Bitcoin Forum

Everybody who values their's at 10 USD or less will get a great deal selling it to Circle. What's the problem with that?

And: everybody here wishing for 'mainstream adoption' should be happy as we will then finally have the opportunity to go shopping on Ebay and on apple-thingy-store and all the other beautiful places, which will of course accept Bitcoin as soon as they are being 'de-risked' and 'consumer-protected' and sent by identified users from regulated Circle wallets.

The to-be-adopted masses of shoppers will be happy, Ebay will be happy, Circle will be happy.

And if Circle protects the users from their private keys even the FED will be happy :).

So, happy times ahead all around, maybe except for the to-the-moon-guy on reddit, as he's not gonna get there. But that is a small sacrifice.

Joe


edit: spelling

This is a very good point. But there will be and maybe there is already (see cryptonote technology) a way for the one who wants it to free himself from the tyranny of government and its oppression towards your privacy.

How much privacy does "our identity" have left anyway?
The NSA spying/data collecting has been as bad or worse than anyone expected. Also, the IRS was caught taking a close look at the tax returns of people who belong to certain political groups, and people get fired from their job for certain types of donations.

Bitcoin is not anonymous either (despite many "news" stories claiming it is)
I value privacy, but for me it's probably too late to really matter much.
Who has an identity that is currently worth more than $10?  :o

Last time I checked Google is estimated to make $600 a year from each user based on the the information they get from tracking and analytics. When they can read spending patterns and tailor ads to you it makes your identity rather valuable. I personally prefer companies to know less about me - I value that at a lot more than $10.

I suppose privacy depends on what context your in - you'll pretty much  never be anonymous to the government, the taxman tries to know everything so he can hit as hard as possible. But as far as big corporations go I don't feel they deserve my information - they're being paid for a service no need to bloody well data mine on top of that.

From the reporting on the Target Credit Card breach, I learned that the wholesale going rate is many times your $10 figure.

I don't quite get the ire directed at Circle. It's another model. This is progress. We don't need to abandon the working models. Indeed, one does not need to store all their stash at Circle. One could conceivably use it for their pocket money.

About you post.

One word:

No.

imagine names that are not already publicly accessible for free. take for example mark karpeles. wouldnt you pay more then $10 to know his home address, home telephone, private email address?

take any other scammer, con-artist. wouldnt you pay more then $10 for their identity.

well debt recovery agencies all get thir data from private data collection agents. and these agents will paymore per entry as they know they can sell that one entry to multiple people.

yes there are some bits of data that are not as valuable. but take for instance any companies that want to concentrate on bitcoin users. they will pay more for circles members list.. rather then go to facebook and pay them for facebook members that have 'liked' or commented about bitcoin.

its never end users such as debt collection agents that just want one entry. its data companies that can resell, that will pay over $10

The biggest barrier to adoption right now is the onramp and offramps. If these highly-regulated but easy-to-use onramps bring a 10x growth to the user base, then I think it's a good thing. Once people are in the system, they'll eventually learn their way around it and start to branch out.

I liken it to bittorrent and downloading free movies / tv shows. Everyone does it now and it's normal. Mass adoption of peer-to-peer file sharing forced the industry to be disrupted. But that only became commonplace after everyone had a computer on their desk and became familiar with software and the internet. The PC / Internet may not have ever gotten off the ground if it was expressly marketed as a way to bypass copyright restrictions.

You know what's so very fucking cool about Bitcoin? You have the freedom to use it the way you want to!

Nobody is forcing you to sign up with Circle or use a similar service. You are free to keep your bitcoins in your own wallet on your own PC and use them as anonymously as you like. I think we should be excited about the fact that we soon might have the option to use bitcoins in a very convenient and secure way.

I really don't understand your rant.

I don't really understand all the hatred towards circle.

Yes it's centralized and yes they will probably not allow you to handle your own keys (and therefore you don't actually posses any bitcoin because the one who has the keys has the coins) but still it could be the 'killer app' for bitcoin.

Noone is forcing you to use circle and in fact I'd advice everyone to hold their own keys, but I also realize many people are too lazy or too stupid for that. The only thing I'm worried about is if circle becomes popular and goxxes a lot of people who are relatively new to bitcoin. That could prove to be a distaster for the reputation of bitcoin.

Thank you for speaking out.

Unfortunately many people value their identity even less than 10 USD.

 Yep, Circle has already won by default. Except for Crypsty.

 Yep, smooth sailing here.

 Same for all the soon to be arriving Deep Pockets and Mega Cannons.

 Crystal clear paradise right here in the land of Bitcoin for all the already due huge new players.

 Everything changes in the next several months time.

 Get over it OP, yor beating a dead horse.


Bitcoin is The Future.

This is a rather short-sighted viewpoint.

It's true today, however there are many, many ways in which this could not remain true tomorrow.

You lost me there. How would people be forced to use Circle?

Bitcoin transactions are just as anonymous as you want to make them.

Think about it.

agree, if you want to use the atm's and have your identity tied to your wallet you can

or

you can stay in the shadows....

I don't see how this isn't a good thing. You can still use your own wallet and your own private keys. If this gives us the ability to use bit coin at places like the Apple store or Amazon etc. it increases the reach and economy of bit coin exponentially. Not to mention the new users.

Hey Justus - I'm confused as well regarding your statement. Care to clarify?

I dont know anything about circle, nor do I care. But lets be serious here and dont report half ass stories.

If they are a US based company, and deal in crypto, they need to have certain data about you in order to comply with US regulations (specifically FinCen and if they extend to the states MSB licenses). You can't have all these start ups, specifically in the US, and get away with not complying with regulations. You want mass adoption? Do you want people to use cryptos? Do you want price to increase? Well without complying with regulations is the fastest way to keep those from not happening.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

I'm kind of curious why all the wigging over this identity issue.

Everyone here almost certainly has a bank account and credit/debit cards in which you have to give them your identification. You have cable and internet and satellite, and you have to provide your identification - who you are, where you live, and contact info. You had to give the same shit from the moment you entered kindergarten and will always have to provide your identification and contact info for everything you do. If that freaks you out to the point of a shrieking coronary, then change your name to a symbol and go live in seclusion away from society.

You've provided it even to these trader exchanges already.

If you've used your credit card to buy a pizza online and have it delivered, you've given some college kid your credit card number which is far more potentially damaging than someone knowing your damn name, address and phone number.

Circle isn't requesting anything even remotely near as intrusive and invasive as bitstamp asks, but they have to have this information to link up your accounts...same reason Pay Pal needed it or Amazon or any online service linked to your account so they can EXCHANGE FUNDS. Circle isn't out to steal your money. They're out to make it easy for non tech geeks to adopt bitcoin as easily as they adopted pay pal and Amazon and eBay.

They are not the spawn of satan out to absorb your unborn children into their dark beast and sell their lists to the government death squads...Circle is bitcoin's paypal...no more, no less. Use it to make online purchases at shops easier, get your grandma set up with it. Enjoy its free services and then move your funds off Circle into an offline wallet or dark wallet or out of Circle. Once you move them you have a different private key that you control. Or just don't use them.

This is so unwarranted. Circle is on your side...they're making it easy for people who currently would just as soon tell you to shove bitcoin up your ass than to use magic money to use magic money with their phones all over the place so they forget what they were so irate about.

And by the time that happens the government wouldn't be able to regulate it if they tried.

Jeez, settle the fuck down already, this backlash is nuts. Paranoid nuts.

Regulatory Catpure of the unregulatable? You make-a no sense to me.

ETA: Nope, still not seeing how one might be forced to use Circle.

This doesn't stop people using the basic peer-to-peer client, though.

I think I understand what you're alluding to, that governments could make non-white label transfers illegal, but to control that they would have to impose draconian controls over global Internet traffic, all while their jurisdiction is limited. About the only thing they could do with a measure of success IMO is implement white listed coins, but we've already discussed it should be a community priority to neuter/block any such lists at all costs.

It depends on the person, really in terms of how they think their information will be handled. It's like the herd mentality, if everyone else is jumping in, they will be safe because there is strength in numbers. The price isn't really the price they would put on their identity, because the herd mentality set in and that reduces the perception of risk.