California lawmaker is asking for more regulation on cryptocurrencies

[spartak_t]

I was talking about regulation for years, but a lot of people blamed me that I am a fan of the idea. I'm just trying to be realistic. I believe that one day cryptocurrencies will be regulated (I'm not sure to what level though) worldwide and we are just speeding things up with TheDAO's, ICO's and etcetera. Just continue to "invest" in ICO's, which are obvious scams, make some $10 profit and in 2 years (just an example) you can go back to your old work (cleaning toilets). Yeah...

The state assemblyman behind efforts to regulate digital currency businesses in California cited the $65m hack of Bitfinex this week as evidence of the need for tighter industry controls.

In a statement issued following his state's decision to temporarily shelve further regulatory deliberations this year, he said that more time was needed to strike a balance between giving virtual currency businesses a firm foundation and ensuring consumers are protected.

Assemblyman Matt Dababneh said in the statement:

"Today, a user of virtual currency has no protection from loss, and businesses that use, transmit or store virtual currency live in an ecosystem of regulatory uncertainty. Potential harm to consumers is not some remote possibility, but has already happened."

Dababneh first proposed the bill last year shortly after becoming chairman of the state’s Banking and Finance Committee, and a revised version was once again introduced this year amid resistance from industry advocates.

In remarks, Dababneh credited conversations with "virtual currency experts, consumer organizations" as a deciding factor in the determination to suspend the proposed legislation until January of next year.

California’s regulatory effort follows New York's implementation of the so-called BitLicense, its controversial industry-specific licensing regime. That law, introduced in 2015, has been blamed for the departure of some digital currency startups from the state.

Overall, Dababneh sought to position the delayed bill as part of his state’s efforts to take a leadership position in the industry.

He concluded:

"Unfortunately, the current bill in print does not meet the objectives to create a lasting regulatory framework that protects consumers and allows this industry to thrive in our state."

Source: http://www.coindesk.com/california-lawmaker-bitfinex-regulation-needed/

[1715460746]

1715460746

[1715460746]

1715460746

[1715460746]

1715460746

[1715460746]

1715460746

[Tacalt]

I was talking about regulation for years, but a lot of people blamed me that I am a fan of the idea. I'm just trying to be realistic. I believe that one day cryptocurrencies will be regulated (I'm not sure to what level though) worldwide and we are just speeding things up with TheDAO's, ICO's and etcetera. Just continue to "invest" in ICO's, which are obvious scams, make some $10 profit and in 2 years (just an example) you can go back to your old work (washing toilets). Yeah...

The state assemblyman behind efforts to regulate digital currency businesses in California cited the $65m hack of Bitfinex this week as evidence of the need for tighter industry controls.

In a statement issued following his state's decision to temporarily shelve further regulatory deliberations this year, he said that more time was needed to strike a balance between giving virtual currency businesses a firm foundation and ensuring consumers are protected.

Assemblyman Matt Dababneh said in the statement:

"Today, a user of virtual currency has no protection from loss, and businesses that use, transmit or store virtual currency live in an ecosystem of regulatory uncertainty. Potential harm to consumers is not some remote possibility, but has already happened."

Dababneh first proposed the bill last year shortly after becoming chairman of the state’s Banking and Finance Committee, and a revised version was once again introduced this year amid resistance from industry advocates.

In remarks, Dababneh credited conversations with "virtual currency experts, consumer organizations" as a deciding factor in the determination to suspend the proposed legislation until January of next year.

California’s regulatory effort follows New York's implementation of the so-called BitLicense, its controversial industry-specific licensing regime. That law, introduced in 2015, has been blamed for the departure of some digital currency startups from the state.

Overall, Dababneh sought to position the delayed bill as part of his state’s efforts to take a leadership position in the industry.

He concluded:

"Unfortunately, the current bill in print does not meet the objectives to create a lasting regulatory framework that protects consumers and allows this industry to thrive in our state."

Source: http://www.coindesk.com/california-lawmaker-bitfinex-regulation-needed/

One has to love it's always under the guise of "protect the consumer" that these laws get put in place even those that directly invade your privacy such as the laws passed after 9/11 

[Spoetnik]

Interesting encouraging news.. good Topic Spartak !

I can't be bothered explaining my stance on reg's been there and done that for years.
..next time

And there is reg's in a slew of ways i keep pointing out.
Made profit ?
Paid your taxes on it ?

Ripple + Fincen ?

Cryptsy and other exchanges REQUIRING user identification why now ?

There already is regulations guys.

[kelsey]

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation  thats kinda half the point 

[YIz]

They basically cannot regulate it unless the people will declare ownership of the cryptocurrency, and I don't think many people will.

[spartak_t]

Interesting encouraging news.. good Topic Spartak !

I can't be bothered explaining my stance on reg's been there and done that for years.
..next time

And there is reg's in a slew of ways i keep pointing out.
Made profit ?
Paid your taxed on it ?

Ripple + Fincen ?

Cryptsy and other exchanges REQUIRING user identification why now ?

There already is regulations guys.

I said "regulated worldwide". Of course we have some regulations now, I thought that there is no need to point that out...

P.S. Taxes? We were forced (because we wanted everything to be legit) to create a VAT registered company back in 2014 when I was still working with my investor. Our (bulgarian) government passed a law for profits from cryptocurrencies (taxes were 10%). Didn't paid any taxes though. My investor screwed me (more like his broker) long before we have any profits so...

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation   thats kinda half the point  

Yeah, right... and what happens when you want to trade them?

EDIT:

They basically cannot regulate it unless the people will declare ownership of the cryptocurrency, and I don't think many people will.

... and what happens when exchanges require your identity?

[YIz]

Interesting encouraging news.. good Topic Spartak !

I can't be bothered explaining my stance on reg's been there and done that for years.
..next time

And there is reg's in a slew of ways i keep pointing out.
Made profit ?
Paid your taxed on it ?

Ripple + Fincen ?

Cryptsy and other exchanges REQUIRING user identification why now ?

There already is regulations guys.

I said "regulated worldwide". Of course we have some regulations now, I thought that there is no need to point that out...

P.S. Taxes? We were forced (because we wanted everything to be legit) to create a VAT registered company back in 2014 when I was still working with my investor. Our (bulgarian) government passed a law for profits from cryptocurrencies (taxes were 10%). Didn't paid any taxes though. My investor screwed me (more like his broker) long before we have any profits so...

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation   thats kinda half the point  

Yeah, right... and what happens when you want to trade them?

EDIT:

They basically cannot regulate it unless the people will declare ownership of the cryptocurrency, and I don't think many people will.

... and what happens when exchanges require your identity?

Do you think all the exchanges will require user's identity one day? I don't think so. many of the crypto users refuse to give out their identities, for various reasons, and that's why it will always be profitable to run an exchange that doesn't require an ID.

And if all exchanges will, there will be websites in the darknet for crypto exchanges.

[spartak_t]

Which serious exchange at the moment does not require user's identity? For what cryptocurrencies are fighting for? Adoption! That would surely help it... 

[YIz]

Which serious exchange at the moment does not require user's identity? For what cryptocurrencies are fighting for? Adoption! That would surely help it... 

I'm not using any exchanges too much, but in the times I have used shapeshift and bittrex and I was never asked for an ID.

[Spoetnik]

Interesting encouraging news.. good Topic Spartak !

I can't be bothered explaining my stance on reg's been there and done that for years.
..next time

And there is reg's in a slew of ways i keep pointing out.
Made profit ?
Paid your taxed on it ?

Ripple + Fincen ?

Cryptsy and other exchanges REQUIRING user identification why now ?

There already is regulations guys.

I said "regulated worldwide". Of course we have some regulations now, I thought that there is no need to point that out...

P.S. Taxes? We were forced (because we wanted everything to be legit) to create a VAT registered company back in 2014 when I was still working with my investor. Our (bulgarian) government passed a law for profits from cryptocurrencies (taxes were 10%). Didn't paid any taxes though. My investor screwed me (more like his broker) long before we have any profits so...

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation   thats kinda half the point  

Yeah, right... and what happens when you want to trade them?

EDIT:

They basically cannot regulate it unless the people will declare ownership of the cryptocurrency, and I don't think many people will.

... and what happens when exchanges require your identity?

Do you think all the exchanges will require user's identity one day? I don't think so. many of the crypto users refuse to give out their identities, for various reasons, and that's why it will always be profitable to run an exchange that doesn't require an ID.

And if all exchanges will, there will be websites in the darknet for crypto exchanges.

Precocious little scamp.. you are cute & adorable and a cliche.
I already told you off 3 years ago and all the others like you since..

Guess what son ?

2 guys met on LocalBitcoins to arrange to meet in person to buy / sell Bitcoins.
They did.
And they were swiftly arrested by the FBI.

SO.....

uuhhhhhh.........

Guess what honey ?
THEY CAN REGULATE IT !

You will figure that out when the Tax man finds out about your earnings and garnishes your wages
or the FBI clicks the hand cuffs closed on your or FINCEN fines your company a half million dollars. etc..

I like the "goal" of having no regulations but we need a coin that can function that way technically.
I am not a dreamer but a realist !
The reality is we have heavy unbreakable ties to FIAT right now with Crypto Currencies.
It's a little ridiculous that you have to go to your bank and withdraw FIAT money to buy Bitcoins etc.
The notion of having to buy a currency with the currency it replaces is simply fucking retarded LOL
AND !
It's what got those guys busted at LBC ?
Florida's Anti-Money laundering laws.
AND.. that is why *MANY* Exchanges require your identification.. because of Financial regulations etc.

Did you guys forget Coinbase helped rat out the owner of KickAssTorrents ?
Who collected his personal information and handed it to the govt  (they admitted publicly)
And what country was behind the investigation and where was the victim living ?
Check the story he had servers all over including in Canada..

@kelsey
Good to see you pop up again
As always we agree a lot !
These guys don't get it or care.. or they would not be supporting a scene that is getting MORE centralized.
Exchanges have gotten worse and ICO's like Ethereum have made the situation far worse.
They want NO regulations they are just not willing to do the work to get there LOL
Profits get in the way hahahhaha

[dinofelis]

Which serious exchange at the moment does not require user's identity? For what cryptocurrencies are fighting for? Adoption! That would surely help it...  

Centralized exchanges shouldn't exist.  Only distributed exchanges should exist.

I don't see the use of adoption of crypto if it is to become regulated fiat.  Then I prefer sticking with fiat.  My only interest with crypto is the anarchist part, and the hope that it may be a tool that one day liberates us from state and law.  If it is to abide by state and law, I don't see what it is good for.

I prefer a $20 million market cap which is free, than a $20 billion market cap that is regulated.  I prefer fiat then.  It is more private, safer, and more stable.

Of course, you can take crypto as betting horses in speculative bets, but you could then just make bets on any random number generator, and not go through all that hassle.

Really, what are cryptos good for except anarchism ?

[kiklo]

2 guys met on LocalBitcoins to arrange to meet in person to buy / sell Bitcoins.
They did.
And they were swiftly arrested by the FBI.

Latest Update to the above Story , good news for the guy that got arrested. 
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article91682102.html

A Miami-Dade judge ruled Monday that Bitcoin is not actually money, a decision hailed by proponents of the virtual currency that has become popular across the world.

In a case closely watched in financial and tech circles, the judge threw out the felony charges against website designer Michell Espinoza, who had been charged with illegally transmitting and laundering $1,500 worth of Bitcoins.
He sold them to undercover detectives who told him they wanted to use the money to buy stolen credit-card numbers.

But Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Teresa Mary Pooler ruled that Bitcoin was not backed by any government or bank, and was not “tangible wealth” and “cannot be hidden under a mattress like cash and gold bars.”

“The court is not an expert in economics; however, it is very clear, even to someone with limited knowledge in the area, the Bitcoin has a long way to go before it the equivalent of money,” Pooler wrote in an eight-page order.

The judge also wrote that Florida law — which says someone can be charged with money laundering if they engage in a financial transaction that will “promote” illegal activity — is way too vague to apply to Bitcoin.

“This court is unwilling to punish a man for selling his property to another, when his actions fall under a statute that is so vaguely written that even legal professionals have difficulty finding a singular meaning,” she wrote.

 

[kelsey]

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation   thats kinda half the point  

Yeah, right... and what happens when you want to trade them?

well that's what the whole p2p parts about

(99% of my tradings p2p, darkpools etc, exchanges are for noobs, bots selling to themselves or to dump shitcoins on)


also i live in hope of a decent p2p exchange being developed.

[kelsey]

@kelsey
Good to see you pop up again
As always we agree a lot !
These guys don't get it or care.. or they would not be supporting a scene that is getting MORE centralized.
Exchanges have gotten worse and ICO's like Ethereum have made the situation far worse.
They want NO regulations they are just not willing to do the work to get there LOL
Profits get in the way hahahhaha

yeah most the crypto scene has lost the plot, mostly greed or stupidity (or sprinkle of both).

just got to laugh and keep most of it under "for entertainment purpose only" just to keep your cool about it all   

[bbc.reporter]

No to any form of regulation. Those politicians cannot be trusted especially the politicians from the USA. They will only make cryptocurrencies serve their agenda. It is also their style to make us scared so that we will think that we need regulation.

I cannot believe most of you are falling for this trap again. We all wanted to be in crypto because we are fighting censorship, centralization of power, the need for trustful systems and closed systems. What is all a matter with you? If wanting regulation is because you lost money investing in crypto then get out of here. You should not be investing in the first place.

[bbc.reporter]

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation  thats kinda half the point 

This truly! I cannot believe the people here are still stupid enough to believe those politicians. If some of you are only here for the money then leave now. Go somewhere else where there is regulation where you feel protected.

[spartak_t]

Which serious exchange at the moment does not require user's identity? For what cryptocurrencies are fighting for? Adoption! That would surely help it...  

Centralized exchanges shouldn't exist.  Only distributed exchanges should exist.

I don't see the use of adoption of crypto if it is to become regulated fiat.  Then I prefer sticking with fiat.  My only interest with crypto is the anarchist part, and the hope that it may be a tool that one day liberates us from state and law.  If it is to abide by state and law, I don't see what it is good for.

I prefer a $20 million market cap which is free, than a $20 billion market cap that is regulated.  I prefer fiat then.  It is more private, safer, and more stable.

Of course, you can take crypto as betting horses in speculative bets, but you could then just make bets on any random number generator, and not go through all that hassle.

Really, what are cryptos good for except anarchism ?

I get your point and I share your view, but truth is that (imho), regulation of the majority of the market is probably inevitable.

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation   thats kinda half the point  

This truly! I cannot believe the people here are still stupid enough to believe those politicians. If some of you are only here for the money then leave now. Go somewhere else where there is regulation where you feel protected.

You don't need to believe the politician, you should just take such statements into consideration, because they are refering everything in here (Bitcoin, Litecoin, F*ckcoin...). You also don't need to be here for the money (like the guys who are constantly launching ICO after ICO).



EDIT: There is one Canadian business executive and author Don Tapscott who wrote a book called "Blockchain revolution". He recently tweeted about an interview in which he said that the blockchain could be a threat for companies like Uber. See my response: https://twitter.com/FAILCommunity/status/767034109101273088

[YIz]

Interesting encouraging news.. good Topic Spartak !

I can't be bothered explaining my stance on reg's been there and done that for years.
..next time

And there is reg's in a slew of ways i keep pointing out.
Made profit ?
Paid your taxed on it ?

Ripple + Fincen ?

Cryptsy and other exchanges REQUIRING user identification why now ?

There already is regulations guys.

I said "regulated worldwide". Of course we have some regulations now, I thought that there is no need to point that out...

P.S. Taxes? We were forced (because we wanted everything to be legit) to create a VAT registered company back in 2014 when I was still working with my investor. Our (bulgarian) government passed a law for profits from cryptocurrencies (taxes were 10%). Didn't paid any taxes though. My investor screwed me (more like his broker) long before we have any profits so...

a true decentralised p2p currency should be indifferent to regulation   thats kinda half the point  

Yeah, right... and what happens when you want to trade them?

EDIT:

They basically cannot regulate it unless the people will declare ownership of the cryptocurrency, and I don't think many people will.

... and what happens when exchanges require your identity?

Do you think all the exchanges will require user's identity one day? I don't think so. many of the crypto users refuse to give out their identities, for various reasons, and that's why it will always be profitable to run an exchange that doesn't require an ID.

And if all exchanges will, there will be websites in the darknet for crypto exchanges.

Precocious little scamp.. you are cute & adorable and a cliche.
I already told you off 3 years ago and all the others like you since..

Guess what son ?

2 guys met on LocalBitcoins to arrange to meet in person to buy / sell Bitcoins.
They did.
And they were swiftly arrested by the FBI.

SO.....

uuhhhhhh.........

Guess what honey ?
THEY CAN REGULATE IT !

You will figure that out when the Tax man finds out about your earnings and garnishes your wages
or the FBI clicks the hand cuffs closed on your or FINCEN fines your company a half million dollars. etc..

I like the "goal" of having no regulations but we need a coin that can function that way technically.
I am not a dreamer but a realist !
The reality is we have heavy unbreakable ties to FIAT right now with Crypto Currencies.
It's a little ridiculous that you have to go to your bank and withdraw FIAT money to buy Bitcoins etc.
The notion of having to buy a currency with the currency it replaces is simply fucking retarded LOL
AND !
It's what got those guys busted at LBC ?
Florida's Anti-Money laundering laws.
AND.. that is why *MANY* Exchanges require your identification.. because of Financial regulations etc.

Did you guys forget Coinbase helped rat out the owner of KickAssTorrents ?
Who collected his personal information and handed it to the govt  (they admitted publicly)
And what country was behind the investigation and where was the victim living ?
Check the story he had servers all over including in Canada..

@kelsey
Good to see you pop up again
As always we agree a lot !
These guys don't get it or care.. or they would not be supporting a scene that is getting MORE centralized.
Exchanges have gotten worse and ICO's like Ethereum have made the situation far worse.
They want NO regulations they are just not willing to do the work to get there LOL
Profits get in the way hahahhaha

Well, the situation is worse than I thought it was then, locally I have never heard of something like this happening, but I guess the US is a different story. were you planning to buy large amounts of bitcoins in that meeting? I doubt they will go after peanuts.

[Spoetnik]

Just to clarify about my earlier LBC FBI arrest story..
http://www.coindesk.com/localbitcoins-users-criminal-charges-florida/

This happened a couple years ago now and i believe it was rooted in
Florida's anti-money laundering laws..
Meaning ?
Any transaction i think over 10k has to be properly documented. (30k in BTC in the story)
When it is not "documented properly" they can and DO run investigations.. regularly.
Cryptsy for example had instituted "Account verification" procedures.
I believe it was a direct response to that !
Why am i assuming that ?

Because BitJohn at Cryptsy had told us here on the forum..
That Cryptsy regularly would lie to a user about Network problem etc etc
then they would freeze the users funds and hand off their collected info to the US authorities for investigation.

I don't say that to bash Cryptsy though.. i think they did what they had to do.

So ?
Guess what people ?
I bet you all.. any exchange requiring user verification info is doing the same damn thing !
And some of them we KNOW they are because they admitted it !
Such as Coinbase.

So you all like to talk a big game huh ?
Do you back it up ?
I never got verified on any crypto service ever.. nor would i.
I like & want to support the rebellious idea of decentralization.
And i am willing to put my money where my mouth is.. when others don't !

An ICO coin SCREAMS centralization and that is far more than enough for me to avoid them 100% forever.
I would betray my own ideals / principles i hold.. you all have any ?
You think chanting Free Market and supporting centralized exchanges that took your picture ID is very Free Market like ?

Can we actually have the ties to FIAT 100% severed ? I really don't know.
I would like to hope so.. eventually.

All i see now is BTC far too hard to mine and if you do you need to get ASICs
which often end being a purchase with FIAT.
No matter how you look at it all there is some buried linked tie to FIAT.
When it's silly to say hey let's make a currency that replaces FIAT ..but you need FIAT to buy it ROFL

If we pushed to support our principles a lot more we could get opportunities.
It's priorities.. when we have the opportunity to do centralized crap for profit.
More if t will keep coming..
Rather than dev's working at making decentralized products or services.. that we WOULD support.
PUT YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS !

Can we get a reasonable level of full decentralization ?
Maybe but not how we have been doing it.. we got side tracked.
The massive flood of ICO's are a huge step in reverse !

And lastly i would like to support a decentralized exchange of sorts.
But i will NOT if it's backed / started with an ICO coin / token.

Can we ? What do you all think ? just a fantasy ? Wishful thinking ?


EDIT:

Know what people ?
The biggest next super profitable "investment"
May be the next "decentralized exchange"
If it was launched fairly and not an ICO then it could be VERY popular.
And if there was a way to profit off it starting up etc it could be a tsunami of popularity.

We don't NEED "ICO" fuel tokens for a centralized "APPS" / smart contract platform.

We NEED a decentralized exchange system ASAP !

[edmundduke]

Land of the "Free". LUL