Bitcoin is anonymous, does this mean that you can avoid taxation when receiving payment? Bitcoin isn't anonymous. That's actually a common misconception. It's actually pseudonymous, like Reddit. You end up with an online identity--a wallet address--that you use with Bitcoin.
If I walk up to you on a street corner and buy Bitcoin with cash, then I'm pretty much anonymous. If I buy it from a large institution like Coinbase or some other company, they will have records of the address my Bitcoin was bought for. As a result, you can trace them down, generally speaking.
As for avoiding taxation, that's a general no.
What do you think Bitcoin's biggest hurdle is and how do you think it can be overcome? Are there any misconceptions about Bitcoin that you think people have? The biggest hurdle for Bitcoin to overcome is governments. Governments have a variety of reasons not to want an alternative currency. We seem to have done pretty well on that front here in the US, but for other countries (China) that is not the case. Past that, the other major hurdle is something I consider an inevitability: consumer adoption. Business adoption has begun in earnest, consumer adoption hasn't. It will when enough businesses take Bitcoin to give it sufficient utility for the average customer.
What trading platform do you use to daytrade Bitcoin? What is the standard margin that Bitcoin brokers offer? what's the typical ask/bid spread? I primarily use Bitfinex.
Very few Bitcoin brokers currently offer leverage, Bitfinex offers 2.5:1. Over time, I anticipate it will become more like current Forex, where 10:1 or greater leverage is common.
It varies by exchange depending on their fees. Huobi charges 0% fees, so their spread is generally tiny. Some exchanges can be as wide as 1.5%. Typically, I see spreads between .5 and .7%.
Do you invest in any other type of cryptocurrency? if so, which is your favorite besides bitcoin? I currently have no other holdings, but I've held DOGE and LTC at points and am considering VTC and NXT. DOGE is probably my favorite, because if the community can keep this up for a little longer it will snowball into amaze.
Can you trade me a Jace? TMS WWK, TMS FTV, Beleren, MA, or AoT?
Beleren. M10, M11, LOR, JVC, JVCJPN, or Book Promo?
M10 and if not possible then M11. Sure.
I've been reading your blog for quite some time and especially like your summaries for recent events. Keep up the good work! Do you use strict stop-loss orders for your trades? When do you decide to close a trade? Especially in situations where you can basically see you profit/loss grow by the minute. When is enough? Do you have a longterm bitcoin investment you don't touch or do you use everything you have for trading? I do use relatively strict stop losses, but they're not stop loss orders. My conditions usually aren't just the price hitting a certain point, but instead it sustaining for a brief period, or hitting it with a certain volume, or with a certain amount of resistance to retreat. I don't want my stop loss to be triggered by some idiot who dumps 300 BTC and temporarily drops the price 15, but only ends up really dropping it 3. I am very strict with myself about this, though, generally speaking--if I can't trust promises I make to myself, what good am I?
Let's say for example you have a sum x dollar and a sum y bitcoin on your trading account. How much % of x or y do you risk at every trade? I've seen a formula for the max. amount of investment and read numerous times that traders shouldn't risk more than one or two percent of their "bankroll". Do you generally have dollar and btc or just one of them at any given time? 100% of funds in every trade, so long as all funds are easily moved into the position. Common exceptions are lack of liquidity and funds being on other exchanges. My reasoning for being all-in all-the-time is that it's a profit-maximizing move. It is also risk-maximizing. My risk tolerance is infinite; most people's isn't. Only ever one. Generally BTC if I'm long, dollar if I'm short. I prefer to double-dip, as otherwise it would be in contradiction to the 100% plan. I use everything I have for trading. Again, profit-maximization, infinite risk tolerance.
I decide a closing price when I'm near either my stop loss or my profit aim. I place a limit order or multiple limit orders wherever I need to. I avoid market orders whenever possible. Enough is when I hit my goals or my loss tolerance. I decide these at the start, but I frequently re-evaluate them as news and market conditions develop.
What is a typical bid/ask spread for Bitcoin? It depends what exchange you're looking at, but generally .5-.7%.
What's the best way to popularize Bitcoin among the masses? Add your own but would love your thoughts on: -microtransactions developing nations -gift economy (tipping) I would suggest just running around shouting "You get to be your own bank" is probably the best way.
In all seriousness, though--we don't need to try. It's going to happen on its own from now on, as the news media slowly starts to pick up the story. People will start appearing on TV talking about it with more and more frequency. Things like the Dogelympic teams are great PR and help boost it up, as well, of course, but in general it's just going to follow the adoption curve of every other technology.
If it picks up in a few developing nations that have stable internet, it will be a massive revolution for them. Self-banking can do a huge amount of good for an economy like theirs. We might see reports on that. If a major newspaper decides to run a permanent paywall like what the Sun-Times tested recently, that could be big as well. The slow PR from tipping on Reddit is another way, to be honest. Every bit helps, but the cryptocurrency community is now large enough that we're going to do a significant amount of organic, word-of-mouth style growth.
Do you think that a magic game could beat harthstone? If they do a good job, absolutely. They have to focus on the right things. It needs to be mobile-available, easy to pick up and play, and fun.
Is there a good crypto currency to get in on now, before it explodes like bitcoin did? There are plenty of options. Check out coinmarketcap.com. Fair warning, there are plenty of horrible things there--treat it kind of like penny stocks. I like BTC, LTC, DOGE, NXT, and VTC.
Also, why is it such a pain in the ass to buy them with actual money? Like you have to have bitcoins to buy other crypto currency. It's such a pain to buy them with USD because no one has made a good system to do it on, like Coinbase. If you think there's a desire, go do it!
Well the way I look at it, is how the hell else would you be able to buy them? Not everyone has piles of bitcoins lying around and I really don't want to spend $600+ on a single bitcoin just to buy some other currencies. Ah, I see the problem! You can buy fractions of a Bitcoin using Coinbase--I think .01BTC (~$6) is their minimum.
The March 2013 appreciation was from American and European investors and November 2013 was mainly from Chinese investors. Which group of people do you think will be the next to buy (I hate using the word invest when talking about bitcoin) bitcoin for investment purposes? American institutional and hobby investors. That is, Wall Street and people who pay attention to Wall Street.
Which do you think will be a better long term (~5 years) investment, Bitcoins, Litecoins, Dogecoins, Fetch Lands, Shock Lands, or Original Dual Lands? Does it change for ~10 years? Either Bitcoin or Fetch lands for 5 years. For 10 years, Bitcoin. I'd be worried about the 10-year view for paper MTG.
Ive been mining Bitcoins for years now, i have a good sum im my wallet but i never plan to use them. Does this make me a bad person? Approximately yes.
Ben, I should've simultaneously copied and pasted all of my questions from the Spreecast over to here but here are a few... It seems like the conspiracy crowd has really latched onto the idea of Bitcoin as being a discreet form of currency. If Bitcoin is backed up by the internet why would people choose having a currency that's being tracked over say cash, gold, different commodities? Having a currency be tracked has negatives and positives, but it's overwhelmingly positive for the average consumer. Because it's tracked, you don't need to pay someone to move your money for you. There also are no chargebacks, which means merchants aren't getting scammed and passing those costs onto consumers. Theft costs everyone money. It's also very fast--transactions confirm in just 10 minutes, regardless of size or where it's going. Transferring dollars from here to China is very difficult--transferring Bitcoin? Just as easy as from anywhere else to anywhere.
My job is a mix of voodoo, intuition, science, and news. In USD, my percentage return calculated from investment to current valuation is about 300% over a little more than 2 months.
No, just gambling. In BTC, my percentage return calculated from investment to current valuation is about 425% over a little more than 2 months.
Anyway, how have the profits been from start to finish compared to the market? Using my average per-coin buy-in price, if I had just bought-and-held, I would have lost about 27% of my initial investment value.
Are you willing to disclose how much you have in your trading portfolio/what kind of profit you turn both % and $ wise? In USD, my percentage return calculated from investment to current valuation is about 300% over a little more than 2 months.
In BTC, my percentage return calculated from investment to current valuation is about 425% over a little more than 2 months.
Using my average per-coin buy-in price, if I had just bought-and-held, I would have lost about 27% of my initial investment value.
What would you say is the easiest method of shorting bitcoin or any other coin? For shorting Bitcoin or Litecoin, check here.
For other coins, there isn't really a good way yet, to the best of my knowledge. A few exchanges have plans to add short-selling, but Bitfinex is really the only one I know of that has.
What did you have for breakfast today. Didn't breakfast, was delicious.
Hey Ben, I know next to nothing about Bitcoin. I went to /bitcoin after seeing this AMA on your FB, and I noticed that everyone is going apeshit over "Gox". I have no idea what that means or why everyone is so sad/angry/suicidal. MtGox (which originally stood for Magic the Gathering Online eXchange) was the first prominent Bitcoin exchange. They've been going through some rather rough times lately, some of which I was an early cataloguer of here. In short, everyone is freaking out because the exchange may be insolvent. It's not really a big deal to Bitcoin as a whole, but it's certainly an obvious blow to credibility. In my view, people are primarily upset because MtGox has been a part of Bitcoin for a very long time, and it can be hard to let go of what we're used to. I expect that they will either fix the issues or will go out of business officially very soon.
Please explain what happened.
Tell me every artist in your iTunes. Daft Punk, detektivbyrån, Kid Cudi, Matisyahu, The White Panda.
Spotify for life, yo.
Follow up question, what % are you in BTC vs Fiat and when you are on the losing side of a trade do you find your self dumping in more to get right or do you pull the cord Unless my positions are on different exchanges or in different coins, they're all always 100% of what I'll put into that trade at entrance and exit. As a result, I end up with a binary choice: stay or reduce/close. I very rarely reduce position size, nearly always preferring to just end the position instead.
Last updated: 2014-02-25 04:57 UTC
This post was generated by a robot! Send all complaints to epsy.
submitted by tabledresser to tabled [link] [comments]

Bitcoin buff confronts infamous regulator The Bitcoin Group #18 (Live) - Mt. Gox (part III ... Benjamin Lawsky Keynote - Money 2020 - Nov 2, 2014 - #bitcoin #regulation Charles Hoskinson on Ben Lawsky and Ripple Ben Lawsky's BitLicense could cost New York Jobs

Home › Latest News › Ben Lawsky Announces Revised BitLicense. Press Release. Ben Lawsky Announces Revised BitLicense . December 18, 2014 By Oliver Carding. A few days ago, New York State’s superintendent of financial services, Ben Lawsky, announced DFS’s revised outline of the Bitlicense framework for regulating digital currencies. The updated Bitlicense will be posted on FDS’s ... The name Ben Lawsky doesn’t sit too well with most Bitcoin enthusiasts. He is one of the people responsible for BitLicense. That regulatory framework has proven to be a major pain in the rear ... Bitcoin News Final Version of BitLicense Is Out. Not Many Impressed. Ben Lawsky’s much awaited BitLicense update in finally out. The final version of licensing regulations for Bitcoin and other ... On Bitcoin regulations he would like to see put in place, Ben Lawsky said: “We’d like to see consumer protection. So when people entrust their money to a bitcoin wallet or a bitcoin exchange or another service, that we don’t have a situation like we had in Japan last year with Mt. Gox…We want to see sufficient cyber security to prevent terrible hacking, and we want to see enough ... Ben Lawsky, Superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, spoke with Bloomberg TV's Trish Regan today on the future of Bitcoin and virtual currencies on the internet and the ability of law enforcement to ...

[index] [21601] [13944] [48999] [26000] [51551] [45023] [50885] [9505] [6586] [12033]

Bitcoin buff confronts infamous regulator

Live Bitcoin Liquidation Watch: June 1 2020 IntroToCryptos 206 watching Live now Kayleigh McEnany explains what it will take to stop antifa - Duration: 7:26. Charles Hoskinson on Ben Lawsky and Ripple ... Can I delete my old Daedalus Wallet - Duration: 1:46. Crypto ADApter 49 views. 1:46. Charles Hoskinson Opening address to the Cardano 2020 Virtual ... This video is unavailable. Watch Queue Queue. Watch Queue Queue Benjamin Lawsky Keynote - Money 2020 - Nov 2, 2014 ... Bitcoin and the Digital Battle for Your Wallet - Duration: 7:53. Bloomberg 4,113 views. 7:53 . Bitcoin Predictions, What Brings Us 2014 ... Arnold Schwarzenegger This Speech Broke The Internet AND Most Inspiring Speech- It Changed My Life. - Duration: 14:58. Alpha Leaders Productions Recommended for you

#