Bitcoin Forum

Economy => Speculation => Topic started by: segeln on June 17, 2014, 01:29:21 PM



Title: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: segeln on June 17, 2014, 01:29:21 PM
Does anyone know wether the announced time schedule (End Q II) ist still valid?


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Dragonkiller on June 17, 2014, 01:36:28 PM
Haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: segeln on June 17, 2014, 01:40:12 PM
Haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise.
so,this and the next week will be very exciting


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: cypherdoc on June 17, 2014, 02:12:30 PM
Don't forget to do your civic duty and pound on Professor Bitcorn at the end of the month.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Dragonkiller on June 17, 2014, 02:17:07 PM
Don't forget to do your civic duty and pound on Professor Bitcorn at the end of the month.

Meh.

People are outraged about what he said because they think because he is a professor, somehow his opinions are more valid and therefore if he is wrong, he should be ridiculed.

But he is just an idiot and always will be. A piece of paper doesn't change that.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Ibian on June 17, 2014, 02:34:44 PM
Don't pound him for being a professor, that part is irrelevant. Pound him for being an arrogant fool. Public exposure and humiliation is the only way that type learn.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: segeln on June 17, 2014, 06:44:02 PM
no more Information about this issue?


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Arghhh on June 18, 2014, 02:33:10 AM
This announcement will likely be the main catalyst for our next bubble.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: segeln on June 18, 2014, 08:27:17 AM
This announcement will likely be the main catalyst for our next bubble.
itīs the most important and decisive issue for bitcoin


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Dragonkiller on June 18, 2014, 08:34:22 AM
This announcement will likely be the main catalyst for our next bubble.
itīs the most important and decisive issue for bitcoin

It will be positive. It is no coincidence it is timed along with the Silk Road seizure sale and Apple allowing 'approved' digital currency apps. Remember that Ben Lawsky announced that he will start accepting applications for exchanges back in February. I expect the exchange Barry Silbert is working on to be announced very shortly afterwards. And the Winklevoss ETF to be approved at around the same time.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: TERA on June 18, 2014, 08:52:18 AM
They're probably struggling to figure out exactly how to regulate it. Remember during those court meetings the panel was explaining to the regulators how bitcoin works and the regulators didn't even really know that much about it at that point. There were a lot of ideas thrown around that sounded good on paper because the regulators were thinking of the ideas in terms of how traditional finance systems work, but they weren't thinking them through on a technical level of how bitcoin actually works. Ben Lawsy probably realizes now that he got in a little over his head now that the regulators have learned more about what bitcoin actually is, how it works technically, the decentralization, how the existing exchange system is set up, and who the big holders are. Everything will have to be re-thought. It's probably a nightmare.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Dragonkiller on June 18, 2014, 09:06:41 AM
They're probably struggling to figure out exactly how to regulate it. Remember during those court meetings the panel was explaining to the regulators how bitcoin works and the regulators didn't even really know that much about it at that point. There were a lot of ideas thrown around that sounded good on paper because the regulators were thinking of the ideas in terms of how traditional finance systems work, but they weren't thinking them through on a technical level of how bitcoin actually works. Ben Lawsy probably realizes now that he got in a little over his head now that the regulators have learned more about what bitcoin actually is, how it works technically, the decentralization, how the existing exchange system is set up, and who the big holders are. Everything will have to be re-thought. It's probably a nightmare.

Yeah... that's the pessimism I was talking about. Not healthy.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Arghhh on June 18, 2014, 09:13:01 AM
They're probably struggling to figure out exactly how to regulate it. Remember during those court meetings the panel was explaining to the regulators how bitcoin works and the regulators didn't even really know that much about it at that point. There were a lot of ideas thrown around that sounded good on paper because the regulators were thinking of the ideas in terms of how traditional finance systems work, but they weren't thinking them through on a technical level of how bitcoin actually works. Ben Lawsy probably realizes now that he got in a little over his head now that the regulators have learned more about what bitcoin actually is, how it works technically, the decentralization, how the existing exchange system is set up, and who the big holders are. Everything will have to be re-thought. It's probably a nightmare.
Benjamin Lawsky urinated in your coffee this morning didn't he?


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: TERA on June 18, 2014, 09:15:29 AM
It's not pessimism. It's a rational explanation for why this might be taking so long with any announcements at all.

Now if I was actually pessimistic I might say something like... "they are actually planning to ban bitcoin".


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Dragonkiller on June 18, 2014, 09:19:40 AM
It's not pessimism. It's a rational explanation for why this might be taking so long with any announcements at all.

Now if I was actually pessimistic I might say something like... "they are actually planning to ban bitcoin".

There was an announcement in February that the framework will be released no later than Q2 2014. What announcement do you want? You want an update every month repeating the same thing?

If there has been no update, it means nothing has changed. Announcements usually announce new information.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: shields on June 18, 2014, 02:46:56 PM
Someone that's on twitter, tweet him and ask him if it's still on schedule:  @benlawsky https://twitter.com/BenLawsky


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: segeln on June 18, 2014, 03:35:31 PM
Someone that's on twitter, tweet him and ask him if it's still on schedule:  @benlawsky https://twitter.com/BenLawsky
done
I will report


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: alexeft on June 18, 2014, 03:59:38 PM
It's not pessimism. It's a rational explanation for why this might be taking so long with any announcements at all.

Now if I was actually pessimistic I might say something like... "they are actually planning to ban bitcoin".

Do you always have to rationalize downwards??   ::)


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: TERA on June 18, 2014, 08:49:17 PM
It's not pessimism. It's a rational explanation for why this might be taking so long with any announcements at all.

Now if I was actually pessimistic I might say something like... "they are actually planning to ban bitcoin".

Do you always have to rationalize downwards??   ::)
This isn't downwards. It's a possible explanation for the delay that already happened  (remember than it was July at the latest, not July at the earliest). I'm not saying that anything bad is going to happen in the future, or that bitcoin is going to go down, nor did I give a timetable for delays in the future.


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: segeln on June 18, 2014, 09:13:53 PM
It's not pessimism. It's a rational explanation for why this might be taking so long with any announcements at all.

Now if I was actually pessimistic I might say something like... "they are actually planning to ban bitcoin".

Do you always have to rationalize downwards??   ::)
This isn't downwards. It's a possible explanation for the delay that already happened  (remember than it was July at the latest, not July at the earliest). I'm not saying that anything bad is going to happen in the future, or that bitcoin is going to go down, nor did I give a timetable for delays in the future.
just wait another 12 days before speaking of a delay


Title: Re: Regulation by Ben Lawsky,NY
Post by: Dragonkiller on June 18, 2014, 09:14:11 PM
It's not pessimism. It's a rational explanation for why this might be taking so long with any announcements at all.

Now if I was actually pessimistic I might say something like... "they are actually planning to ban bitcoin".

Do you always have to rationalize downwards??   ::)
This isn't downwards. It's a possible explanation for the delay that already happened  (remember than it was July at the latest, not July at the earliest). I'm not saying that anything bad is going to happen in the future, or that bitcoin is going to go down, nor did I give a timetable for delays in the future.

Your definition of delay is incorrect.