Colby's article was probably about as balanced as you can be when the immediate, direct audience is the anti-money laundering crowd and those tasked with compliance. I think it's great that the web address is moneylaundering.com instead of antimoneylaundering.com.

Money laundering is a pejorative term to begin with because it insinuates that the participants do not have certain inherent rights to financial privacy. The Jews "laundered" their money to Switzerland in order to escape Hitler's holocaust.  Come on, people!  Financial privacy is a fundamental human right that has been consistently eroded and violated by governments.  We must take a step back and comprehend that "secrecy" does not mean "concealment", but rather that "secrecy" means "privacy" in its most basic sense.

We all apparently support the "mass illusion" that is called the US Dollar when it is backed by nothing (other than a really big army). Governments only become suspicious and threatened when other groups voluntarily create and support their own "mass illusion", because they view it as competition to the THEIR illusion.  Bitcoin, more than anything, is a study in sociology and human nature.

Volumes will increase. True, it would only take a few days to adapt forex software for BTC, but clearing and settlement from/into national currencies is where it touches the "KYC" anti-money laundering world, including OECD/FATF and Fincen.

An environment of multiple cryptocurrencies is a likely future but I don't think a BTC clone will come from Google, Apple, or any nation-State because those entities would be centralized in nature and they would not be in a position to exploit the attributes of bitcoin, such as remaining open and operational while under political attack.  It would almost be like Google coming out with their own BitTorrent server to compete against The Pirate Bay.

Secrecy=privacy. Those "elements" you mention are a red herring put forth by people who believe that secrecy=concealment. See Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse

Yes, I wholeheartedly agree in the public nature of an open-source cryptocurrency (it is a good point).  The Atlantic piece wasn't the best article and a lot of my better points weren't even used.  I had no idea of the article's title while being interviewed.  Actually, I was addressing his question about Facebook Credits (which are a private currency). He seemed to confuse private currencies with digital cash and cryptocurrencies, not to mention the differences between an e-gold ledger-based system and the decentralised nature of signed RPOWs to prevent double spending. Still better to participate in the article then turn it down, which is what I did for the Colby Adams request.

Yes, bitcoin as the stateless currency.  We should however focus more time on implementing decentralized p2p exchanges and also address the vulnerabilities of IRC in light of an attack.

Bitcoin IS ACTUALLY discussed in The Atlantic Monthly Magazine:

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/04/how-to-start-your-own-private-currency/73327/

You might also see....  The Tiny Dot  http://youtu.be/H6b70TUbdfs

The attendees came from various places (i.e., Malta, Isle of Man, Ireland, UK, Bulgaria, etc) but they were all involved at some level in the online gaming industry. A member of the EU, Gibraltar has its own constitution and governs its own affairs via its own elected parliament. The independent judicial system of Gibraltar is modeled on the common laws of England & Wales which is seen as a benefit in business dealings (compared to Panama or Costa Rica for instance). Financial law follows the EU and the UK, but having said that Gibraltar has been very effective at leveraging the recent e-money legislation and e-money companies do quite well in Gib. Several have been set up and they are permitted to issue VISA and Mastercard prepaid cards without having a full bank license which is required in the US.

I wouldn't get too hopeful though about any country formally embracing bitcoin because they all still answer to OECD/FATF and Know-Your-Customer anti-money laundering laws (you would almost have to go Libya or Iran if you wanted to ignore OECD/FATF). Considerable pressure still comes from the US government on these matters and online gambling companies respect the US law of not allowing US players.

The bottom line is that the attendees do not seem to perceive the payment method as a "competitive advantage" so they happily receive the other fee-based payment alternatives.  They tend to focus more on the competition for eyeballs and affiliates feeding them traffic so in many ways it resembles the economics of online porn.

Creighto,

Please see my recent presentation at Gibraltar conference where bitcoin was presented to the Prime Minister of Gibraltar and the leading eGaming companies in attendance.  FYI, Gibraltar is the world capital for online gambling companies and it is the country's #1 industry.

http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2011/03/monetising-game-play-on-social-network.html
(the bitcoin section begins on page 11.)

My other "pre-bitcoin", Chaumian-type cryptocurrency work was completed during my tenure at VeriSign, Inc. where I was employed after VISA. One such 1995 piece was published by both the London School of Economics and the Libertarian Alliance:

http://themonetaryfuture.blogspot.com/2009/05/london-school-of-economics-publishes.html
(please note that this early digital cash work was subsequently referenced in a leading Economics textbook)

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/econn/econn063.pdf

I am an economist and I already have staked my reputation on Bitcoin.

I believe the narrative for anonymity is "financial privacy" as a fundamental human right.  Where along the way did we lose our basic right to simple financial privacy?  Sheeple have been unfairly conditioned to think that secrecy equals concealment and nothing could be further from the truth. It is wrong to preach that we have to surrender basic financial privacy so that TPTB can endlessly chase the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse.  Secrecy = Privacy,  Secrecy ≠ Concealment. See http://www.arraydev.com/commerce/jibc/9601-2.htm

Seems natural to me.

I just watched the video of the talk.  Excellent job, Genjix. I really enjoyed the highlighting of the money laundering service from Mike Gogulski. You are now added to the great BIG gubmint database of public bitcoin advocates when they come for us.  "Sir, but it's just a math puzzle".....Cheers.

Intriguing thoughts from @webisteme on Bitcoin and Fractional Reserve Banking:
http://www.webisteme.com/blog/?p=192

...and, my comment to his blog post:
This is an interesting thesis. At this point in bitcoin’s evolution, I still see any bitcoin ‘reserves’ as similar to gold (or silver) reserves with the primary difference being that bitcoin does not suffer the same portability, divisibility, and security issues which gave rise to the gold reserve note in the first place. Back to the demand side of money, why would a user accept a bitcoin reserve note when the actual bitcoin has better overall transactional properties than its derivative?

Having said that, in the absence of a parallel bitcoin fork or parallel cryptocurrency, I do not believe that the bitcoin economy will support fractional reserve banking. I disagree with Gavin Andresen on this point. Lending will indeed exist through timed deposit instruments rather than ‘on-demand’ current accounts. This would not be unlike the gold leasing arrangements that exist today for the world’s above-ground gold reserves (of, course, I’m referring to the non-fraudulent ones). Being highly divisible, fungible, nearly real-time, and already decentralized, bitcoin negates the conditional criteria that gave rise to fractional reserve free banking in the pre-bitcoin era.

Server Not Found error on the onion address.  Is that correct address?

The bitcoin economy will grow and prosper precisely because it has the potential to facilitate a parallel economy that can also operate beyond the scope of taxation. All types of transactions will be attracted to a taxation-free zone because throughout history no- to low-tax zones have always thrived against their counterparts (Hong Kong, US in the 1800s).  This parallel economy will know no political borders so it will not even be clear which taxation authority has the jurisdiction over the economic participant(s).

Even if the proper jurisdictional taxation entity could be reasonably determined, they would still be faced with applying a tax to a reusable proof-of-work 'puzzle'. Firstly, how do you tax a mathematical puzzle without giving it monetary legitimacy?  How do you determine the political borders of the recipient key (if recipient is careful)?  How do you determine the total amount to tax if bitcoin laundries and mixers are used?  Today, an individual can work for bitcoin in anonymous fashion from an undetected geographic location and then spend bitcoin or anonymously trade out of bitcoin.  I don't really see that changing. I'd be more worried about an authoritarian shutdown of the IRC network.

Not true.  It's only the opposite situation if looking at it from the ¥en-to-Dollar perspective.  When you look at it from Dollar-to-¥en (or future BTC-to-Dollar) perspective, then one Dollar would equal .0070 BTC in future.  Exchange rates are always different sides of the same 'coin'. Just inverted.

Second that, noagendamarket. Governments are not going to roll back taxes and create tax-free zones, because it's more in their interest to grow and to expand.  The forces on the side of liberty periodically attempt to rein in the government but it merely has the effect of only slowing its rate of growth. This is unfortunate.

The bitcoin economy will grow and prosper precisely because it has the potential to facilitate a parallel economy that can also operate beyond the scope of taxation. All types of transactions will be attracted to a taxation-free zone because throughout history no- to low-tax zones have always thrived against their counterparts (Hong Kong, US in the 1800s).  This parallel economy will know no political borders so it will not even be clear which taxation authority has the jurisdiction over the economic participant(s).

Even if the proper jurisdictional taxation entity could be reasonably determined, they would still be faced with applying a tax to a reusable proof-of-work 'puzzle'. Firstly, how do you tax a mathematical puzzle without giving it monetary legitimacy?  How do you determine the political borders of the recipient key (if recipient is careful)?  How do you determine the total amount to tax if bitcoin laundries and mixers are used?  Today, an individual can work for bitcoin in anonymous fashion from an undetected geographic location and then spend bitcoin or anonymously trade out of bitcoin.  I don't really see that changing. I'd be more worried about an authoritarian shutdown of the IRC network.