Policing Bitcoin brought to you by Gavin Andresen

[yayayo]

Listen up, law-abiding citizen, what your honorable CIA-fellow and altcoin developer Gavin Andresen is doing for your safety:

https://forum.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-discussion/announcing-the-blockchain-alliance-t1601.html#p3635

There has always been a split among bitcoiners on how best to interact with regulators and law enforcement.

There is the "ignore them, they're illegitimate. Honey Badger don't care" side.

And there's the "engage them, educate them, show them the positive benefits to balance the negatives that are, otherwise, probably the only thing they see" side.

I still think engaging is the best strategy. Yes, there will be more failures like the BitLicense, but overall I think every positive interaction with law enforcement or regulators helps move opinions from "Bitcoin is Evil and must be eliminated" towards "Bitcoin is an innovative technology that should be allowed to grow."

And no, I don't think "we" will compromise the technology or our deeply held beliefs because we interact with "them."

At least, I know I won't. If you are worried that talking to the FBI about the latest version of CryptoLocker might corrupt your morals, then great-- nobody will twist your arm to participate.

What a great idea and joyful day for all of us. As always Gavin is working hard to advance freedom on all fronts.

Now stay calm and trust the authorities!


ya.ya.yo!

[1714298125]

1714298125

[1714298125]

1714298125

[1714298125]

1714298125

[1714298125]

1714298125

[1714298125]

1714298125

[neurotypical]

I just don't get the concept of trying to regulate Bitcoin to be honest. Do they regulate TCP/IP? Ultimately Bitcoin is just that, a protocol. A guy may or not do evil things on the internet, that doesn't mean they regulate the protocol itself, they regulate whatever services are provided through the protocol. This is nonsense to me. Bitcoin will reach a point where the tech allows for anonymity that makes it trying to tax it or regulate it a losing game.

[brg444]

I just don't get the concept of trying to regulate Bitcoin to be honest. Do they regulate TCP/IP? Ultimately Bitcoin is just that, a protocol. A guy may or not do evil things on the internet, that doesn't mean they regulate the protocol itself, they regulate whatever services are provided through the protocol. This is nonsense to me. Bitcoin will reach a point where the tech allows for anonymity that makes it trying to tax it or regulate it a losing game.

It's all about attempting to undermine the trust users while they still can.

It will fail. Miserably.

Gavin & all of these banking parasites will be looked back on as merely a footnote in Bitcoin's history.

[Kprawn]

He lost the lead engineer position {by choice} then realized what he gave up, and joined forces with Mike Hearn to get it back.. They thought they had much more support and

could bring about a hostile takeover and also sneak in some government back doors, but they failed. Now they are out to sabotage and divide the Bitcoin community, and to hand

over the power to the competition. {GovCoins / BankCoins .....} If they lose the fight, they will side with the competition, mark my words.  It's all about power and glory. It has

nothing to do with the development and improvement suggested by the two sides. We will just be the casualties of war, when the war is done.   

[runam0k]

Jeez, you guys are bitter.

Why even get upset about this? It isn't meant for you, it's meant for other perfectly legitimate members of the Bitcoin ecosystem -- those that believe that educating and assisting regulators and law enforcement may actually help Bitcoin in its journey towards mainstream acceptance. They may or may not be misguided in that viewpoint, but we know full well those government entities are looking at Bitcoin regardless and with virtually no positive voices to shape their view. Adoption in the US continues to be very significantly stunted, primarily because of Bitcoin's bad rep. Maybe this - alongside all the other initiatives - can help.

None of this will stop you using Bitcoin.

[brg444]

Jeez, you guys are bitter.

Why even get upset about this? It isn't meant for you, it's meant for other perfectly legitimate members of the Bitcoin ecosystem -- those that believe that educating and assisting regulators and law enforcement may actually help Bitcoin in its journey towards mainstream acceptance. They may or may not be misguided in that viewpoint, but we know full well those government entities are looking at Bitcoin regardless and with virtually no positive voices to shape their view. Adoption in the US continues to be very significantly stunted, primarily because of Bitcoin's bad rep. Maybe this - alongside all the other initiatives - can help.

None of this will stop you using Bitcoin.

It certainly won't but it implies huge invasion of privacy and typical Big Brother attitude we have been accustomed to from the states.

Surprising? No. Disappointing that it would get support from a majority of Bitcoin businesses & misguided devs? Definitely.

You are right though. Honey badger don't care and these stupid schemes will only serve to provide more embarrassment in the future for any participants.

[Racey]

He lost the lead engineer position {by choice} then realized what he gave up, and joined forces with Mike Hearn to get it back.. They thought they had much more support and

could bring about a hostile takeover and also sneak in some government back doors, but they failed. Now they are out to sabotage and divide the Bitcoin community, and to hand

over the power to the competition. {GovCoins / BankCoins .....} If they lose the fight, they will side with the competition, mark my words.  It's all about power and glory. It has

nothing to do with the development and improvement suggested by the two sides. We will just be the casualties of war, when the war is done.   

Quoting this for historical purposes, I think you are spot on, well said.

[SwagGirl]

As this moveent continues to grow  (and that is what crypto / decentralize is -  movement), the powers that be will become more and more  . I dont know how the govs will handle that in the long term but its inevitable. The only downside is that bad actors ie terrorists will be empowered as well - (privacy and anonymity)

[pedrog]

Listen up, law-abiding citizen, what your honorable CIA-fellow and altcoin developer Gavin Andresen is doing for your safety:

https://forum.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-discussion/announcing-the-blockchain-alliance-t1601.html#p3635

There has always been a split among bitcoiners on how best to interact with regulators and law enforcement.

There is the "ignore them, they're illegitimate. Honey Badger don't care" side.

And there's the "engage them, educate them, show them the positive benefits to balance the negatives that are, otherwise, probably the only thing they see" side.

I still think engaging is the best strategy. Yes, there will be more failures like the BitLicense, but overall I think every positive interaction with law enforcement or regulators helps move opinions from "Bitcoin is Evil and must be eliminated" towards "Bitcoin is an innovative technology that should be allowed to grow."

And no, I don't think "we" will compromise the technology or our deeply held beliefs because we interact with "them."

At least, I know I won't. If you are worried that talking to the FBI about the latest version of CryptoLocker might corrupt your morals, then great-- nobody will twist your arm to participate.

What a great idea and joyful day for all of us. As always Gavin is working hard to advance freedom on all fronts.

Now stay calm and trust the authorities!


ya.ya.yo!

Is Gavin's post supposed to be bad?

[odolvlobo]

Listen up, law-abiding citizen, what your honorable CIA-fellow and altcoin developer Gavin Andresen is doing for your safety:
https://forum.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-discussion/announcing-the-blockchain-alliance-t1601.html#p3635

Gavin is saying that it is a good idea to educate the people with the guns and cages so that they don't overreact and start using those guns and cages on you. I see nothing wrong with that. You can stick your head in the sand, but blinding yourself won't make those people leave you alone.

Maybe you think that Gavin is our "leader", or you think that the Bitcoin Alliance and the Bitcoin Foundation are in charge, and you are afraid that they are going to negotiate and capitulate. If that is what you think, then perhaps you should rethink the "leader" and "who is in charge" nonsense.

[johnyj]

I don't have a bad impression of law enforcement. I guess federal agents are much more experienced than Gavin security wise, they have sophisticated models to handle unknown threat, no need to educate them, they will get the essential of bitcoin pretty quick

But what those organization need to get educated is monetary knowledge. Once they fully understand that modern fiat money is a Ponzi scam, they will consider bitcoin more positively: comparing with the large scale scam of fiat money which is counted in trillions, bitcoin's illicit usage is nothing

[cjmoles]

Well, I certainly see Gavins point about some sort of regulations.  If it allows for a smoother transfer between USD to BTC that would be a good thing.  However, the thought of negotiating with an agency of whom we already know is doing underhanded things (Edward Snowden revelations) seems a little sketchy.  The government in the USA already tells its citizens what they can and cannot spend their hard earned money on....which s exactly why many use bitcoin in the first place....Hmmm.

[yayayo]

Listen up, law-abiding citizen, what your honorable CIA-fellow and altcoin developer Gavin Andresen is doing for your safety:
https://forum.bitcoin.com/bitcoin-discussion/announcing-the-blockchain-alliance-t1601.html#p3635

Gavin is saying that it is a good idea to educate the people with the guns and cages so that they don't overreact and start using those guns and cages on you. I see nothing wrong with that. You can stick your head in the sand, but blinding yourself won't make those people leave you alone.

Maybe you think that Gavin is our "leader", or you think that the Bitcoin Alliance and the Bitcoin Foundation are in charge, and you are afraid that they are going to negotiate and capitulate. If that is what you think, then perhaps you should rethink the "leader" and "who is in charge" nonsense.

I definitely do not think that Gavin is "our" "leader". He is just trying hard to push for governmental control through node centralization, blacklisting, and all the other fine things governmental control freaks use to take away your freedom.

To prevent that Bitcoin becomes government controlled slave-money improved privacy features like confidential transactions are urgently needed.

I don't have a bad impression of law enforcement. I guess federal agents are much more experienced than Gavin security wise, they have sophisticated models to handle unknown threat, no need to educate them, they will get the essential of bitcoin pretty quick

Like shoot first, verify suspicion later? Authorities' prime obligation is to consolidate the power of the government muppets in charge. People that think talking to authorities will advance freedom score 100% on the double-think indoctrination scale.

ya.ya.yo!

[cjmoles]

I don't know...I don't think the FBI would have oversight...it would be the CIA because bitcoin encompasses the world.  The CIA have already demonstrated that they lie, cheat, steal, snoop, kill, and various other illegal things.  Why trust them to stick their noses in our wallets?

[rebuilder]

So we should aim to educate people om what Bitcoin is and can do, as long as they're in no way associated with the government?

[medUSA]

Bitcoin will be regulated whether we like it or not. It is difficult to regulate our addresses and bitcoin wallets, it will be easy to regulate our bitcoin spending: when we buy physical goods from website, when we exchange for other crypto or fiat. Governments can force us to declare bitcoin ownership on our tax returns. I believe it is better to interact with regulators, to educate them that bitcoin is not an "evil" technology.

[brg444]

So we should aim to educate people om what Bitcoin is and can do, as long as they're in no way associated with the government?

Are we suppose to believe LAE are somehow stupid and can't figure out Bitcoin by themselves?

They seemed to do a good enough job in DPR's case.

I'll personally make sure to stay as far away as possible from any company involved in this "Bitcoin Alliance"

[brg444]

Bitcoin will be regulated whether we like it or not. It is difficult to regulate our addresses and bitcoin wallets, it will be easy to regulate our bitcoin spending: when we buy physical goods from website, when we exchange for other crypto or fiat. Governments can force us to declare bitcoin ownership on our tax returns. I believe it is better to interact with regulators, to educate them that bitcoin is not an "evil" technology.

Yeah that worked splendidly well with Lawsky heh 

And no, government will never force me to declare and report whatever amount of Bitcoin I possess. It is none of their business. 

[AdopterOfCoin]

Bitcoin will be regulated whether we like it or not. It is difficult to regulate our addresses and bitcoin wallets, it will be easy to regulate our bitcoin spending: when we buy physical goods from website, when we exchange for other crypto or fiat. Governments can force us to declare bitcoin ownership on our tax returns. I believe it is better to interact with regulators, to educate them that bitcoin is not an "evil" technology.

Yeah that worked splendidly well with Lawsky heh 

And no, government will never force me to declare and report whatever amount of Bitcoin I possess. It is none of their business. 

If the government treat bitcoin as money or property, you have to declare it.

[coinpr0n]

I'm not much for regulation myself but I also don't subscribe to the Gavin Conspiracy Theory. I think he is doing what he feels is right and everyone is allowed to make their own decisions.

[DooMAD]

I'm not much for regulation myself but I also don't subscribe to the Gavin Conspiracy Theory. I think he is doing what he feels is right and everyone is allowed to make their own decisions.

Absolutely.  It might sound a bit cornball, but Bitcoin can be all things to all people.  We know that the protocol itself can't be universally regulated by a single authority, so that's a non-issue.  Services can easily be regulated, but it's still ultimately the users' choice as to whether they opt to use a regulated service or an unregulated one.  It's a bit like the choice between Netflix and Bittorent.  There's room in this diverse world for both to thrive and, as you say, everyone is allowed to make their own decisions.

[yayayo]

I'm not much for regulation myself but I also don't subscribe to the Gavin Conspiracy Theory. I think he is doing what he feels is right and everyone is allowed to make their own decisions.

What conspiracy theory?

Fact #1: Gavin was invited by the CIA and accepted invitation.

Fact #2: Gavin founded the now mostly defunct Bitcoin Foundation.

Fact #3: Gavin together with Mike Hearn tried to initiate a non-consensus hardfork with a previously rejected XT-client that implements blacklisting.

Fact #4: Gavin again proves as a perfect servant of the establishment by supporting the blockchain alliance.

Fact #5: Gavin constantly tries to exert political influence on Core development via frequent media appearances.

Regardless if he is evil or hopelessly naive. His actions are damaging Bitcoin and couldn't be further from Satoshi's vision as engraved in the Genesis block.

ya.ya.yo!

[MbitSport]

Bitcoin will be regulated whether we like it or not. It is difficult to regulate our addresses and bitcoin wallets, it will be easy to regulate our bitcoin spending: when we buy physical goods from website, when we exchange for other crypto or fiat. Governments can force us to declare bitcoin ownership on our tax returns. I believe it is better to interact with regulators, to educate them that bitcoin is not an "evil" technology.

Yeah that worked splendidly well with Lawsky heh 

And no, government will never force me to declare and report whatever amount of Bitcoin I possess. It is none of their business. 

If the government treat bitcoin as money or property, you have to declare it.

I think it would be too hard for them to force people to declare their amount bitcoin, i do belive they'll try, don't get me wrong, but no way they could keep track of everyone's wallets, yeah maybe some will, but even those will probably only declare ONE of many wallets lol no chance in hell they'll manage (hope im not eating my words in 20 years time)

[brg444]

I'm not much for regulation myself but I also don't subscribe to the Gavin Conspiracy Theory. I think he is doing what he feels is right and everyone is allowed to make their own decisions.

What conspiracy theory?

Fact #1: Gavin was invited by the CIA and accepted invitation.

Fact #2: Gavin founded the now mostly defunct Bitcoin Foundation.

Fact #3: Gavin together with Mike Hearn tried to initiate a non-consensus hardfork with a previously rejected XT-client that implements blacklisting.

Fact #4: Gavin again proves as a perfect servant of the establishment by supporting the blockchain alliance.

Fact #5: Gavin constantly tries to exert political influence on Core development via frequent media appearances.

Regardless if he is evil or hopelessly naive. His actions are damaging Bitcoin and couldn't be further from Satoshi's vision as engraved in the Genesis block.

ya.ya.yo!

Couldn't have said it better.

And people say it's the guys over at Blockstream we should be concerned about 

[BruceFenton]

These words from Gavin originally were in response to a note I wrote criticizing the Blockchain Alliance (with FBI, DHS, ICE etc.)

I completely believe that Gavin wishes what is best for Bitcoin and has no bad intent.   I don't think he should be criticized for this -- we should all work to increase understanding and share ideas about the best ways to do so.

Bruce

[Envrin]

Gavin and Mike can sit and spin.

XT is going nowhere anyway...  miners have already voted, and they're not willing to adopt it, so Mike and Gavin might as well just talk to a cement wall.

[RawDog]

I just don't get the concept of trying to regulate Bitcoin to be honest. Do they regulate TCP/IP?

The Fed certainly does regulate TCP/IP.  Well, not the protocol but activity done on it.  Same for Bitcoin, they don't want to regulate the protocol - the protocol is in the wild and the Fed doesn't want to change it at all.   However, when child pornographers use TCP/IP to transmit kiddie porn, the regulators slam down the hammer.  Don't think you will be able to use the bitcoin protocol for illegal purposes, they will slam down the hammer on you.  They are trying to regulate the protocol - just the assholes who use it to advance their crimes.

[yayayo]

I think it would be too hard for them to force people to declare their amount bitcoin, i do belive they'll try, don't get me wrong, but no way they could keep track of everyone's wallets, yeah maybe some will, but even those will probably only declare ONE of many wallets lol no chance in hell they'll manage (hope im not eating my words in 20 years time)

I think you did not think it through. It's very easy to exert factual control over the vast majority of Bitcoin users if you implement blacklisting and use data analysis to track relations between all wallets combined with IP-addresses and information from external sources (identities, businesses etc.).

Governmental control will be greatly facilitated if Bitcoin's privacy features remain weak and node centralization occurs. (Gavin is openly denying the importance of these points.)

ya.ya.yo!

[yayayo]

These words from Gavin originally were in response to a note I wrote criticizing the Blockchain Alliance (with FBI, DHS, ICE etc.)

I completely believe that Gavin wishes what is best for Bitcoin and has no bad intent.   I don't think he should be criticized for this -- we should all work to increase understanding and share ideas about the best ways to do so.

Bruce

Whether his intentions are bad or not is irrelevant: His actions are a hazard for Bitcoin and deserve criticism.

He has become a burden to Bitcoin. Sadly, many people are blinded by his media presence, perceiving him as the most important developer, while he has barely contributed since over a year and most important work was/is done by others.

The sooner Gavin leaves Bitcoin alone the better.

ya.ya.yo!