Bitcoin could be the answer to charity transparency

[LakeBTC]

Because of the nature of the currency, each Bitcoin is unique and all transactions are traceable. It is therefore possible for donors to see exactly how their money is spent.

New online currencies such as Bitcoin could be the answer to charities becoming more transparent over how they spend donations, says a report released today by the Charities Aid Foundation, here



https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/media-office/press-releases/2015/0605-bitcoin-transparency.aspx

[medUSA]

New online currencies such as Bitcoin could be the answer to charities becoming more transparent over how they spend donations, says a report released today by the Charities Aid Foundation, here

Not really. We can see how much bitcoin donations charities received, but we have no way of knowing how they were spent. We probably can't trace the coins back to the anonymous donator either.

[Amph]

i remember that they were doing donations to charity to preserve their anonymity, despite knowing that bitcoin doesn't offer 100% anon, now they said that they use it because of transparency? weird...

[H.W.Z]

“However, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that these kinds of currencies are still in their infancy, and charities should be wary of the potential risks that may arise as they develop.”

Bitcoin donation is transparent but only the fiat money can be spent by them due to the scarce bitcoin accepting merchants for them. So to avoid the risk of the price volatile, they probably need a bitcoin payment processor.

[louise123]

Because of the nature of the currency, each Bitcoin is unique and all transactions are traceable. It is therefore possible for donors to see exactly how their money is spent.

New online currencies such as Bitcoin could be the answer to charities becoming more transparent over how they spend donations, says a report released today by the Charities Aid Foundation, here



https://www.cafonline.org/about-us/media-office/press-releases/2015/0605-bitcoin-transparency.aspx

No, not really.
You can see how much money they have received but not exactly how they were spent.
A charity will cash out coins, then you will have no clue what they did with it.

[thebigtalk]

i remember that they were doing donations to charity to preserve their anonymity, despite knowing that bitcoin doesn't offer 100% anon, now they said that they use it because of transparency? weird...

I didn't think that would be possible and will ever be. I mean it's all traceable and you're right, bitcoin doesn't offer 100% anonymity in any case.

[Light]

No, not really.
You can see how much money they have received but not exactly how they were spent.
A charity will cash out coins, then you will have no clue what they did with it.

Exactly, just because you can you see where the coins are going to - you can't actually tie any of the addresses to another entity/person. This means you don't actually know if they've simply gone into someone's pocket or are actually being spent properly.The only way it would work is if both parties continually signed messages to prove they are transferring funds to actual causes and then posting those.

[Shindo1988]

No, not really.
You can see how much money they have received but not exactly how they were spent.
A charity will cash out coins, then you will have no clue what they did with it.

Exactly, just because you can you see where the coins are going to - you can't actually tie any of the addresses to another entity/person. This means you don't actually know if they've simply gone into someone's pocket or are actually being spent properly.The only way it would work is if both parties continually signed messages to prove they are transferring funds to actual causes and then posting those.

Speaking from personal experience, most of the charities I have met, their owners or organizers put most of the money in their pockets.
They give a bit of something to the ones the money were supposed to go to, make a big deal about giving to the needy,
and they look like heroes while they should have been put in jail.

[Light]

Speaking from personal experience, most of the charities I have met, their owners or organizers put most of the money in their pockets.
They give a bit of something to the ones the money were supposed to go to, make a big deal about giving to the needy,
and they look like heroes while they should have been put in jail.

Or they just make themselves the CEO and somehow manage to justify getting paid upwards of $500,000 without actually committing any illegal fraud. The only way to stop these people is just not to donate to those charities - but the truth of the matter is that in most cases charities focus on paying themselves just as much as they do on helping those in need. The only real charities that I might trust would be those by billionaire philanthropists (as long as they contribute to it themselves i.e. Bill Gates) as they don't need your money and are thus less likely to steal it.

[Undermood]

Speaking from personal experience, most of the charities I have met, their owners or organizers put most of the money in their pockets.
They give a bit of something to the ones the money were supposed to go to, make a big deal about giving to the needy,
and they look like heroes while they should have been put in jail.

Or they just make themselves the CEO and somehow manage to justify getting paid upwards of $500,000 without actually committing any illegal fraud. The only way to stop these people is just not to donate to those charities - but the truth of the matter is that in most cases charities focus on paying themselves just as much as they do on helping those in need. The only real charities that I might trust would be those by billionaire philanthropists (as long as they contribute to it themselves i.e. Bill Gates) as they don't need your money and are thus less likely to steal it.

For the charity they add new method of donation. But the donators, if you don't know the charity and CEO, don't send any of your bitcion to them. A lot of scams are around.

[Shindo1988]

Speaking from personal experience, most of the charities I have met, their owners or organizers put most of the money in their pockets.
They give a bit of something to the ones the money were supposed to go to, make a big deal about giving to the needy,
and they look like heroes while they should have been put in jail.

Or they just make themselves the CEO and somehow manage to justify getting paid upwards of $500,000 without actually committing any illegal fraud. The only way to stop these people is just not to donate to those charities - but the truth of the matter is that in most cases charities focus on paying themselves just as much as they do on helping those in need. The only real charities that I might trust would be those by billionaire philanthropists (as long as they contribute to it themselves i.e. Bill Gates) as they don't need your money and are thus less likely to steal it.

That is true, Bill and Melinda (his wife) have donated hundreds of millions of dollars both to their charity organization as well as others worldwide.
And AFAIK there are many other famous people that do that too, Angelina Jolie for one.

Those people I have absolutely no problem donating to their charity organizations.
I know they are not doing it for the money.

[Kaneki]

Because of the nature of the currency, each Bitcoin is unique and all transactions are traceable. It is therefore possible for donors to see exactly how their money is spent.

I think this is not entirely true, the user bitcoin transaction or in this case the charity group can perform privacy protection if it does not want the transaction can be tracked.

[MUFC]

New online currencies such as Bitcoin could be the answer to charities becoming more transparent over how they spend donations, says a report released today by the Charities Aid Foundation, here

Not really. We can see how much bitcoin donations charities received, but we have no way of knowing how they were spent. We probably can't trace the coins back to the anonymous donator either.

Usually charities are already quite open with the donations they receive and what goes where. I think they even have to be by law in a lot of countries to clamp down on wrongdoing.

i remember that they were doing donations to charity to preserve their anonymity, despite knowing that bitcoin doesn't offer 100% anon, now they said that they use it because of transparency? weird...

It provides anonymity in that you don't know the person who sent it. If I donate with my creditcard that info will forever be stored somewhere and my real name and identity will be exposed (possibly even publicly in some scenarios). If the money just comes from 14TiiZRzqYv9t14jQ8UBhbCmmeDed6GPyh then the most someone could find was that it came from MUFC but I could send money from an address not tied to me if I wanted further anonymity.