DATA - Authority or Association?

[Razick]

EDIT: I'm not saying I'm against it, I am simply raising a few concerns.
EDIT: Here is my NPOV (neutral point of view) article on Bitcoin-Square: http://bitcoin-square.com/data-digital-asset-transfer-authority/

According to an article on Coindesk, "luminaries in the bitcoin community have launched a self-regulatory body in an apparent attempt to gain a cohesive voice in the ongoing tussle with financial regulators." The body will be called DATA, or the Digital Asset Transfer Authority.

I take minor issue with the name, however: Any "authority" they might have will be resultant of a consensus in the community. Additionally, I think we have enough "authority" to deal with just accounting for the hundreds of government agencies, banks, and other self-regulatory bodies around the world.

For those reasons, I would suggest that DATA stand for Digital Asset Transfer Association instead of Digital Asset Transfer Authority.

Of course, I am also concerned about the real purpose of DATA. While the organization's stated intentions, and no doubt the intentions of it's founders are positive, history has shown that self-regulatory bodies can become quite powerful. For example PCI has the authority to fine violators thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of dollars per month even without any government affiliation. Not only that, but DATA seems to have hinted that it plans a more regulatory role than "gaining a cohesive voice would suggest." The following quotation alone makes me nervous: “We expect that DATA will require its members to obtain all required licenses and registrations, and that its oversight will supplement, not replace, the oversight of statutory regulators."

Sure, membership is voluntary now, but could DATA become Bitcoin's version of PCI?

[nameface]

Things can go 4 ways:

1- Bitcoin becomes very regulated. DATA is great because it helps lawmakers make more beneficial and informed choices than a government agency would if acting alone.

2- Bitcoin becomes illegal. If nothing else, DATA will be a beacon for whatever virtual currencies are still legal/unregulated.

3- Bitcoin fails/becomes very unpopular. Other virtual currencies will still exist, and point #1 remains valid in relation to these.

4- The world becomes a crypto-anarchy. Bitcoin is used by everyone and everything is completely unregulated.

I think most of us know that #1 is the most likely outcome. I welcome DATA. In the long run #4 might be a better outcome, but we certainly won't turn a corner like that overnight.

[EmperorBob]

PCI membership isn't mandatory as far as I can tell.
PCI compliance is. That just follows from the fact that all credit card companies require you to agree to their common rules before you can use their products (IIRC agreeing to the fines is part of the fine print).

Obviously, DATA can't exclude others from using Bitcoin for not wanting to play by their rules. So it's much harder for them to twist your arm into becoming a member/following their rules.

Tinfoil Hat on: They could in theory exclude others from using Bitcoin legally in the US. Regulatory capture is always possible.

“We expect that DATA will require its members to obtain all required licenses and registrations, and that its oversight will supplement, not replace, the oversight of statutory regulators."

I suspect it's mostly meant as a way to keep most big players in the US space from doing things that lead to regulatory crackdowns. Kind of like video game companies control their own ratings agency, to forestall government censorship. This may mean places like Bitpay may be required to verify all merchants on their platform are 'legit', for some definition of that word.

But yes, I understand your worries. The good news is that regulatory control always has to be tacked on, and so is more easily avoided, regardless of how many others want to comply.

[Razick]

Here is my NPOV (neutral point of view) article on Bitcoin-Square: http://bitcoin-square.com/data-digital-asset-transfer-authority/

[Gabi]

Lol at giving self-entitled names to their entities

We have the bitcoin FOUNDATION. Ye well, no, it is just your private group and forum, it is not a "foundation"

Now suddenly we even have an AUTHORITY. Ye well, again, just no, it is still your private group and nothing more.

Clearly, the only thing this AUTHORITY can do is regulate themselves and nothing more. They don't make rules, laws or anything else. They can't "regulate" anything.

Mandatory membership and having to pay to join? Ehy wait a moment, let me create the Gabi Foundation, let's make membership to it mandatory so i become RICH!!! 

[nameface]

Ehy wait a moment, let me create the Gabi Foundation, let's make membership to it mandatory so i become RICH!!! 

GLWT 

[Gabi]

I just need a word to make it looks important. Foundation and Authority are already taken. 

[nameface]

I just need a word to make it looks important. Foundation and Authority are already taken. 

The Gabi Association (GAS) | Est. 2013

Providing the crucial service to all BTCitcoiners of making them chuckle while they think critically.

Become a MEMBER - Have a GAS!

[bg002h]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-regulatory_organization

This is normal development of any industry...

[marcus_of_augustus]

" --- Transfer Authority" ... sounds like some kind of metro service.

I do not recognise whatever authority they might think they have over me .. or anyone else for that matter. People granting themselves 'authority' seems to be a particular egotistical penchant of our time.

[nameface]

" --- Transfer Authority" ... sounds like some kind of metro service.

I do not recognise whatever authority they might think they have over me .. or anyone else for that matter. People granting themselves 'authority' seems to be a particular egotistical penchant of our time.

I'm not disagreeing with you, but keep in mind that all they've done so far is setup a committee. They have yet to select who should have any theoretical 'authority' and why, and how far this 'authority' will extend.

They intend for the majority of the members to be independent of the industry (I'm not 100% how to interpret that, and I have no idea if it's a good thing. The "technical experts" will surely be from the closely related fields of finance and web/tech).

I don't feel bad about any of this. I'd rather see the DATA set influencing orgs like FinCEN then just avoiding regulatory compliance issues and "hoping everything comes up roses" for Bitcoin et al.

Most of us aren't here to fight a war against the establishment. We want to be strategic, and make sure the vile aspects of our culture erode away slowly but surely.

[Loozik]

Digital Asset Transfer Authority

This word usage can be:
a) an intended misnomer for lulz given the number of anarchists using Bitcoin or
b) an intended misnomer to prank the so called ''gov authorities'' (I almost sense the following Monty Python like situation: DATA guys meet statist bureaucrats in a room; both parties have ''authority'' word on their business cards; which party has more authority? I have more authority! No, I have more authority! - my ''authority' word has a bigger font, etc.) or
c) a sign the guys using DATA name to do business have no touch of the reality (they will be laughed at both by Bitcoiners and bureaucrats).

Time will tell 

[nameface]

This word usage can be:
a) an intended misnomer for lulz given the number of anarchists using Bitcoin or
b) an intended misnomer to prank the so called ''gov authorities'' (I almost sense the following Monty Python like situation: DATA guys meet statist bureaucrats in a room; both parties have ''authority'' word on their business cards; which party has more authority? I have more authority! No, I have more authority! - my ''authority' word has a bigger font, etc.) or
c) a sign the guys using DATA name to do business have no touch of the reality (they will be laughed at both by Bitcoiners and bureaucrats).

Time will tell 

[BCB]

The D.A.T.A. founders chose not to use "Association" because they did not want to be seen as a "trade association", "Agency" was too formal and structured so they settled on "Authority" (with the Latin connotation not necessary the modern English connotation).  

See finra.org.

Too many conspiracy theorists around here.  This is a group of concerned businesses who are trying to make a difference with respect to the onerous regulation here in the US and elsewhere where short-sited government regulations impede innovative technology as it relate to virtual currency and emerging payments.

Hope that helps.

[BCB]

Also you should read this.

http://www.cato-unbound.org/issues/july-2013/private-digital-economy

The first essay an excellent analysis of bitcoin as money.

[Razick]

The D.A.T.A. founders chose not to use "Association" because they did not want to be seen as a "trade association", "Agency" was too formal and structured so they settled on "Authority" (with the Latin connotation not necessary the modern English connotation).  

See finra.org.

Too many conspiracy theorists around here.  This is a group of concerned businesses who are trying to make a difference with respect to the onerous regulation here in the US and elsewhere where short-sited government regulations impede innovative technology as it relate to virtual currency and emerging payments.

Hope that helps.

I'm not sure if you were referring to me, but I am not a conspiracy theorist. I do have mixed feelings about DATA though, which is why I wrote this post.

[BCB]

I was not referring to you specifically but in this thread and others it seems the  M.O. is to shoot first then ask questions later.   

It is always good in anything bitcoin related to have a healthy skepticism.

I too have concerns about any central "authority" self-regulated a decentralized peer-to-peer technolocy in a way that all stake-holders are represented fairly, so I am interested in individuals real and specific concerns that are not just "FUCK the FED" and "FUCK authority" (which you have to admit there is a lot of in these parts).

[Razick]

I was not referring to you specifically but in this thread and others it seems the  M.O. is to shoot first then ask questions later.   

It is always good in anything bitcoin related to have a healthy skepticism.

I too have concerns about any central "authority" self-regulated a decentralized peer-to-peer technolocy in a way that all stake-holders are represented fairly, so I am interested in individuals real and specific concerns that are not just "FUCK the FED" and "FUCK authority" (which you have to admit there is a lot of in these parts).

Exactly.

[bg002h]

SRO's are part and parcel of every industry. Think American Bar Association, American Board of Radiology, etc...most likely, these organizations (including DATA) will have only indirect influence in your life.

[Razick]

SRO's are part and parcel of every industry. Think American Bar Association, American Board of Radiology, etc...most likely, these organizations (including DATA) will have only indirect influence in your life.

Most likely, but it is because of PCI's pain in the ass requirements that TxT Paintball does not accept credit cards.