Bitcoin Forum
November 25, 2017, 02:47:18 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Informing Bitcoin Policy: a Centralised or Decentralised Approach?  (Read 1202 times)
No_2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 805


BTC: the beginning of stake-based public resources


View Profile WWW
April 03, 2013, 09:13:05 AM
 #1

Much as I dislike lobbying and indeed am starting to think it should be prohibited I wanted to open a discussion on the pros and cons of having a bitcoin lobbyist group. A group, funded by bitcoin users that could advise to various bodies, NGOs and government about bitcoin.

Just to be clear I am not advocating this: I want to consider the implications of what would happen if this where to take place as often organisations such as this start to look after their own self interests.

Conversely what would be the pros and cons of a purely decentralised approach to informing NGO and government policy?

MetaLair: a blockchain and cryptocurrency consultancy
Twitter: @MetaLair | Facebook | Google+
1511578038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511578038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511578038
Reply with quote  #2

1511578038
Report to moderator
1511578038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511578038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511578038
Reply with quote  #2

1511578038
Report to moderator
Join ICO Now Coinlancer is Disrupting the Freelance marketplace!
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1511578038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511578038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511578038
Reply with quote  #2

1511578038
Report to moderator
1511578038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511578038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511578038
Reply with quote  #2

1511578038
Report to moderator
1511578038
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1511578038

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1511578038
Reply with quote  #2

1511578038
Report to moderator
flibbr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 263


Bitcoins ftw !


View Profile WWW
April 03, 2013, 09:20:25 AM
 #2

What I don't get is this 'Bitcoin foundation', I mean my understanding of decentralised is no central owners... yet this bitcoin foundation with their 'board members' and 'core bitcoin programmers' are talking like they own the shop.

Sorry, but I didn't appoint you guys to be my god.

I love bitcoins - everything about them.
Visit the Flibbr website - follow on twitter: @flibbr - or say hello on Facebook
No_2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 805


BTC: the beginning of stake-based public resources


View Profile WWW
April 07, 2013, 11:05:40 AM
 #3

This is the kind of thing I wanted to discuss in this thread before it 'went to print':

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=169440.0
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=169438.0

The very concept of an elected leader has always seemed a very odd social assumption to me. I cant seen any benefit to the above.

MetaLair: a blockchain and cryptocurrency consultancy
Twitter: @MetaLair | Facebook | Google+
No_2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 805


BTC: the beginning of stake-based public resources


View Profile WWW
May 15, 2013, 04:05:49 PM
 #4

This is a good example of the kind of thing I was trying to pre-empt to some degree:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/42ca6762-bbfc-11e2-82df-00144feab7de,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F42ca6762-bbfc-11e2-82df-00144feab7de.html&_i_referer=#axzz2T3OP4P3R

What was discussed at this meeting and what were it's conclusions? What original sources of evidence were used? How was this information disseminated?

Being UK centric, I'm going to see if I can find out any more on this conference.

MetaLair: a blockchain and cryptocurrency consultancy
Twitter: @MetaLair | Facebook | Google+
flibbr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 263


Bitcoins ftw !


View Profile WWW
May 15, 2013, 06:01:21 PM
 #5

..
What was discussed at this meeting and what were it's conclusions? What original sources of evidence were used? How was this information disseminated?

Re that meeting.. it's my opinion that what we have here is we have the state.. making plans and or discussing why bitcoin is such a problem... when actually bitcoin just cuts them out of the equation. All of a sudden..

Quote
"The ... state requires that there be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves."

This who thing about Mark from Gox.. they've used the fact that he was simply transmitting money, a completely victemless crime to seize and stop trade inflicting a hindrance to the development of something that changes everything. The state is what needs to be put into check right now.. and bitcoin / cryptocurrency is the way to do it.

I love bitcoins - everything about them.
Visit the Flibbr website - follow on twitter: @flibbr - or say hello on Facebook
No_2
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 805


BTC: the beginning of stake-based public resources


View Profile WWW
May 19, 2013, 04:23:50 PM
 #6

http://reason.com/24-7/2013/05/18/bitcoin-foundation-to-hire-first-lobbyis

This is the whole (short) piece:

Quote
Peter Vessenes, the executive director of the Bitcoin Foundation who's also enmeshed in a messy lawsuit against Mt. Gox, also stressed the need for governmental cooperation.

"We'll be hiring someone to work on [Capitol] Hill and interact with regulators," Vessenes said. "I'm someone who thinks we should have a civil conversation... It's time to engage with regulators and have a good, productive conversation."

Then again, that didn't stop the E-Gold online payment system from being shut down after a federal indictment on charges of money laundering. Not only did E-Gold chairman Douglas Jackson interact with regulators, he even testified before the U.S. Congress a year before the indictment took place.

... May the force be with them.  Smiley

And this....

MetaLair: a blockchain and cryptocurrency consultancy
Twitter: @MetaLair | Facebook | Google+
SamS
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


View Profile
May 19, 2013, 05:12:59 PM
 #7


I guess the question is how do you not end up with regulation at the Fiat/Crypto interface? The guys that control Fiat aren't going to let you into their world except on their terms. It can be negotiated a bit but the truth is it's their world. Unless Bitcoin grows large enough to replace a substantial portion of Fiat use directly, then there will be regulation. If there's regulation, then there will be special interest groups competing to get the Government to slant the rules their way. I can't see that Fiat processing companies would have any interest in letting Bitcoin come in and compete more cheaply. So, it's going to be a tussle. Asked as a sincere question, "why wouldn't those with a vested interest in Bitcoin's success want to have representation on these issues?" Unless, people can see a viable non-Fiat transmission/growth path, it would seem to be a no-brainer.

As to who/what organization that should be, I think we should be honest that the real funders are going to be those that stand to make the greatest profit -- or take the greatest loss if things go sour. It's not desirable from a libertarian point of view, but that doesn't change the reality of the financial calculus.

Bitcoin: 16i8sQWjZo3QPhhSfWupJff5PtwTxxpRJJ
Ripple:  rL7mRCDYBXsVSM2obdvEjwft5fPUmxv3ra
Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714



View Profile
May 19, 2013, 06:18:45 PM
 #8

Much as I dislike lobbying and indeed am starting to think it should be prohibited I wanted to open a discussion on the pros and cons of having a bitcoin lobbyist group. A group, funded by bitcoin users that could advise to various bodies, NGOs and government about bitcoin.

Just to be clear I am not advocating this: I want to consider the implications of what would happen if this where to take place as often organisations such as this start to look after their own self interests.

Conversely what would be the pros and cons of a purely decentralised approach to informing NGO and government policy?


Both. The Internet is both centralized and decentralized. Bitcoin will have to be both centralized and decentralized, but where you can be decentralized and secure you should.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!