we're going to be discussed at the world bank 6/14

[runam0k]

Time to merge the 10 threads we have on this?

[1714853175]

1714853175

[1714853175]

1714853175

[1714853175]

1714853175

[1714853175]

1714853175

[Gabi]

They are coming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Horsemen_of_the_Infocalypse

[Coinseeker]

just saw this on twitter
....

• Ernie Allen, International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children

...

Hmm. What is he doing in a World Bank forum?, and look at what this site thinks of him...
http://bringvarvarahome.org/ernie_allen.php

More than likely he is going to speak to the fact that virtual currencies are being used to fund human trafficking.  A legitimate concern.

[suryc]

In case you missed it: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=233680.0

^
This is a different event that was held yesterday at USIP where the Director of Fincen made a speech mentioning bitcoin

This thread is about a forum held at World Bank Headquarters yesterday.

Interestingly, both were co-sponsored by the International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children

[adamstgBit]

I think the idea of PedoCoin is pretty cool, it sure is better than ButtCoin.

I heard you can exchange either of these using nipple.

This is super funny


but does anyone know how the proceedings are proceeding?

[worldtreasurefinders]

I love how they put "value" in quotation marks when discussing bitcoin, as if this free market voluntary money is not really valuable when compared to the endlessly printed paper and digital fiat money they hold so dear.

The good news is, it doesn't matter what they think or how they decide to respond to any "challenges" posed by bitcoin, they can't stop it and we will all laugh as they try.

[Carlton Banks]

I love how they put "value" in quotation marks when discussing bitcoin, as if this free market voluntary money is not really valuable when compared to the endlessly printed paper and digital fiat money they hold so dear.

Extra irony is courtesy of new-er price fixing revelations: the currency markets are also rigged.

[suryc]

From one of the presentations at the World Bank yesterday.

Virtual currencies are not necessarily riskier than any other electronic payment system

I think this is a positive although the rest of his presentation is talking about how electronic transactions in general make money laundering easier.

Full presentation here: http://globalforumljd.org/docs/events/061413/061413_ppt_kobar.pdf

[Rampion]

From one of the presentations at the World Bank yesterday.

Virtual currencies are not necessarily riskier than any other electronic payment system

I think this is a positive although the rest of his presentation is talking about how electronic transactions in general make money laundering easier.

Full presentation here: http://globalforumljd.org/docs/events/061413/061413_ppt_kobar.pdf

This is ultra bullish. Exchanges must comply with AML regulation, that's all.

[moni3z]

They will create an ultra complicated regulated exchange policy then somebody will release a decentralized exchanger complete with USDcoins for instant trading which will make this all fall apart.

[molecular]

From one of the presentations at the World Bank yesterday.

Virtual currencies are not necessarily riskier than any other electronic payment system

I think this is a positive although the rest of his presentation is talking about how electronic transactions in general make money laundering easier.

It might be positive in some way but it's mainly a gross miscategorization of cryptographic money.

[molecular]

what the...

Today I had the great pleasure of moderating a panel discussion at a conference on the “Virtual Economy” hosted by Thomson Reuters and the International Center for Missing and Exploited Children. On my panel were representatives from the Bitcoin Foundation, the Tor Project, and the DOJ, and we had a lively discussion about how these technologies can potentially be used by criminals and what these open source communities might be able to do to mitigate that risk.

Jerry Britto seems to have hosted this. thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=233823.0

[Spekulatius]

De Jong’s presentation went on to describe three different functions of money — as a medium of exchange, a unit of account and a store of value — and added, “Bitcoin does not meet any of these functions.”

http://www.coindesk.com/world-bank-forum-weighs-pros-cons-of-virtual-currencies/

How can he say such a thing?

He either:
- Has no idea what he is talking about
- Somehow tries to protect Bitcoin by talking it smaller then it is
- Blatantly ignores the well researched publication "Virtual Currency Schemes October 2012" by his own expert committee:

In essence, virtual currencies act as a medium of exchange and as a unit of account within a
particular virtual community. The question then arises as to whether they also fulfil the “store of
value” function in terms of being reliable and safe, or whether they pose a risk not only for their
users but also the wider economy.

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf

- Is mirepresented by the source I am citing (coindesk)

[Carlton Banks]

De Jong’s presentation went on to describe three different functions of money — as a medium of exchange, a unit of account and a store of value — and added, “Bitcoin does not meet any of these functions.”

http://www.coindesk.com/world-bank-forum-weighs-pros-cons-of-virtual-currencies/

How can he say such a thing?

He either:
- Has no idea what he is talking about
- Somehow tries to protect Bitcoin by talking it smaller then it is
- Blatantly ignores the well researched publication "Virtual Currency Schemes October 2012" by his own expert committee:

In essence, virtual currencies act as a medium of exchange and as a unit of account within a
particular virtual community. The question then arises as to whether they also fulfil the “store of
value” function in terms of being reliable and safe, or whether they pose a risk not only for their
users but also the wider economy.

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf

- Is mirepresented by the source I am citing (coindesk)
- doesn't want to speak in any way that could legitimise the properties of the system that could remove him of his job and status

(you missed one)

It's the same reason why people are even interested in what the World Bank has to say, their opinions are thought to be amongst the most authoritative available

There is a long, long list of people that lose their job and status in a world where Bitcoin is gaining adoption

[molecular]

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

[QuestionAuthority]

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

[franky1]

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

this is where a guy in the bitcoin foundation patrick Murck. is failing as a bitcoin fanboy..

he is living on the rules of a country that bitcoin is not owned by

bitcoin is not US property or Euro property or British property. so how can a country that does not own bitcoin say that mining is considered MSB..

its not in any countries remit to categorise another economies actions under their own laws.

Fincen can only control and categorise the Dollar....

patrick Murck needs to hand in his resignation letter for this mega boo boo of not understanding bitcoin.

think of it this way. if i made some poker chips would i need a licence. no

if i was hasbro and made monopoly money would i need a licence. no

if i was a world of warcraft player making gold would i need a licence. no

if i was all of these companies/people above and sold coins/paper play money or virtual game tokens for fiat. would i need a licence. Yes (if doing more then $1000 per customer per day, and over 100,000 total income(as that is then classed as a FIAT Business))

[hacknoid]

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

Even if it were true that miners would be considered MSBs, I can't see how that would possibly apply if you were mining in a pool. I don't receive newly minted coins for the work I do for a pool... The pool does. They then pay each miner based on their contribution of work. So while I am working for the pool, all I am doing is processing what they are asking me to process. They then pay me for that work.

I guess it could be argued I am still enabling transactions, but in an indirect way. I get paid to solve work for the pool. The pool gets paid for the work, and then they choose to pay me. More like a subcontractor.

[newtothescene]

http://www.thegenesisblock.com/town-hall-discussion-with-gavin-andresen-and-patrick-murck/

Wow - How many people knew this little tidbit?

(PM) ALL miners are considered MSBs, since they are enabling transactions for a profit. The guidance is completely backwards – at a local bitcoin exchange the exchange itself is unregulated, however the people there are required to be registered as MSBs. The proper action for FinCEN to have taken is to clarify their guidance, especially related to product as technical as bitcoin, is to solicit public opinion to fully understand the matter. This step was ignored, and MSB regulation from the 90s had a virtual currency clause tacked onto it. Both the public exchange and miner issues should have been clarified in a public forum.

Even if it were true that miners would be considered MSBs, I can't see how that would possibly apply if you were mining in a pool. I don't receive newly minted coins for the work I do for a pool... The pool does. They then pay each miner based on their contribution of work. So while I am working for the pool, all I am doing is processing what they are asking me to process. They then pay me for that work.

I guess it could be argued I am still enabling transactions, but in an indirect way. I get paid to solve work for the pool. The pool gets paid for the work, and then they choose to pay me. More like a subcontractor.

I tend to agree with this line of thinking.  If I worked for a company generating physical items with my tools/hands that contributed to a larger product that the company sold for profit then it would be a similar situation.  Maybe they pay me for my work in portions of that larger product.  I can see the company being required to register as a MSB, but the workers??  Seems to be a case of "doing something with computers, so we need to regulate it more heavily than if it was only done in meatspace." Obviously more of a gray area since the product is a type of currency but still...

[franky1]

I can see the company being required to register as a MSB,

MSB is a product of US government and Euro government laws.

bitcoin is not owned by them

however a "data miner" that creates items for a FIAT value.,. then that would involve MSB.

i live in england why should english miners have to follow american laws such as what you interpret it to be.

other people in thailand will also ask why should they follow the laws of euro and USA..

now i hope for the 5th time you realise bitcoin is not owned by europe or america. so it does not have to follow those laws