Where is the Balance?

[Payment21]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

[1714017885]

1714017885

[1714017885]

1714017885

[1714017885]

1714017885

[xenotrunksx]

The balance comes when regulators understand the difference between individual users holding their own keys and custodial accounts that hold your money for you ie coinbase.  Custodial accounts will need some form of regulation, Bitcoin itself does not need, and cannot be, regulated.

[maku]

If you think that fully decentralized, totally anonymous cryptocurrency will even get close to reaching legal acceptance and therefore, semblance of adoption - think again.
Even bitcoin is a bit extreme for some people, they believe that government intervention in bitcoin is only a matter of time.
Bitcoin will be bring in line with other payment systems, you want to use bitcoin? In the future you will have to register your BTC wallet & submit personal info or you will be marked as a criminal.

[Carlton Banks]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

What everyone seems to fail to understand is that the way you think of "balance" in these matters has changed forever


Put simply: regular users are interested in Bitcoin because it protects their interests, that is, their money. And it protects their money without government regulators, it does the job all by itself. It even protects ordinary users from regulators, as crucially, they have no effective way of regulating either the network or individual users.


And businesses are realising the same thing. Where the regulators lose their leverage to regulate, businesses will gain increased protection. Strange, isn't that supposed to be the regulator's role, protecting the interests of businesses and regular folk? Like most "protection" regimes, it's a more than a little ambiguous exactly who is being protected and from what.

[Victorycoin]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

Here you will find the balance:
1. Coinbase was made for Bitcoin, not the other way round;
2. Bitcoin is sure to go on without the likes of Coinbase;
3. Bitcoin was born a decentralized currency;
4. governments love Blockchain, but hate Bitcoin.
.

[geopolisch]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

What everyone seems to fail to understand is that the way you think of "balance" in these matters has changed forever


Put simply: regular users are interested in Bitcoin because it protects their interests, that is, their money. And it protects their money without government regulators, it does the job all by itself. It even protects ordinary users from regulators, as crucially, they have no effective way of regulating either the network or individual users.


And businesses are realising the same thing. Where the regulators lose their leverage to regulate, businesses will gain increased protection. Strange, isn't that supposed to be the regulator's role, protecting the interests of businesses and regular folk? Like most "protection" regimes, it's a more than a little ambiguous exactly who is being protected and from what.

Well there is a reason why business owners are still not putting their money on bitcoin and that is because it is still unstable, they don’t want to risk putting money and then losing it is not good for their business, we as bitcoin users we don’t care about the price dropping by a $10 that does not affect us but on the big scale it affects a lot that is why it is risky.

[CraigWrightBTC]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

What everyone seems to fail to understand is that the way you think of "balance" in these matters has changed forever


Put simply: regular users are interested in Bitcoin because it protects their interests, that is, their money. And it protects their money without government regulators, it does the job all by itself. It even protects ordinary users from regulators, as crucially, they have no effective way of regulating either the network or individual users.


And businesses are realising the same thing. Where the regulators lose their leverage to regulate, businesses will gain increased protection. Strange, isn't that supposed to be the regulator's role, protecting the interests of businesses and regular folk? Like most "protection" regimes, it's a more than a little ambiguous exactly who is being protected and from what.

Well there is a reason why business owners are still not putting their money on bitcoin and that is because it is still unstable, they don’t want to risk putting money and then losing it is not good for their business, we as bitcoin users we don’t care about the price dropping by a $10 that does not affect us but on the big scale it affects a lot that is why it is risky.

Actually the problem of fluctuating bitcoin's price can be finished with joint to https://bitpay.com/
the payment use bitcoin can be convert to fiat currency automaticly,
it is reduce risk losing money because of fluctuating bitcoin's price for the investors with big scale.

[Senor.Bla]

If you do business somewhere, anywhere, everywhere, then you have to chose if you want to play by the rules of the location you do your business, if you want to argue and fight the rules or if you want to ignore them. In most places you have to play by the government rules and accept the regulations or you run an illegal business. You do have the option to fight (with your army of lawyers) and might change somethings.
If you run an illegal business, then your priority should be to not get caught and your customers should be aware of the risks. If you run an legal business, then just follow the rules and your customers should know where they stand and what rules apply.
Those two cases seem trivial and the remaining one is the interesting one, which will also be the one that most Bitcoin business are in. The rules are not done yet and change and the situation might change quickly and often. A company running under these circumstances will have one priority: make profit.
In order to do so most will want to stay in business and this means to pay attention to two things and balance them if you want to say so. Follow the regulations to a point where you can not be banned or fined into bankruptcy. On the other hand you want to please your customers (in this case protect their privacy) so that they stay your customers.
If you go full privacy, then you might get banned and are out of business. If you go full regulation, then you might loose all your customers and go out of business. Finding the middle ground is the key to success, but if you are forced to chose between those two extremes, then most will chose to stay with the regulations, since it is easier to find new customers then getting the regulators off your back.
A company will always make the promises the customers will want to hear, but i would not count on them. 

[Carlton Banks]

If you do business somewhere, anywhere, everywhere, then you have to chose if you want to play by the rules of the location you do your business, if you want to argue and fight the rules or if you want to ignore them. In most places you have to play by the government rules and accept the regulations or you run an illegal business. You do have the option to fight (with your army of lawyers) and might change somethings.
If you run an illegal business, then your priority should be to not get caught and your customers should be aware of the risks. If you run an legal business, then just follow the rules and your customers should know where they stand and what rules apply. 

You still don't get it: you're describing the status quo, not how things have changed.


Let's put it a different way: if, in 2010, a government issued a decree that all small businesses must pay a 90% revenue tax, businesses would have no choice but to comply (and almost certainly go out of business). In 2020, the same decree would not have the same effect.

So, the balance of power has changed between Bitcoin based businesses and the governments in their respective jurisdictions. Where the government previously had almost all power, Bitcoin businesses now have the power to resist draconianism, they have a bargaining chip where they previously had none.

[Senor.Bla]

If you do business somewhere, anywhere, everywhere, then you have to chose if you want to play by the rules of the location you do your business, if you want to argue and fight the rules or if you want to ignore them. In most places you have to play by the government rules and accept the regulations or you run an illegal business. You do have the option to fight (with your army of lawyers) and might change somethings.
If you run an illegal business, then your priority should be to not get caught and your customers should be aware of the risks. If you run an legal business, then just follow the rules and your customers should know where they stand and what rules apply. 

You still don't get it: you're describing the status quo, not how things have changed.


Let's put it a different way: if, in 2010, a government issued a decree that all small businesses must pay a 90% revenue tax, businesses would have no choice but to comply (and almost certainly go out of business). In 2020, the same decree would not have the same effect.

So, the balance of power has changed between Bitcoin based businesses and the governments in their respective jurisdictions. Where the government previously had almost all power, Bitcoin businesses now have the power to resist draconianism, they have a bargaining chip where they previously had none.

sorry, but i disagree. If i had a shop in 2010 and made all my business deal in cash (we assume i run a fiat exchange at a tourist hot spot), how could they force me to comply or shut me down? Because this will be the answer how they will do it with Bitcoin.
There are rules you can play by or not. Using Bitcoin it might be easier to not play by the rules, but this will not change the rules.
If you think that i still do not get your point, then maybe make an example and help me understand.

[Xester]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

Bitcoin transaction is still anonymous and remains a secret. Those laws and policies will only take effect if somebody has done illegal transactions such as money laundering. Without doing such illicit act there is no need to worry since the authorities will not look into your wallet. They will only look at suspicious wallets with high volumes of bitcoin and make sure that money launderers cannot escape their sight.

[Carlton Banks]

If you think that i still do not get your point, then maybe make an example and help me understand.

You still don't get it, despite the provision of an example. Cash can be easily confiscated, Bitcoin cannot.

[Red-Apple]

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

bitcoin offers privacy and anonymity to some extent not fiat.

in other words you have to understand the difference between these two. when you use bitcoin and bitcoin alone you are on your own, your own bank, your own wallet and your own security.

but when you want to go on an exchange, use fiat and banks to transfer money you have to also accept all the rules that come with fiat. one of them is lack of privacy.

[noormcs5]

If you think that fully decentralized, totally anonymous cryptocurrency will even get close to reaching legal acceptance and therefore, semblance of adoption - think again.
Even bitcoin is a bit extreme for some people, they believe that government intervention in bitcoin is only a matter of time.
Bitcoin will be bring in line with other payment systems, you want to use bitcoin? In the future you will have to register your BTC wallet & submit personal info or you will be marked as a criminal.

To be forced to register your wallet and personal information can only be done on web wallets. Govt. Cannot control the desktop wallets and one can have as many wallets as he wants without the govt. knowing it. So if the bitcoin is to be regulated then the only option is to stop the desktop and hardware wallets and make only web wallets functional which is impossible.

[Reid]

Increasingly businesses are coming under some form of regulatory framework around the globe. For instance, on Wednesday the People’s Bank of China held a meeting with bitcoin exchanges operating the country with the aim of putting new regulations in place to guide them.

Meanwhile, the major selling point of bitcoin has been the privacy that it offers its users. With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

Here you will find the balance:
1. Coinbase was made for Bitcoin, not the other way round;
2. Bitcoin is sure to go on without the likes of Coinbase;
3. Bitcoin was born a decentralized currency;
4. governments love Blockchain, but hate Bitcoin.
.

I have that evil smile when I read this one. 

Regulators. What are they regulating? Isn't it obvious that it is all just because of large amount of money. Why now? Because bitcoin is hitting the thousand mark? They didn't even care when it was all down to almost nothing and now they want in. What hypocrites.

[danherbias07]

If you do business somewhere, anywhere, everywhere, then you have to chose if you want to play by the rules of the location you do your business, if you want to argue and fight the rules or if you want to ignore them. In most places you have to play by the government rules and accept the regulations or you run an illegal business. You do have the option to fight (with your army of lawyers) and might change somethings.
If you run an illegal business, then your priority should be to not get caught and your customers should be aware of the risks. If you run an legal business, then just follow the rules and your customers should know where they stand and what rules apply. 

You still don't get it: you're describing the status quo, not how things have changed.


Let's put it a different way: if, in 2010, a government issued a decree that all small businesses must pay a 90% revenue tax, businesses would have no choice but to comply (and almost certainly go out of business). In 2020, the same decree would not have the same effect.

So, the balance of power has changed between Bitcoin based businesses and the governments in their respective jurisdictions. Where the government previously had almost all power, Bitcoin businesses now have the power to resist draconianism, they have a bargaining chip where they previously had none.

And this is why they want control?
It will look like a balance but still it is for their own pockets. Well, it is quite understandable if we think of it. If there is no tax the government cannot work. Who want to be an official without pay. But with this, what they really want is more. The taxes are not enough so they see a hole in bitcoin to where they could earn more. This is BS but it is our own government who we are talking about.

[Senor.Bla]

If you think that i still do not get your point, then maybe make an example and help me understand.

You still don't get it, despite the provision of an example. Cash can be easily confiscated, Bitcoin cannot.

So you are telling me that the news we read from time to time about the police auctioning off confiscated Bitcoins are fake? I think Bitcoins can be confiscated and like i stated before it might be easier to do illegal stuff with Bitcoin, but it remains illegal. Even if they do not manage to seize your Bitcoin, they can hurt you and shut your business down and make sure you will not be able to spend your money. Just like now there are criminals who made some money, secured it somewhere safe and are now after their prison sentence unable to spend it, because they are watched closely.
But i guess you have a different theory and opinion and that is fine.

[alyssa85]

You still don't get it: you're describing the status quo, not how things have changed.


Let's put it a different way: if, in 2010, a government issued a decree that all small businesses must pay a 90% revenue tax, businesses would have no choice but to comply (and almost certainly go out of business). In 2020, the same decree would not have the same effect.

So, the balance of power has changed between Bitcoin based businesses and the governments in their respective jurisdictions. Where the government previously had almost all power, Bitcoin businesses now have the power to resist draconianism, they have a bargaining chip where they previously had none.

Things haven't changed and won't change. Bitcoin isn't anonymous, it is pseudonymous. That means govts can enforce their laws if they want to.

If you don't like the laws in a given jurisdiction, you need to move. Staying put and imagining that a bit of technology will get round legal structures is wishful thinking.

[Carlton Banks]

Things haven't changed and won't change. Bitcoin isn't anonymous, it is pseudonymous. That means govts can enforce their laws if they want to.

If you don't like the laws in a given jurisdiction, you need to move. Staying put and imagining that a bit of technology will get round legal structures is wishful thinking.

No-one said anything about anonymity or staying put being important, it's about the balance of control. Cash or bank account can be confiscated. BTC cannot. It's very simple, but apparently not simple enough for some


And so your reply doesn't even relate to what I wrote

[mobnepal]

With bitcoin enterprises and activities coming under the focus of regulators, where does the balance for bitcoin enterprises between protecting customers and trying to impress regulators?

Regulators want to take tax out of profit bitcoin traders are making with trading and also they want to stop people from sending their yuan out of country which is one of the cause for devaluation of their currency. Also they want to limit money laundering, any legally operating exchangers have to comply with this so they have to present all their record book to government.

So this types of regulated/registered trading platform can't protect customers information and they have to do this to keep running. But governments can't stop bitcoin transaction, face to face deal and deal over localbitcoins is best way to get way without noticed/investigated by authority.