Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[JorgeStolfi]

How on earth do you think Bitpay can do their operations without buying/selling bitcoin (exchange) or having bank linked customer accounts?
You have not thought this through, sir. 

I explained:

Sorry, I meant "buy and sell from individual customers".

I recall their TOS saying explicitly that you could not use them to turn your bitcoins to cash.  Basically they came into play when you clicked "pay with bitcoin" at some merchant; they converted the merchant's price to bitcoin, took your bitcoins, sold them, and sent the dollars to the merchant's bank account. 

See, I even put a "sorry" there. 

They are not a bitcoin exchange (like Coinbase is), and (AFAIK) still take care not to be used as one, precisely so that they do not need to register as MSB/MTB.  A payment processor is narowly defined in law: it can only accept payments from consumers on behalf of other merchants, in exchange for goods and services delivered by those merchants to those consumers.  They do sell the bitcoins, over the counter or on exchanges (not to the consumers) and take bitcoins from the consumers (but do not give them dollars in exchange).  Their clients are the merchants, not the consumers.

By the way, here is some analysis of the traffic through BitPay's wallet that I did last December.  The source data shows (among other things) their periodic deposits on Bitstamp and other exchanges.

[crazy-pilot]

So happy not living in the U.S. This type of thing is so typical it surprises me it has taken so long. I hope people use their common sense, and vote to actually do something about this. U.S. Government is way to ruled by companies, instead of being appointed and take accounted for by their residents.

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I think you are confused if you don't think Bitpay need a bitlicence for NY customers, professor. Man up and admit you were wrong  

This from BitPay's CCO, Tim Byun.

BitPay does not have any contracts or relationships with consumers.  Consumers’ only interaction with the Processing Service is through

a Merchant’s website or point-of-sale system that has integrated the Processing Service.  As BitPay

offers no consumer-facing services, consumers cannot engage BitPay to remit bitcoins to another per-
son, buy or sell bitcoins for themselves, or store their bitcoins.

[Elwar]

How on earth do you think Bitpay can do their operations without buying/selling bitcoin (exchange) or having bank linked customer accounts?
You have not thought this through, sir. 

I explained:

Sorry, I meant "buy and sell from individual customers".

I recall their TOS saying explicitly that you could not use them to turn your bitcoins to cash.  Basically they came into play when you clicked "pay with bitcoin" at some merchant; they converted the merchant's price to bitcoin, took your bitcoins, sold them, and sent the dollars to the merchant's bank account. 

See, I even put a "sorry" there. 

They are not a bitcoin exchange (like Coinbase is), and (AFAIK) still take care not to be used as one, precisely so that they do not need to register as MSB/MTB.  A payment processor is narowly defined in law: it can only accept payments from consumers on behalf of other merchants, in exchange for goods and services delivered by those merchants to those consumers.  They do sell the bitcoins, over the counter or on exchanges (not to the consumers) and take bitcoins from the consumers (but do not give them dollars in exchange).  Their clients are the merchants, not the consumers.

By the way, here is some analysis of the traffic through BitPay's wallet that I did last December.  The source data shows (among other things) their periodic deposits on Bitstamp and other exchanges.

I converted 800 bitcoins into cash one time back in the day through BitPay.

That was before the Stazi stuff though.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I converted 800 bitcoins into cash one time back in the day through BitPay.

I think authorities would view that use of BitPay as "Laundering", not "conversion" 

[giszmo]

A blazz from the pazz, or "Where Are They Now":


...wait for it...

Oh damn! So Bitcoin died?

Where did you find this picture? tineye can't find it.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[Mervyn_Pumpkinhead]

I don't think that the 5000$ fee was a the problem with BFX. That would be just silly. I think that the problem was with regulations that regard shady schenanigans, like insider trading.

If the bitcoin market wants to become something serious, then it would have to be regulated and run openly. If the market is unregulated, and all the exchanges can just do whatever they wish, then you can be certain that they will abuse their position to get the upper hand in the trading game. Then it's not trading anymore, it's gambling in a virtual casino, run by the exchanges.

The Real Drop will start when people will finally realize that bitcoins price is as high as it is, only because of the past shady schenanigans of the exchanges.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I don't think that the 5000$ fee was a the problem with BFX. That would be just silly. I think that the problem was with regulations that regard shady schenanigans, like insider trading.

If the bitcoin market wants to become something serious, then it would have to be regulated and run openly. If the market is unregulated, and all the exchanges can just do whatever they wish, then you can be certain that they will abuse their position to get the upper hand in the trading game. Then it's not trading anymore, it's gambling in a virtual casino, run by the exchanges.

The Real Drop will start when people will finally realize that bitcoins price is as high as it is, only because of the past shady schenanigans of the exchanges.

I think the big issue with the terms of bitlicense are to do with how they define Virtual Currency Business Activity. Its worded in a way to include any and all activities that could be linked to VCBA. That would have the potential to create a bureaucratic nightmare for any business. Like I said earlier, they need to word this in the ubiquitous language of the technology, not try and fit it to what they understand traditional financial activity to be.

[JimboToronto]

Good morning Bitcoinland.

Would have checked in earlier but when I saw that we hadn't appreciably bounced from Saturday's little dip, I had to run out and buy a few more coins before the price goes back up.

2015, the year of accumulation, kinda like 2012.

[JorgeStolfi]

I converted 800 bitcoins into cash one time back in the day through BitPay.
That was before the Stazi stuff though.

That was probably before they realized the legal implications of doing that. 

Suspicions were raised in another thread that a certain mining equipment manufacturer used BitPay to convert 1 M $ worth of bitcoin to dollars (without BitPay's knowledge, hopefully) by simulating a purchase of 1 M $ of equipment by a "customer" who was in fact the manufacturer itself.  (Bitcoins that, allegedly, had been mined by the manufacturer on equipment that it should have delivered to other prepaying customers months before...)

[becoin]

I think the big issue with the terms of bitlicense are to do with how they define Virtual Currency Business Activity.

Good. Bitcoin is not a virtual currency. It is a digital currency.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[sAt0sHiFanClub]

I think the big issue with the terms of bitlicense are to do with how they define Virtual Currency Business Activity.

Good. Bitcoin is not a virtual currency. It is a digital currency.

Section 200.1 of the DFS Proposed Rules, Codes, etc.  states:

(p) Virtual Currency means any type of digital unit that is used as a medium of exchange or a form of
digitally stored value. Virtual Currency shall be broadly construed to include digital units of exchange that (i)
have a centralized repository or administrator; (ii) are decentralized and have no centralized repository or
administrator; or (iii) may be created or obtained by computing or manufacturing effort.

I see what you say, and agree with your definition, but like I say, the language they use is arcane and open to misinterpretation.

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation

[becoin]

the language they use is arcane and open to misinterpretation.

Actually their definition is so broad that they include every possible form of digital assets which will have boomerang effect upon the regulator. They're committing regulatory suicide!

What is Digital Asset?

A digital asset is any object of text or media that has been formatted into a binary source that includes the right to use it. A digital file without the right to use it is not an asset!

digital assets = assets that don't need permission to be used
bitlicense => requires permission => makes digital assets NOT digital assets => regulator kills the object of the regulation => regulator becomes unemployed regulator

[yefi]

Where did you find this picture? tineye can't find it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Buttcoin/comments/3g488g/remember_polish_bitcoin_embassy_their_diplomatic/

Google reverse image search 

[ChartBuddy]

Coin
Explanation