Bitcoin Forum

It’s no secret that the Winklevoss twins have been championing the ‘sanitization‘ of cryptocurrency. With their “fully regulated” Gemini exchange, their goal is to change the Wild West image of the fledgling industry that’s been plagued by exchange hacks, scams and fraudulent security offerings.

https://bitcoinist.com/winklevoss-cryptocurrency-trust-rules/

Indeed. Apart from the rules embedded in the Bitcoin protocol, no other rules are needed.

The moment you send your coins to a third party (exchange, fund, company, or similar) you are no longer in control of your coins. Whether some external rules may help you retain some degree of control is questionable. Rules may help, but as many crypto owners have already experienced many times in the past, rules may be broken and money can be lost.

Rules or no rules, it all comes down to this: If you don't have control over the private keys associated with your coins, you don't own anything. 

How can one prevent exchange hack through rules and regulations? It can only increase the chance of not getting hacked if the businesses follow some standard security protocol and have adequate insurance cover. 

Also the billboard of Gemini says that,

https://bitcoinist.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/photo_2019-01-06_08-31-47-315x420@2x-315x420@2x.jpg

And after receiving a fair amount of criticism from the bitcoin users worldwide, Cameron came back with the statement that you've mentioned in the thread subject! Cryptos can't be regulated - that's an universal truth! However, I too strongly believe that the business entities must be regulated who are built around cryptos. because the mass adoption can only happen when there is regulation because it brings trust within the system. 

Exchange needs rules and I think there are certain rules that take control over the way they sometimes change it, well I really think that it is OK to have certain rules in the exchange or certain cryptocurrency companies to ensure the safety and securities of a certain individual, This is to protect the transaction from a criminal eye and thief as well, The security issue is a fault of human error and we can not blame cryptocurrency about it, We should spread the word about it so people would not lose their trust over bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

An increase in the chance of not getting hacked means that you are preventing such hacks from happening into your company. Rules and Regulations is the key needed for such event to happen.



It really cant be regulated but at least regulate the exchanges because they are businesses and businesses around the world are regulated by a law. Businesses that are regulated by laws attracts more costumer or investor alike.

It's a point I've always raised when people discuss things like consumer protection.  Individual companies can and should be regulated because there need to be consequences when rules are broken.  But it's simply not feasible to attempt to regulate open-source protocols in which rules are enforced by user nodes.  Particularly if proposed laws would weaken the security of those protocols or diminish the fungibility of the currencies being transacted.

Agreed, services and companies built around cryptocurrency should be regulated in order to enforce consumer protection and to make sure that no company will have the guts to trip themselves over with their own wires and screw with their peers and consumers because no law will ever held them accountable for their mistakes and shortcomings. Bitcoin and crypto per se is already fine without regulations, and I'm pretty sure most people who are handling cryptocurrencies know how to discern a shady transaction from a legitimate one by now. Government interference should only be focused on companies dealing with crypto and trying to make profits off of it and leave the open-source cryptocurrencies as it is as they literally have no control over it, no matter how much grip they think they have on the said currency.

It's true. Even if cryptos are regulated (for people) it's supposed to be a monetary system outside of governments control, which they have no control over, no way to stop you using it nor to know you own coins. The governments won't knock at your door to search your house to see if they can find a seed, hardware wallet. That was the IFM plan firstly but once they figured it's not feasible with efficiency they gave up.

regulations DO NOT mean consumer protections

regulations means a business approved gets a shiny sherrifs badge to then monitor and police its customers.
we need to stop trying to scream and demand for regulations that allow banks/businesses to get away with crap simply because they have a licence. and instead scream and demand for consumer protections, where it become easier for consumers to take companies to court(consumer protection)... not the other way around companies take consumers to court(regulations)

i still laugh and facepalm at all the people that think that not only giving a business funds.. but then advocating that a business should be given a shiny licence to then tell users what they can/cant do. while the business is allowed to do many foolish things with users funds

In every system, human errors is inevitable thus the need for a regulated platform that is backed with rules for the safety of investors assets as well as the platform itself.

There's a saying that "without rules and order, chaos is the order of the day". Let exchanges have backed up rules they must adhere to.

Rules are useless if they cannot be respected and applied. Since governments dont have any kind of control over cryptocurrency , they dont have much control over cryptocurrency companies. In conclusion cryptocurrencies dont need rules ,meanining they dont need companies and every person should have full control over their own crypto.

I'm not sure what the extent is of how businesses are allowed to do 'foolish' things with user funds, but you have a point here.

The thing however is that a licensed business is less likely to do foolish things with user funds than a non licensed business. Coinbase, while I'm not particularly a fan of it, hasn't gone through an exchange level hack where coins were lost, hasn't an insane amount of its holdings sitting in hot wallets, knows how to securely generate key pairs, etc.

In the end, it's people's fault for letting centralized services use them as a punching bag. If you don't like it, quit using it.

This is a good thing because crypto has many participants and it needs to cater for a variety of people. Some are crooks in the dark web, others are investors that need regulation. Good to have them on board

Exchanges, ICO, IEO must all be regulated to avoid scams. When investors have some level of assurance that their funds are protected from hacking and scams, their overall participation will be high and positive instead of this current uncertainty of possible losses.

This is a very difficult equation
Adoption needs to be organized to increase confidence
crypto is based on absolute freedom
We need access to a point that reassures the public and increases trust in crypto
At the same time does not cancel the features of the character of encryption and most important financial freedom and the abolition of the mediator.

I think they are right on this. Taking a deep look at it , crypto dosent need any more rules. The third party agents that served as exchange platforms are the ones that need to be regulated and have a standard of operation. This will boost the confidence of people using the platform and will reduce scam rates and also reduce rate at which new exchange platforms  pop up this days .

The ideal solution for bitcoin exchange should be a decentralized exchanges, because centralized exchanges provide a single point of failure especially as regard security and anonymity. But the current decentralized exchanges we have has not lived up to to expectations. It now seem having centralized exchanges with regulations is a lesser of two evils centralization requires the trust of third party.

@avikz That's the first thought crossed my mind. They spent millions on their "crypto needs rules" campaigns. Billboards, public transport ads. Of course, I don't really think they're now going back against what they said. I think anyone who understands crypto knows that's what they meant when they said "crypto needs rules".

The news article linked also clearly says, that's what they're clarifying: that they meant crypto business. Not that there aren't people who actually think Bitcoin needs rules and CEOs and governing bodies;)

Marketing trick for gemini!

Regulation is inevitable if we want broader adoption - I can agree to this. Many people/companies will see cryptos as a gray area and if you were to ask somebody still he will think twice if this thing is legal. By having the strict rules that are made public will only have an impact on the crypto space in a positive manner, to grow more.

If new rules are made for crypto then there will be no essence for it to be decentralized. No new rule is needed for cryptocurrencies. Let’s just get the crypto exchangers regulated and that will settle everything.

Cryptocurrency companies must be responsible for doing rules and regulations in their cryptocurrencies to avoid loopholes for their business. Rules will help users to be more secure and safe with their assets in the cryptocurrency industry and the companies should do it as soon as possible. Creating rules and regulation isn't that easy but they have to make sure to do it as much as possible for us the users and the enthusiasts.

The reason for this is simple. Governments and regulators cannot "control" direct Bitcoin use, but they can regulate Bitcoin if people opt to use 3rd party services. The 3rd party services needs to adhere to these rules and regulations, because they can be targeted as centralized businesses. The Gemini exchange needs to adhere to the "rules" because they are identifiable and well known in the financial industry and the Winklevoss twins are targeting institutional capital investment that are highly regulated.  :P

We cannot blame the Winklevoss twins, because they must play by the rules of the government's game or close their doors.  ::)

If we just want to send each other cryptocurrency, then for this, of course, we do not need any additional rules and no regulation of cryptocurrency. However, if we want the cryptocurrency to be a means of payment in society and each state even simply allows its circulation on its territory, and even more so, takes it under its protection, including judicial, we will have to accept some additional rules of this state and it's nothing you can do. Cryptocurrency will be able to continue to develop further only after the states legalize it.

I do agree with them the cryptocurrency image has a wild west environment and people who are estrange to it will feel the same.
They do need to an image recreation to the wider population if they ever want it to go as mainstream to the fiat system.
And since the winklevosses have the experience and especially the capital to do it then the ball is in their court.

That is a more logical approach. You can't go and regulate crypto, its a technology designed to circumvent control. But you could go after the companies and individuals. So possession and exchange of crypto should not be prone to artificial rules that do not exist in the code governing the coins themselves.

I agree that the industry needs regulation, but the right regulation and not arbitrarily. There is way too much fraud in the industry - it needs to be cleaned up. The industry will mature when it's more user-friendly and there are more protections for consumers, which will come partly with regulations. While the industry is decidedly libertarian in orientation, we have seen some of the consequences of lack of regulation in many unsavory news stories. Again, the bitcoin protocol is fine - it's companies dealing with it that need to be watched.

Aside from the protocol involved in cryptocurrency, there is no other rules needed but the dev are right crypto don't need any rule but the cryptocurrency companies need rules, just like the regulated exchange which will operate within a regulatory framework and at that will enjoy the support and confidence of it users because of those rule and regulations they follow in carryout their activities. Winklevoss are right on this one compared to their what is written on they sign bord.

In a theoretical pure crypto world where everyone controls their own keys and there are no third parties then there is no need for any more rules. And there is no way of enforcing any rules either.

If someone steals from you then there are existing rules to nail them.

I absolutely believe that any third party who takes control of your keys should be regulated until their dick falls off. We have nearly ten years of utter incompetence, dishonesty and failure to prove that internet strangers are shit and need to kept on the tightest leash imaginable.

Since the crypto is not yet centralized I think crypto doesn't need rule . So we need to push crypto to go in legalization and centralization stage because we need rules and regulation in this industry to protect our every transactions. We need security in this type of business because we deal lot of money inestment.