btc authority

[Kprawn]

The point of BTC is to NOT have this.

I know, but as people, governments and states are becoming more and more aware of the potentional of btc, do you think that they'll just let it be o will they try to create some sort of superstructure to it?

If government steps in to regulate,they would most likely adopt a similar crypto with their rules in place.
They would also start a campaign explaining how bad bitcoin is and what sleazy perverts use it for and why its better to use Sheepcoin instead.
If people want to regulate and get down with government they are not bitcoin fans at all.

You will struggle to operate in a country, if you not working with the government on issues like this. Yes, I agree with you that it is not a good

thing to get them involved, but it's even worst.. if they are not involved. You have to remember... these governments control your internet

access and your communication networks. If they decide to block it, like they are doing in China with the firewalls... you would lose the

freedom to use it. I hate to work with them... but I would rather work with them, than being against them. In most democratic governments,

these people are voted into power by the voters... and the only way to get rid of them are to vote against them. {If they block Bitcoin use}

[1714918349]

1714918349

[1714918349]

1714918349

[1714918349]

1714918349

[1714918349]

1714918349

[1714918349]

1714918349

[1714918349]

1714918349

[BingoDog]

There are many argues about this topic. Some think this is possible and that governments are interested to make this step. I'm not so sure about it and think if something like this happens it might have negative influence on Bitcoin.

[franky1]

authority:
the network and coin has no jurisdiction so cannot be controlled... only businesses with a registered address are restricted by laws of that jurisdiction
a government tried to regulate bitcoin (NewYork bitlicence) and bitcoiners just avoided starting businesses in new york, because regulation only affects businesses. not the network or coin itself.

government:
if governments want to make bitcoin usage healthy. they should learn the difference between the terms: regulation vs consumer protection. and instead of being currently 95% regulation 5% consumer protection, to be "compliant".. it should be 100% consumer protection rules a BUSINESS should follow to be "compliant".

advocacy:
word of mouth is a good form of advocacy for adoption, yet 99% still fear telling their friends, family, colleagues or public about it due to the media shaming of bitcoin as 'dirty' currency.
this may change but that is still making people sit on thier hands waiting for media to change their story..

no one should be stopped if they want organise themselves at meetups or social media to do their own PR advocacy campaigns. but this should be about making promotional and layman explanations more easy to talk about and more efficiently spread the word by having a 'thinktank' to speed up promotional ideas..
again advocacy and promoting bitcoin is not about controlling the network or grabbing all the coins.. its about promoting bitcoin.

but relying on one group of 'knowledge' can lead to governments restricting what that group can advertise because of where the 'office' is.. so its best to have several distributed groups of knowledge to do their own promotions.. which has started to happen now. local meetups that then try getting their own town/area more bitcoin aware.

[btc2usd.biz]

we all hope this will not come .  but the problem will be when bitcoin will get to dangerous for every goverment and then  they will try shut it down like they did with lr , finding a excuse that money is ``DARK ``

[tee-rex]

authority:
the network and coin has no jurisdiction so cannot be controlled... only businesses with a registered address are restricted by laws of that jurisdiction

Even if Bitcoin is beyond national jurisdiction, it can still be controlled on an international level through relevant international organizations such as the UN or IMF, which are established to address global scale issues. As I see it, international treaties are meant to specifically regulate issues regarding the global commons. Anyways, there shouldn't be any real difficulty to control Bitcoin worldwide if it were worth the effort and such a need arose.

[xuan87]

i think in the future government will try to to make regulation to control and supervise bitcoin, some of the country already prepare the regulation for bitcoin, and if the government feel that the users can't be controlled then the government will banned the coin
I think it is reasonable that the government want to regulate because the government can see the potential of what bitcoin capable to do for the economic, but as the bitcoin user i strongly against the government interfering

[quellos]

Do you think that it will be created a btc regulatory authority in the future or will the blockchain continue to be the only warranty?

I think It will become very regulated in the sense that banks and financial institutions are already developing platforms to use crypto, with that sort of corporate interest comes government laws and regulations. Governments do not what currency they cannot regulate, manipulate and control.

[ImHash]

Do you see internet with one authority? then you can understand why bitcoin can't have one unless of course satoshi agrees on donating half of his stash to build a physical office and such.

[hexitor]

No, there will never be such kind of authority. They have no power over blockchain, so they can't do anything.

[RodeoX]

authority:
the network and coin has no jurisdiction so cannot be controlled... only businesses with a registered address are restricted by laws of that jurisdiction

Even if Bitcoin is beyond national jurisdiction, it can still be controlled on an international level through relevant international organizations such the UN or IMF, which are established to address global scale issues. As I see it, international treaties are meant to specifically regulate issues regarding the global commons. Anyways, there shouldn't be any real difficulty to control Bitcoin worldwide if it were worth the effort and such a need arose.

How?

[franky1]

authority:
the network and coin has no jurisdiction so cannot be controlled... only businesses with a registered address are restricted by laws of that jurisdiction

Even if Bitcoin is beyond national jurisdiction, it can still be controlled on an international level through relevant international organizations such the UN or IMF, which are established to address global scale issues. As I see it, international treaties are meant to specifically regulate issues regarding the global commons. Anyways, there shouldn't be any real difficulty to control Bitcoin worldwide if it were worth the effort and such a need arose.

How?

the IMF can only deal with government money. EG a painting or jewellery is a tradable asset. the IMF wont get involved with that
the UN can only deal with governments.

though governments can make laws to prohibit (make illegal to use) something. the law is just paper. paper cannot attack electric. just like paper couldnt directly attack liquid (moonshine/alcohol of the last century)
it requires court orders and law enforcement (HUMANS) to investigate and deliver these bits of paper to ISP's to shut off the internet of <6000 nodes/raid pubs/bars and drinking clubs.

but bitcoin nodes are not (should not) be confined to one country. thus if america prohibits bitcoin and gets a court order to disconnect the internet of 1500 peoples landlines. there are still 3700 nodes connected to the internet in other countries.

right now there are 91 countries that have nodes running. so all 91 countries will need to pass a law to prohibit bitcoin to then use that to all simultaneously get the ISP's of all nodes to disconnect the internet of all <6000 nodes.
though in minutes someone can knock on a neighbours door and borrow their landline internet or a open wifi to get their node online, while they sort out their own landline.

bitcoin is a little weak in this area because it does not cover all 200 countries and the majority are not using satalite internet to avoid a small possibility of international law changes and/or ISP take down requests.

but even in a worse case. people will just change their home address to get access to a new landline access to the internet. and borrow/rent friends internet for a month, while its getting sorted. thus all they can do is disrupt bitcoin temporarily, thus its a fools errand to take down someones internet.

mining pools already have several servers to mitigate the risk of not relying on one ISP access to the internet. so overall i cannot see governments being able to permanently stop the bitcoin network. but we should atleast not be apathetic and not trust/hope governments wont change laws or isps wont follow court orders or pretend that 91 countries is enough diversity/distribution.

we should always be looking to expand diversity/distribution to mitigate risks.

[tee-rex]

authority:
the network and coin has no jurisdiction so cannot be controlled... only businesses with a registered address are restricted by laws of that jurisdiction

Even if Bitcoin is beyond national jurisdiction, it can still be controlled on an international level through relevant international organizations such the UN or IMF, which are established to address global scale issues. As I see it, international treaties are meant to specifically regulate issues regarding the global commons. Anyways, there shouldn't be any real difficulty to control Bitcoin worldwide if it were worth the effort and such a need arose.

How?

I don't know the exact procedure but I think that the UN Security Council could possibly issue a resolution potentially banning Bitcoin, for example, under the pretext of fighting terrorism or preventing money laundering, and that would be binding to all UN member states. Whether the Security Council (its permanent members) is actually able to unanimously accept such a resolution is another question, but if it is and does, Bitcoin will be officially outlawed on a global scale.

[Carlton Banks]

Even if Bitcoin is beyond national jurisdiction, it can still be controlled on an international level through relevant international organizations such the UN or IMF, which are established to address global scale issues. As I see it, international treaties are meant to specifically regulate issues regarding the global commons. Anyways, there shouldn't be any real difficulty to control Bitcoin worldwide if it were worth the effort and such a need arose.

How?

I don't know the exact procedure but I think that the UN Security Council could possibly issue a resolution potentially banning Bitcoin, for example, under the pretext of fighting terrorism or preventing money laundering, and that would be binding to all UN member states. Whether the Security Council (its permanent members) is actually able to unanimously accept such a resolution is another question, but if it is and does, Bitcoin will be officially outlawed on a global scale.

@UN: Bring that shit. I'm ready. You're not.

[RodeoX]

authority:
the network and coin has no jurisdiction so cannot be controlled... only businesses with a registered address are restricted by laws of that jurisdiction

Even if Bitcoin is beyond national jurisdiction, it can still be controlled on an international level through relevant international organizations such the UN or IMF, which are established to address global scale issues. As I see it, international treaties are meant to specifically regulate issues regarding the global commons. Anyways, there shouldn't be any real difficulty to control Bitcoin worldwide if it were worth the effort and such a need arose.

How?

I don't know the exact procedure but I think that the UN Security Council could possibly issue a resolution potentially banning Bitcoin, for example, under the pretext of fighting terrorism or preventing money laundering, and that would be binding to all UN member states. Whether the Security Council (its permanent members) is actually able to unanimously accept such a resolution is another question, but if it is and does, Bitcoin will be officially outlawed on a global scale.

I see what you mean, but I don't think the UN could pull it off. Certainly in America (and maybe everywhere) such a mandate would be greeted with outright hostility. I would not even consider obeying such a law and I have no fear whatsoever of repercussions.
So far no one has demonstrated a method that could stop me or anyone from using BTC. There may be people at the UN or elsewhere who would like to see bitcoin just do away, but it ain't gona happen. The war is over and we won.
Perhaps in a place like China, with it's great firewall, could greatly limit BTC. However as long as we have net neutrality we're good.

[tee-rex]

How?

I don't know the exact procedure but I think that the UN Security Council could possibly issue a resolution potentially banning Bitcoin, for example, under the pretext of fighting terrorism or preventing money laundering, and that would be binding to all UN member states. Whether the Security Council (its permanent members) is actually able to unanimously accept such a resolution is another question, but if it is and does, Bitcoin will be officially outlawed on a global scale.

I see what you mean, but I don't think the UN could pull it off. Certainly in America (and maybe everywhere) such a mandate would be greeted with outright hostility. I would not even consider obeying such a law and I have no fear whatsoever of repercussions.
So far no one has demonstrated a method that could stop me or anyone from using BTC. There may be people at the UN or elsewhere who would like to see bitcoin just do away, but it ain't gona happen. The war is over and we won.
Perhaps in a place like China, with it's great firewall, could greatly limit BTC. However as long as we have net neutrality we're good.

You asked, I answered.

Of course, with the ongoing controversies between the permanent members of the UN Security Council it is hardly possible that a resolution of banning Bitcoin would ever pass at all. But if tensions subside while Bitcoin, on the other hand, gets traction as well as wider recognition and becomes a real threat to government money, they could ultimately search for consensus. It won't kill Bitcoin, but that will surely affect it in a negative way. Would businesses continue to accept Bitcoin after it is outlawed and its users are made into criminals?

[sonnyacg]

I think the policy of using bitcoin is the responsibility of users themselves. Bitcoin authorities in some countries may still be in question. because bitcoin including currency on the Internet is vulnerable to hacking. so in my opinion if the user can understand the risks bitcoin vulnerable to hazards, it is fitting that personal responsibility.

[clickerz]

I think the policy of using bitcoin is the responsibility of users themselves. Bitcoin authorities in some countries may still be in question. because bitcoin including currency on the Internet is vulnerable to hacking. so in my opinion if the user can understand the risks bitcoin vulnerable to hazards, it is fitting that personal responsibility.

I think there is no bitcoin authority to start with just to control the internet. Maybe a policy body,a consortium that will implement the road map but not to control it and there is no such kin din other countries. Unless that country pass a law to regulate bitcoin.

[MingLee]

Do you think that it will be created a btc regulatory authority in the future or will the blockchain continue to be the only warranty?

There shouldn't be any of this happening either way, and in the event there is a regulating authority that materializes then there are going to be issues all around. Something like that simply does not fit with what Bitcoin is supposed to do and be.

[davis196]

Do you think that it will be created a btc regulatory authority in the future or will the blockchain continue to be the only warranty?

How such regulatory authority will look like?

A bunch of clerks that will have to be paid for their work.Who is going to pay them?

All the bitcoin users?

[tee-rex]

Do you think that it will be created a btc regulatory authority in the future or will the blockchain continue to be the only warranty?

How such regulatory authority will look like?

A bunch of clerks that will have to be paid for their work.Who is going to pay them?

All the bitcoin users?

If it comes to that, then yes, all of us, the Bitcoin users. What such a body would most likely try to do is levy Bitcoin transactions and make miners include the transaction tax into their fees, so that this supervising body would get some percentage from all Bitcoin transactions. How they could actually implement this and make miners pay I don't know, but this idea lies on the surface and comes to mind first.