Bitcoin Forum
September 09, 2026, 01:18:55 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 31.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
 1 
 on: September 08, 2026, 05:15:49 PM 
Started by alani123 - Last post by yhiaali3
And since the law is so flexible, they can punish one company and not punish another for the same thing. This is EU policy, and Binance plays by their rules.
Try doing the same in the US, and the company will face different consequences.
How so? I mean, is the application of the law selective and does it differ from person to person or from company to company? And on what basis is the selection made? Is it based on interests or on personal relationships and influence?

I understand such things here in my country and in developing countries in general, where the law is not applied to everyone, but rather is selected according to interests and influence, but is this the same thing for Europe and the United States?

 2 
 on: September 08, 2026, 01:33:22 PM 
Started by Majestic-milf - Last post by 2stout
The 2 party system isn't enshrined in law but because it's been so entrenched for so long, it seems to be de facto law.  The example you mention about the street vendors is what is referred to as the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law.

I wouldn't call the parties outside of the major 2 simple.  It's just that it simply take time and lots of $$$ to establish a real foothold and then after that establish a true presence.  

Why waste time and money if you don't have to comply with stupid laws?
Recently, on September 1st, a law came into force in Russia that regulates cryptocurrency exchange and adds many restrictions.
I was at a cryptocurrency exchange. They removed their billboards and signs from the business center and now operate behind closed doors.
"It's an old saying that it's impossible to enforce too many laws." Cheesy

Depends on what the laws are, are they being enforced, and the potential consequences and legal costs if those laws are enforced.  In your example about the cryptocurrency exchange, it seems that exchange took the strategy of out of sight, out of mind.  And, perhaps the authorities will look the other way.  But, would one risk their funds potentially being frozen and/or confiscated by gambling that enforcement won't happen?

 3 
 on: September 08, 2026, 10:38:57 AM 
Started by alani123 - Last post by zasad@
As a lawyer, I can tell you that only a court can establish a violation of the law. And until a court decision is reached, Binance hasn't violated anything de jure. Grin
I agree that Binance has not broken any European law so far, but it intends to. Cheesy
Of course, the law does not punish intentions but punishes actions after they have been committed, so until that time no one has the right to hold Binance accountable.

Binance isn't going by the letter of the law and playing it safe here for sure. They want business to continue at any cost.
It is clear that Binance intends not to comply but as I pointed out in my previous post the law punishes actions, not intentions, so we must wait for the violation to occur and then see the European Union’s decision against Binance.
Europe can impose strict restrictions and sanctions, but they try to be flexible.
And since the law is so flexible, they can punish one company and not punish another for the same thing. This is EU policy, and Binance plays by their rules.
Try doing the same in the US, and the company will face different consequences.

 4 
 on: September 07, 2026, 06:03:55 PM 
Started by Majestic-milf - Last post by zasad@
The 2 party system isn't enshrined in law but because it's been so entrenched for so long, it seems to be de facto law.  The example you mention about the street vendors is what is referred to as the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law.

I wouldn't call the parties outside of the major 2 simple.  It's just that it simply take time and lots of $$$ to establish a real foothold and then after that establish a true presence.  

Why waste time and money if you don't have to comply with stupid laws?
Recently, on September 1st, a law came into force in Russia that regulates cryptocurrency exchange and adds many restrictions.
I was at a cryptocurrency exchange. Тhey removed their billboards and signs from the business center and now operate behind closed doors.
"It's an old saying that it's impossible to enforce too many laws." Cheesy

 5 
 on: September 07, 2026, 05:49:08 PM 
Started by bbc.reporter - Last post by zasad@
@zasad@. The gay associations in America joining the protests against the Clarity act will certainly imply that it is the Democrats who are behind these protests heheeheheh!

In any case, the rating for the Clarity act is still very much low on 17%, however, the stocks of Circle and Coinbase are pumping like traders of those markets are expecting an approval.
Opinion of the US Senator
https://x.com/SenLummis/status/2096644344795246746
"If the Clarity Act doesn’t pass this Congress, the next real opportunity to bring market structure legislation back up is 2030. That’s years of jobs, investment, and tax revenue we can avoid squandering if we finish this now."

But you understand that this is just another news item and nothing more.

 6 
 on: September 07, 2026, 05:32:16 PM 
Started by zasad@ - Last post by zasad@
Thus it's much easier to imply any sort of sanctions onto trading parties! You can't stop third world countries from using USD in their dark deals. What about totally observable transaction on the blockchain? You can switch off entire continents with that thing! So if one has CBDC and trades it for any blockchain assets he/she might be put under the rock and a hard place just being wrong time wrong place? I mean by be observed in such digital transparency as BTC gives?
If I understand your point correctly, CBDC is digital slavery. If you think about it further, today we have banks and CBDC, but in the future, banks will be integrated into the CBDC system, and traditional cashless payments will no longer exist. One click of a button, and a person no longer has an account or money.

 7 
 on: September 07, 2026, 03:57:46 PM 
Started by bbc.reporter - Last post by Z-tight
The US government needs this law because it represents a huge potential for investment that is essential for continued market competition.
I couldn't agree more with this, it is just crazy that there are too many oppositions to this law, especially from the Democrats. I believe it counts for something that the National Sheriffs' Association have changed their position, but it would have counted for more if they changed it to 'support', but anyway, a neutral position is much better than opposition.
In any case, the rating for the Clarity act is still very much low on 17%,
I can understand why it is this low, there is no new information to suggest that an approval is imminent. I support an approval, but i'd be surprised if that's what we get.

 8 
 on: September 07, 2026, 05:44:58 AM 
Started by Majestic-milf - Last post by 2stout


It's more like being strong armed as opposed to a social contract, because the people are not satisfied and politicians have chosen their voters with the gerrymander.  The race with the most choice is Senator as there are no districts or electoral college, but money still does talk as in flooding the airwave with misinformation and lies.
People are often dissatisfied, but if they are dissatisfied, no one is stopping them from organizing their own party or running for other political office in their state. In the US, state laws sometimes vary greatly.
If the government starts initiating criminal and administrative cases against undesirable politicians and activists and jailing the most prominent representatives, then in my opinion, this could be coercion, but so far we haven't seen that.

Actually, there have been plenty instances of this already with the current administration- see James Comey, Ras Baraka, Letitia James, etc:  "If the government starts initiating criminal and administrative cases against undesirable politicians and activists and jailing the most prominent representatives, then in my opinion, this could be coercion, but so far we haven't seen that."

"People are often dissatisfied, but if they are dissatisfied, no one is stopping them from organizing their own party or running for other political office in their state. In the US, state laws sometimes vary greatly."  People have run for office due to dissatisfaction with the status quo and yes, even though small and usually doesn't make the news, a lot of states have upwards of 3 parties but the big 2 still dominate.
If you take the law literally, it's difficult to change this system. But if you think of the law more broadly, encompassing the entirety of those who enforce it, then you, as citizens who enforce it, can change it.
A simple example from Russia: the law prohibits street vending, but no one complies. The police tell citizens there will be an inspection tomorrow and ask them not to trade. The inspection comes, they report that the law is being observed, and the next day everything is back to normal. The police accept that it's better for people to earn money through minor administrative violations than to engage in criminal activity.
Simple parties may have no chance of winning, but they are not obligated to comply with stupid laws.

The 2 party system isn't enshrined in law but because it's been so entrenched for so long, it seems to be de facto law.  The example you mention about the street vendors is what is referred to as the spirit of the law vs the letter of the law.

I wouldn't call the parties outside of the major 2 simple.  It's just that it simply take time and lots of $$$ to establish a real foothold and then after that establish a true presence.  

 9 
 on: September 07, 2026, 12:48:51 AM 
Started by bbc.reporter - Last post by bbc.reporter
@zasad@. The gay associations in America joining the protests against the Clarity act will certainly imply that it is the Democrats who are behind these protests heheeheheh!

In any case, the rating for the Clarity act is still very much low on 17%, however, the stocks of Circle and Coinbase are pumping like traders of those markets are expecting an approval.

 10 
 on: September 06, 2026, 03:43:32 PM 
Started by zasad@ - Last post by user210822
Thus it's much easier to imply any sort of sanctions onto trading parties! You can't stop third world countries from using USD in their dark deals. What about totally observable transaction on the blockchain? You can switch off entire continents with that thing! So if one has CBDC and trades it for any blockchain assets he/she might be put under the rock and a hard place just being wrong time wrong place? I mean by be observed in such digital transparency as BTC gives?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!