Bitcoin Forum

...

Uh-huh ... shall we have a whip 'round for Lawsky then?

... who wants to start the "BitCoins for Lawsky" thread?

He might just want to put a donation address up somewhere, let's test his open mind to new ways of doing business ... ah, actually, it maybe more like the old way of doing business.

Seems like we'll see quite a bit of an increase in media attention to Bitcoin with these subpoenas.  I would like to see this increase Bitcoin awareness.

let's start BitPAC - donate to my address below and when we reach 1000 BTC we'll start taking Senators out for lunch

since we cant get any money out of mtgox at the moment i will give the senators BTC donations for their upcoming in the form of private keys at 50 BTC increments in honor of the 50 states

1000/50 = 20 i think that's a decent sized voting block, we'll grow from there

of course if BTC goes to $500 soon that's a $25,000 donation

What a nice guy. Thanks Mr. Lawsky, for allowing peaceful people to do business.

Does anyone really believe this is not about eventually placing control mechanisms in the Bitcoin protocol?

Obviously they see they must target the The Bitcoin Foundation companies who control the lead developer.

Sarcasm?

While I think he wants to believe himself so very much, he may not be empathetic of how capital intensive and detrimental it is for a small business to register with the NY DFI as a money transmitter. And if he does have any empathy for that scenario, he may not be considering the $1,000,000+ cost of registering appropriately in every single state across the U.S. I understand and support the need to prevent money laundering, but there is absolutely a more efficient solution than the current proposed regulatory schematic for bitcoin businesses. As it lies, any business short of a multi- million dollar bank roll is going to have a hard time operating in this space. We don't need to be regulated by 48 different departments. It's crippling.

Who would agree to that revision?  ::)

Yes it was an attempt at sarcasm. I do not support tax/theft and a need to prevent "money laundering" and above all I do not want to be ruled, regulated or told what to do by these bozos. What is "money laundering" anyway? Just some catechism that the average Joe immediately identifies with hmm drugs, hmmm tax evasion, hmm that's bad, without questioning it.

The problem is that the majority of the Bitcoin network's hash power is outside the regulator's jurisdiction.

... that's okay, he invoked the "national security" magic words so the US military is now involved and his jurisdiction just became the world ...

Impossible. Being "lead developer", Gavin certainly has a lot of influence, but influence is all he has. Any change that will allow the U.S. (or any) government to control or monitor transactions will be rejected, even if Gavin is forced to make it in the Bitcoin-QT client.

Because the blockchain is public, to control the transactions, you can built a monitoring/regulating network around the blockchain and e.g. require US persons to declare their addresses and forbid use of undeclared ones.