Bitcoin Exchange Gemini Approved for Launch in New York

[Kprawn]

There is no big rush to buy at the moment... I hoped to see some more action by now.. I guess it's better to give it some time to give traders a chance to get accustomed with the

new kid on the block. 

It's still early days and virgin territory for most investors in Crypto currencies, but they will eventually get there.  It's just a pity that you have to adhere to all those KYC/AML

regulations. 

[1715244764]

1715244764

[1715244764]

1715244764

[1715244764]

1715244764

[1715244764]

1715244764

[UserVVIP]

I believe that gemini and new york need to lessen there laws.


NY isn't helping anyone by not allowing ppl to use btc.

[Keyser Soze]

The AML/KYC requirements should be of no surprise to anyone. It sounds similar to what you would need to open a bank account or brokerage account.

It is still early, but I am sure volume will pick up in the coming weeks. Takes time for people to sign up and fund accounts...

[Gleb Gamow]

I assume this is 24/7/365 trading and not ending at the bell, correct?

[maku]

I believe that gemini and new york need to lessen there laws.


NY isn't helping anyone by not allowing ppl to use btc.

That is the point. I am surprised that Winklevii really subjected to BitLicense, I have a grim feeling that opening Gemini under New York jurisdiction is just publicity stunt aimed to show people that Bitcoin business in NY can be successful. Time will tell if I was right.

[mayax]

You forget something which must be VERY important to BTC community. It seems it was forgotten; The anonymity. The core of BTC.

Gemini, Coinbase and others like them are bringing what you didn't want.... regulation, taxes, GOVs which will know everything you make with your coins and so on.

How is with stories like BTC is made for anonymity, privacy?

[n2004al]

You forget something which must be VERY important to BTC community. It seems it was forgotten; The anonymity. The core of BTC.

Gemini, Coinbase and others like them are bringing what you didn't want.... regulation, taxes, GOVs which will know everything you make with your coins and so on.

How is with stories like BTC is made for anonymity, privacy?

Bitcoin must be regulated. There is no other way if bitcoin will want to survive, to have the right to be and to have the same status as the other currencies. The anonymity of bitcoin can be used, or better misused, from the evildoers. This can cause only bad reputation and banning of it from every country. Everyone which love bitcoin must fight that it can be accepted through the regulations in its country.

[DooMAD]

Bitcoin must be regulated. There is no other way if bitcoin will want to survive, to have the right to be and to have the same status as the other currencies. The anonymity of bitcoin can be used, or better misused, from the evildoers. This can cause only bad reputation and banning of it from every country. Everyone which love bitcoin must fight that it can be accepted through the regulations in its country.

Maybe while we're at it, we can set up some credit reference agencies to lose all our personal data.  

Adding central points of failure doesn't make the system better.  Certain Bitcoin services should be regulated if they deal with fiat, but the network itself would only be weakened by adding authorities to hoard personal data or decide what should and shouldn't be allowed.

Should the Bitcoin protocol be regulated?

In short, no. Every so often, someone calls for Bitcoin to be centrally regulated by a trusted body in the mistaken belief that it would help prevent scams, thefts and frauds. Although it sounds like a good idea, this is actually a dangerous line of thinking and could potentially jeopardise Bitcoin's future.

Bitcoin is designed as a transaction between two people, without relying on a trusted third party. Any attempt to add regulation to the protocol would introduce a controlling third party, which could potentially block, freeze or otherwise restrict transactions. This would damage Bitcoin's fungibility and could break the currency as a whole. Once a regulator has control, there is nothing to stop them doing what they like. There's also no evidence to suggest that central regulation would in fact lessen the number of thefts or scams.

People who ask for Bitcoin to be centrally regulated are generally considered to have misunderstood the fundamental concept of the Bitcoin network. Bitcoin is decentralised by design, as this guarantees it being neutral, incorruptible and secure. See the "Why is decentralisation important?" section to explain further.

It's good that people have the option to use a regulated exchange if that's what makes them feel secure, but that choice shouldn't be forced on everyone.

[mayax]

Bitcoin must be regulated. There is no other way if bitcoin will want to survive, to have the right to be and to have the same status as the other currencies. The anonymity of bitcoin can be used, or better misused, from the evildoers. This can cause only bad reputation and banning of it from every country. Everyone which love bitcoin must fight that it can be accepted through the regulations in its country.

Maybe while we're at it, we can set up some credit reference agencies to lose all our personal data.  

Adding central points of failure doesn't make the system better.  Certain Bitcoin services should be regulated if they deal with fiat, but the network itself would only be weakened by adding authorities to hoard personal data or decide what should and shouldn't be allowed.

Should the Bitcoin protocol be regulated?

In short, no. Every so often, someone calls for Bitcoin to be centrally regulated by a trusted body in the mistaken belief that it would help prevent scams, thefts and frauds. Although it sounds like a good idea, this is actually a dangerous line of thinking and could potentially jeopardise Bitcoin's future.

Bitcoin is designed as a transaction between two people, without relying on a trusted third party. Any attempt to add regulation to the protocol would introduce a controlling third party, which could potentially block, freeze or otherwise restrict transactions. This would damage Bitcoin's fungibility and could break the currency as a whole. Once a regulator has control, there is nothing to stop them doing what they like. There's also no evidence to suggest that central regulation would in fact lessen the number of thefts or scams.

People who ask for Bitcoin to be centrally regulated are generally considered to have misunderstood the fundamental concept of the Bitcoin network. Bitcoin is decentralised by design, as this guarantees it being neutral, incorruptible and secure. See the "Why is decentralisation important?" section to explain further.

It's good that people have the option to use a regulated exchange if that's what makes them feel secure, but that choice shouldn't be forced on everyone.

To be regulated means that the GOVs know about you, you will pay taxes and so on. Regulations for an exchanger means to be a financial company like any other existing one.

My question is: Why would I use BTC in this case while I already have a bank account, credit cards, debit cards, traditional financial instruments?

Why would I need Bitcoin if I am forced to provide the same documents in order to buy and sell BTC as I provide to any bank?

More than that, I can pay more quickly by using a credit card for example and almost any merchant is accepting credit cards these days...

[DooMAD]

Bitcoin must be regulated. There is no other way if bitcoin will want to survive, to have the right to be and to have the same status as the other currencies. The anonymity of bitcoin can be used, or better misused, from the evildoers. This can cause only bad reputation and banning of it from every country. Everyone which love bitcoin must fight that it can be accepted through the regulations in its country.

Maybe while we're at it, we can set up some credit reference agencies to lose all our personal data.  

Adding central points of failure doesn't make the system better.  Certain Bitcoin services should be regulated if they deal with fiat, but the network itself would only be weakened by adding authorities to hoard personal data or decide what should and shouldn't be allowed.

Should the Bitcoin protocol be regulated?

In short, no. Every so often, someone calls for Bitcoin to be centrally regulated by a trusted body in the mistaken belief that it would help prevent scams, thefts and frauds. Although it sounds like a good idea, this is actually a dangerous line of thinking and could potentially jeopardise Bitcoin's future.

Bitcoin is designed as a transaction between two people, without relying on a trusted third party. Any attempt to add regulation to the protocol would introduce a controlling third party, which could potentially block, freeze or otherwise restrict transactions. This would damage Bitcoin's fungibility and could break the currency as a whole. Once a regulator has control, there is nothing to stop them doing what they like. There's also no evidence to suggest that central regulation would in fact lessen the number of thefts or scams.

People who ask for Bitcoin to be centrally regulated are generally considered to have misunderstood the fundamental concept of the Bitcoin network. Bitcoin is decentralised by design, as this guarantees it being neutral, incorruptible and secure. See the "Why is decentralisation important?" section to explain further.

It's good that people have the option to use a regulated exchange if that's what makes them feel secure, but that choice shouldn't be forced on everyone.

To be regulated means that the GOVs know about you, you will pay taxes and so on. Regulations for an exchanger means to be a financial company like any other existing one.

My question is: Why would I use BTC in this case while I already have a bank account, credit cards, debit cards, traditional financial instruments?

Why would I need Bitcoin if I am forced to provide the same documents in order to buy and sell BTC as I provide to any bank?

That's what I'm saying, you shouldn't be forced.  If some people want to use a regulated and insured exchange to have guarantees that they'll get their funds back if someone tries to run off with them, they'll have to counterbalance that with the cost of everything that regulation entails.  Like handing over identifiable information and the possibility of those details being lost or stolen.  For those who don't want to use a regulated exchange and feel their information and privacy is more important to them that the value of their funds, they can use one of the many other unlicensed exchanges.  Their personal details will be safer, but their money potentially less so, as it won't be insured against loss or theft.  It's a fair tradeoff.

Although better still would be a system where users aren't trusting their funds to a third party at all, since it rather defeats the point of a peer to peer network.  It's already possible to trade certain altcoins directly from one blockchain to another without using an exchange, but fiat-to-crypto is a more difficult problem to crack.

 

[Febo]

You forget something which must be VERY important to BTC community. It seems it was forgotten; The anonymity. The core of BTC.

Gemini, Coinbase and others like them are bringing what you didn't want.... regulation, taxes, GOVs which will know everything you make with your coins and so on.

How is with stories like BTC is made for anonymity, privacy?

Bitcoin never was anonym. Lots people still think it is, but even if you have no tech knoleage and only monitor press you see it is not. Monero is coin with anonymity features.

My question is: Why would I use BTC in this case while I already have a bank account, credit cards, debit cards, traditional financial instruments?

Because is cheaper and faster (maybe right now in many cases that is not correct but in long run should be).

[chennan]

You forget something which must be VERY important to BTC community. It seems it was forgotten; The anonymity. The core of BTC.

Gemini, Coinbase and others like them are bringing what you didn't want.... regulation, taxes, GOVs which will know everything you make with your coins and so on.

How is with stories like BTC is made for anonymity, privacy?

Bitcoin never was anonym. Lots people still think it is, but even if you have no tech knoleage and only monitor press you see it is not. Monero is coin with anonymity features.

Monero is the head leader of the cryptonite PoW structure, but there are a lot of other cryptonite coins out there.  But I totally agree with you. A majority of people still think that Bitcoin is completely anonymous while not realizing it's pseudonymous or what that really means.

With bitcoins blockchain you can trace every single transaction that ever happened to certain wallet addresses.  With Cryptonite coins like Monero, it utilizes a way to build in a "mixer" that mixes up coins in a certain block and then it pays out to the corresponding wallets, giving it more of an anonymous feature.

[mayax]

You forget something which must be VERY important to BTC community. It seems it was forgotten; The anonymity. The core of BTC.

Gemini, Coinbase and others like them are bringing what you didn't want.... regulation, taxes, GOVs which will know everything you make with your coins and so on.

How is with stories like BTC is made for anonymity, privacy?

Bitcoin never was anonym. Lots people still think it is, but even if you have no tech knoleage and only monitor press you see it is not. Monero is coin with anonymity features.

My question is: Why would I use BTC in this case while I already have a bank account, credit cards, debit cards, traditional financial instruments?

Because is cheaper and faster (maybe right now in many cases that is not correct but in long run should be).

Cheaper and faster? I can buy anything I want with credit cards/debit cards for "free"(no fee) and in a blink of eye. What you mean with BTC is cheaper and faster? Now, you are waiting 15 min or more for a transaction to be confirmed.

[toinew]

Bitcoin only charge you about 0.0001BTC-0.0002BTC or 2-5 cents per transaction.
Furthermore, there are places where you can pay with bitcoin instantly with shops which accept 0 confirmation

your argument about low fees for bitcoin transaction is invalid since the main source of income for miners will gradually become the fees (source : Satoshi)
Miners and banks will very soon have a common way of making money.

I mean come on, all the network is deemed to works on fees, and you're not even mentionning it

[errornone]

what are the advantages of gemini VS coinbase?

[mayax]

You forget something which must be VERY important to BTC community. It seems it was forgotten; The anonymity. The core of BTC.

Gemini, Coinbase and others like them are bringing what you didn't want.... regulation, taxes, GOVs which will know everything you make with your coins and so on.

How is with stories like BTC is made for anonymity, privacy?

Bitcoin never was anonym. Lots people still think it is, but even if you have no tech knoleage and only monitor press you see it is not. Monero is coin with anonymity features.

My question is: Why would I use BTC in this case while I already have a bank account, credit cards, debit cards, traditional financial instruments?

Because is cheaper and faster (maybe right now in many cases that is not correct but in long run should be).

Cheaper and faster? I can buy anything I want with credit cards/debit cards for "free"(no fee) and in a blink of eye. What you mean with BTC is cheaper and faster? Now, you are waiting 15 min or more for a transaction to be confirmed.

Don't you know that bank charge few percent (usually 1%-3%) from every transaction with credit cards/debit cards? Bitcoin only charge you about 0.0001BTC-0.0002BTC or 2-5 cents per transaction.
Furthermore, there are places where you can pay with bitcoin instantly with shops which accept 0 confirmation

I am charged with 0% (nothing) for any online shopping that I make by debit cards/credit cards. That's why I am asking "Why would I use BTC in this case while I already have a bank account, credit cards, debit cards, traditional financial instruments?"

[n2004al]

Bitcoin must be regulated. There is no other way if bitcoin will want to survive, to have the right to be and to have the same status as the other currencies. The anonymity of bitcoin can be used, or better misused, from the evildoers. This can cause only bad reputation and banning of it from every country. Everyone which love bitcoin must fight that it can be accepted through the regulations in its country.

Maybe while we're at it, we can set up some credit reference agencies to lose all our personal data.  

Adding central points of failure doesn't make the system better.  Certain Bitcoin services should be regulated if they deal with fiat, but the network itself would only be weakened by adding authorities to hoard personal data or decide what should and shouldn't be allowed.

I don't understand what do you mean with "network" but if "the network" you wrote above mean blockchain (for you) you must know that blockchain and bitcoin are two different concepts and not the same thing. They have to do with each other and cannot exist without each other but are two different things.  The regulation of bitcoin have nothing to do with blockchain but only with bitcoin and its use as a currency.

[DooMAD]

Bitcoin must be regulated. There is no other way if bitcoin will want to survive, to have the right to be and to have the same status as the other currencies. The anonymity of bitcoin can be used, or better misused, from the evildoers. This can cause only bad reputation and banning of it from every country. Everyone which love bitcoin must fight that it can be accepted through the regulations in its country.

Maybe while we're at it, we can set up some credit reference agencies to lose all our personal data.  

Adding central points of failure doesn't make the system better.  Certain Bitcoin services should be regulated if they deal with fiat, but the network itself would only be weakened by adding authorities to hoard personal data or decide what should and shouldn't be allowed.

I don't understand what do you mean with "network" but if "the network" you wrote above mean blockchain (for you) you must know that blockchain and bitcoin are two different concepts and not the same thing. They have to do with each other and cannot exist without each other but are two different things.  The regulation of bitcoin have nothing to do with blockchain but only with bitcoin and its use as a currency.

Services that use Bitcoin, like exchanges, web wallets and merchants can be regulated if that's what the regions they operate in require.  But people will always have the option of using a service that's not regulated if that's what they prefer.  Any nation or jurisdiction can try to impose regulations on the general use of Bitcoin if they want, but they're not going to have much success with that.  For starters, not all jurisdictions will agree on how it should be regulated and, secondly, it's about as productive as trying to regulate peer-to-peer file-sharing.  It can't be done.  Bitcoin is self regulating.  The protocol determines what is and is not permissible, not regulators.  

Also, regulation in practice does very little to stop "the evildoers" as you call them, as we don't do regulation properly anymore.  Banks and investment firms are regulated, but they're still a bunch of lowlife, criminal scum.  This is because regulators tend to be as corrupt as the governments responsible for implementing them.  If it benefits the financial sector to only be subject to the occasional slap on the wrist when they've done something illegal, then the regulators won't be too harsh on them.  It's just another one of the many frauds that Bitcoin is better equipped to fight without so-called regulation.  To hell with the bean counters, the middlemen and the other useless third party intermediary puppets that do little else but bog down the system in red tape and bureaucracy.

Something enforced in code is far more powerful and robust than something supposedly enforced in law.

[Sir Lagsalot]

I expect Gemini to be just another Bitcoin bank, much the same as Coinbase or Circle. The goal of such services, as stated by Jeremy Allaire, is to make Bitcoin "part of the global banking order." Bitcoin was designed as an alternative to that broken, fraudulent system and no amount of FUD about "evildoers" will change that.

Please help me get the word out, to newbies especially, that decentralised exchanges and those which don't demand all your Personally Identifying Information are the only way to go! I wrote a newbie-friendly guide which covers the disadvantages of Bitcoin banks in comparison to services like LocalBitcoins.

[mayax]

I expect Gemini to be just another Bitcoin bank, much the same as Coinbase or Circle. The goal of such services, as stated by Jeremy Allaire, is to make Bitcoin "part of the global banking order." Bitcoin was designed as an alternative to that broken, fraudulent system and no amount of FUD about "evildoers" will change that.

Please help me get the word out, to newbies especially, that decentralised exchanges and those which don't demand all your Personally Identifying Information are the only way to go! I wrote a newbie-friendly guide which covers the disadvantages of Bitcoin banks in comparison to services like LocalBitcoins.

You are right but as you can see, the people trust more in "regulation"(control). Now, Bitcoin wanted to be an anonymous and free e-currency which it is not. Why? Because the regulations  made it to be as any other e-currency from market.
More than that, it's hard to be used and it's not cheap at all.

Why would a newbie use Bitcoin instead Paypal? There are is no advantage in using Bitcoin anymore. You have to provide a lot of documents in order to fund and to cash out Bitcoin...same as with Paypal.