 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 4 5 »
|
They have the resources and all the legal means to get their project launched. Which will benefit the growing bitcoin community. |
|
|
|
|
When will U.S citizens stand up ? Maybe it's time for a U.S Spring movement.
|
|
|
|
A long time if you look at how long Zimbabwe is managing to do it  |
|
|
|
The solution is to make it so people won't want to trade their bitcoins for dollars. Why go through the trouble of transferring to dollars at all when you can buy everything with bitcoins?
Exactly ! That's what i've been saying. I know it's not yet that easy, but the more people realize they have the power to change things for the better the faster we'll all be able to deal in bitcoins or other good cryptocoins to do what we wish. No more middlemen, no more bank issues, taking away control from those who currently control fiat. Just think of the recent case of Cyprus, where people woke up to find out they got a haircut to bail out banksters. |
|
|
|
Mt. Gox missed the deadline.
They are now in default.
Time for their creditors to go to court in Delaware.
Delaware is just a paper structure. What people need to do is form a group then hire a good lawyer office and get them in Japan where it hurts them most. Delaware etc are all just PO BOX firms. |
|
|
|
|
I'd think twice if all those "freedom loving initiatives" seem to only want creditcard / bank payments for some reason.
|
|
|
|
|
For clarity lets make sure when we talk about Europe it is the continent and the EU when we talk about the block of countries working together and selling their people to Brussel.
|
|
|
|
|
Beside that it'll give bitcoin a great boost in many ways i think it'll also mean that their business (stock) will dictate sooner or later the exchange price of bitcoin. BTC/USD and from there any other combination building on it. So companies like mtgox and others will use that price instead of the status quo.
|
|
|
|
DO NOT GET EXCITED ABOUT GOX REGISTERING WITH FINCEN!!!This posting might deserve it's own topic but since I'm also the OP on this post, WTF, I can do whatever I want  I, for one, am NOT feeling any better about Gox since their FinCen announcement. I do enough BTC trading where I'm also in the process of registering as an MSB. You have to understand that there are TWO registrations, one federal and one with the state. So I'm not excited about Gox because (1) FinCen registration is actually quite simple. If you already have a business incorporated and a business bank account, FinCen registration literally takes a few minutes, it's just one form and its very straightforward. Its not even something you would need a lawyer for. You simply need to give FinCen the name of your bank and bank account (for monitoring, I presume) and you have to acknowledge/promise that you have KYC policies in place and that you will comply with all reporting requirements (CTR, SAR, etc). And thats it, it literally takes less than 30 minutes to fill out. But for Gox, its GREAT publicity, sounds proactive, makes your feel like things are happening . . . but FinCen registration is really not complex. The hard part REALLY comes in with state registration. (1) because of the young nature of BTC its still unclear whether you need to register in all 50 states or just your primary state. (2) very, very few states have created a policy on MSBs and virtual currencies. So even the state Gox is registered in may ask them to wait for a policy paper BEFORE allowing MSB operations in that state (and thats assuming that they dont need to register in ALL 50 states!). and (3) state registration is where the real fees come in. At that point you will have to post a bond. Depending on the state, this can be into the millions of dollars. You wouldnt have to come up with the entire amount, I'm sure there's bond brokers for that, but its not a small expense if you decide to do a few states - do all 50 and it can cost you quite a bit. I will only feel better about Gox when they resume USD withdrawals THIS THURSDAY AS PROMISED. Until then, this FinCen registration is nothing but a red herring designed to make you feel better, nothing more. Gox is probably dealing with authorities. Don't think this has to do with any technical issue. Rather authorities and/or banks. Take for example the Swiss, several of their banks were forced to submit everything they got on U.S citizens or else ... I wouldn't be surprised if they either will announce to stop dealing with people from the land of the "free" or if they continue they will handover all U.S citizen data they have to stay in business as they are now. And remember, it's Japan, best buddy of the U.S ;-) |
|
|
|
|
Lets start from about 1913 and see how things developed into the shit most of the population lives in today.
|
|
|
|
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2043360/bitcoin-exchange-files-with-us-treasury-regulatory-agency.htmlJeremy Kirk, IDG News Service Jul 1, 2013 5:57 AMprint The largest Bitcoin exchange has filed key paperwork with the US Treasury's anti-money laundering agency, but it may have come too late. Mt. Gox, based in Tokyo, registered on Thursday with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) as a money services business (MSB), according to FinCEN's website. The adoption of Bitcoin, a virtual currency that can be transferred worldwide for free using peer-to-peer software, has been stymied by concerns over compliance with different countries' anti-money laundering and financial regulations. Mt. Gox's registration comes just six weeks after one of its U.S. bank accounts was seized. The order alleged Mt. Gox failed to register as a money transmitting business, which is required by many states and the federal government. The account was linked to Dwolla, a payments provider, and used by Mt. Gox to transmit funds to its exchange in Japan used to buy and sell bitcoins. Dwolla was not a target of order, issued on May 14 by the U.S. District Court in Maryland and didn't have any funds seized. One of FinCEN's missions is to combat money laundering. Bitcoin's semi-anonymous transaction system has led to concerns that it could be used to hide money and avoid taxes. Mt. Gox's registration may have come too late. According to FinCEN's website, those running money services businesses are required to register with the agency within 180 days of when the business was established. Businesses must renew their registration every two years. The seizure order from the federal court stated that Mt. Gox has used its U.S. account to distribute funds to Dwolla since at least December 2011. Mt. Gox officials could not be immediately reached for comment. On June 21, the exchange stopped U.S. dollar international wire transfers. The exchange said the halt was due to its bank, which was struggling to cope with the volume of transfers over the last two months. Mt. Gox said it planned to resume transfers within a couple of weeks. The decentralized nature of the Bitcoin system, managed by a small community of software developers, poses interesting issues for government regulators in how to apply laws and regulation, wrote Ed Felten, a professor of computer science and public affairs at Princeton University. "The people who govern Bitcoin are an obvious point of leverage for regulators," Felten wrote. "In principle, a regulator might try to compel the developers who govern the Bitcoin software to deploy certain rule changes, by compelling them to push software changes that implement the modified rules." Bitcoin will likely prove "to be more regulable than its initial advocates thought," Felten wrote. The transition could be awkward due to Bitcoin's complexity. "Also like the Internet, Bitcoin will flummox some of the less savvy people in government, leading to some series-of-tubes moments," he wrote. This part is very interesting:
The decentralized nature of the Bitcoin system, managed by a small community of software developers, poses interesting issues for government regulators in how to apply laws and regulation, wrote Ed Felten, a professor of computer science and public affairs at Princeton University.
"The people who govern Bitcoin are an obvious point of leverage for regulators," Felten wrote. "In principle, a regulator might try to compel the developers who govern the Bitcoin software to deploy certain rule changes, by compelling them to push software changes that implement the modified rules."
Bitcoin will likely prove "to be more regulable than its initial advocates thought," Felten wrote. The transition could be awkward due to Bitcoin's complexity.
"Also like the Internet, Bitcoin will flummox some of the less savvy people in government, leading to some series-of-tubes moments," he wrote.
And that is why we need a p2p exchange system and/or bitcoin is not needed to be converted to fiat anymore because of worldwide adaption. |
|
|
|
Here's something that I'm wondering...
It seems to me that (IF a small group of) the people who own the 7 million just permanently deleted their wallets, that would help kill it off, right?
Or what if the government bought (or is buying) hundreds of thousands and just threw them away?
That's my question.
yes don't you think it makes sense they should invest it into the BTC community and stop acting like nazis!!! >>>WTF!!!!!! Exactly, that's my point too. If those few people have so much bitcoins then it doesn't make them any better than what we have now with centralized banking systems & FED type structures. Bitcoin was meant to move that power, to be decentralized and p2p. Perhaps someday we won't need fiat but everything happens within the p2p crypto-currency system. Those guys who did the analysis are not some bums, that is what makes me take this serious. If you doubt their credentials feel free to do your research on them. |
|
|
|
|
Might also add to the list where their office/people are located (as in country) ? Could be important to know.
|
|
|
|
Well, it looks like fear is speaking instead of thinking. What those few people (less then 10 ?) controlling 7,000.000 coins want with hoarding that amount ? If their intentions were good they would be spreading bitcoin further and spending them on projects to get the masses use bitcoin. By not doing so they put a bomb under bitcoin. Again, if that analysis is true.
So the question is, why does a handful of people have 7,000.000 bitcoins doing nothing ? Or just run them from A to B to C ? Bitcoin can only scale if there is a flow of it.
PS: not talking about people with 1000's of bitcoins or even 10,000's, just specifically about that little group who controls 7,000.000 coins. And again, if that analysis is true !
They've earned it all fair and square, following the rules set in the bitcoin protocol. Changing it up like that will tank bitcoin so fast. Also, no matter how well off they are, it's morally reprehensible to just try and destroy one's savings just because they do what you don't want with it. A planned event like bitcoin and then massively hoarding that amount is not what i call fair and square. But it's not up to me, at the end the masses decide and if they decide to exclude those specific hoarders then so be it. This will sooner or later come back and bite us as in the community in the ass, mark my words. |
|
|
|
|
Well, it looks like fear is speaking instead of thinking. What those few people (less then 10 ?) controlling 7,000.000 coins want with hoarding that amount ? If their intentions were good they would be spreading bitcoin further and spending them on projects to get the masses use bitcoin. By not doing so they put a bomb under bitcoin. Again, if that analysis is true.
So the question is, why does a handful of people have 7,000.000 bitcoins doing nothing ? Or just run them from A to B to C ? Bitcoin can only scale if there is a flow of it.
PS: not talking about people with 1000's of bitcoins or even 10,000's, just specifically about that little group who controls 7,000.000 coins. And again, if that analysis is true !
|
|
|
|
If that is true then we as the community should implement the solution described here to get rid of those specific kill-switch-hoarders:
"
So, what, if anything, could be done about it? Unfortunately, the one solution which I can think of (other than the idiotic head-in-the-sand solution of not giving a damn, which the Bitcoin user community seems to favour) is a rather unlikely one, and would be quite distasteful – on a gut level – to most users. I am speaking, of course, of proscription. If the Bitcoin community – or a reasonable subset thereof – agreed that the kill switch ought to be neutralized by any means possible, it would be a fairly straightforward matter to declare the hoarders persona non grata and collectively agree to use modified Bitcoin clients (let’s call them Bitcoin-P) which act as if the particular coins currently held by A, C-F, H-K, and M-S were not bitcoins at all. And that such pseudo-coins will never be accepted as genuine in trade for any good or service. In effect, they would be retroactively shitcoined for all time.
This act would not require cooperation from every single Bitcoin user, or the imposition of any kind of governing authority. If even a minority of users were to move to Bitcoin-P, operating separate exchanges and the like, said users would be forever immune to the effects of a future market glut resulting from hoarders cashing out. Users of conventional Bitcoin would feel the effects in full, suffering the loss of most if not all of their purchasing power.
But I am under no illusions that Bitcoin-P will ever happen, given the libertarian bent of most Bitcoin users. They will mutter of dekulakization and the like. Fine, lose your hard-earned wealth to a pyramid scheme operator at some unspecified future date. But if you like the idea of decentralized cryptocurrencies without built-in kill switches, think hard about Bitcoin-P. Anyone who wants to can start using Bitcoin-P right now, without having to wait for others to be convinced of its merits. Just compile a list of the Satoshi gang’s bitcoins, and start pretending that they aren’t coins at all. It really is that simple.”
"
So basically steal the money of people who don't want to use it your way? Wouldn't that in itself be a killswitch, in addition to how unethical it is just to steal because they don't do things your way? Not really, to make sure bitcoin survives as it was intended (!) and its destiny not in the hands of a few people who set this all up from the beginning. Cause if that analysis is true then it's either make a few filthy rich and crash OR make sure there is no "killswitch". Maybe those people who planned bitcoin and have 7000000 bitcoins as a small group could show their intentions and use those coins to spread bitcoin further by all means. Not saying all coins, but large enough so it's not a killswitch anymore AND at the same time do good with it. |
|
|
|
It's still a bit strange, if a consumer in the u.s buys foreign currency does that make him need some kind of license ? Why would that same consumer not be allowed to buy bitcoin ? Assuming that the people / biz he buys it from are outside the U.S located. |
|
|
|
|
If that is true then we as the community should implement the solution described here to get rid of those specific kill-switch-hoarders:
"
So, what, if anything, could be done about it? Unfortunately, the one solution which I can think of (other than the idiotic head-in-the-sand solution of not giving a damn, which the Bitcoin user community seems to favour) is a rather unlikely one, and would be quite distasteful – on a gut level – to most users. I am speaking, of course, of proscription. If the Bitcoin community – or a reasonable subset thereof – agreed that the kill switch ought to be neutralized by any means possible, it would be a fairly straightforward matter to declare the hoarders persona non grata and collectively agree to use modified Bitcoin clients (let’s call them Bitcoin-P) which act as if the particular coins currently held by A, C-F, H-K, and M-S were not bitcoins at all. And that such pseudo-coins will never be accepted as genuine in trade for any good or service. In effect, they would be retroactively shitcoined for all time.
This act would not require cooperation from every single Bitcoin user, or the imposition of any kind of governing authority. If even a minority of users were to move to Bitcoin-P, operating separate exchanges and the like, said users would be forever immune to the effects of a future market glut resulting from hoarders cashing out. Users of conventional Bitcoin would feel the effects in full, suffering the loss of most if not all of their purchasing power.
But I am under no illusions that Bitcoin-P will ever happen, given the libertarian bent of most Bitcoin users. They will mutter of dekulakization and the like. Fine, lose your hard-earned wealth to a pyramid scheme operator at some unspecified future date. But if you like the idea of decentralized cryptocurrencies without built-in kill switches, think hard about Bitcoin-P. Anyone who wants to can start using Bitcoin-P right now, without having to wait for others to be convinced of its merits. Just compile a list of the Satoshi gang’s bitcoins, and start pretending that they aren’t coins at all. It really is that simple.”
"
|
|
|
|
Just in case it's not clear, please only PM me if you have more than a 100 positive trades (bitcoin-otc) or if you are a known exchange business.
100 positive trades ? Good luck. From some one with ZERO postive feedback ? ROTFL Well I made 2 risks in this forums you can see in my trust system. I gave you the link of my bitmit account which has over 15+ positive transactions from paypal to BTC and not a single negative feedback. So I have feedback and reputation on bitmit,what do you have ? I have a bag of bitcoins boy Now move on and let me find some one i feel comfortable with. |
|
|
|
Just in case it's not clear, please only PM me if you have more than a 100 positive trades (bitcoin-otc) or if you are a known exchange business.
100 positive trades ? Good luck. From some one with ZERO postive feedback ? ROTFL |
|
|
|
|
