DATA - Authority or Association?

[BCB]

About the PCI Security Standards Council

The PCI Security Standards Council is an open global forum, launched in 2006, that is responsible for the
-development,
-management,
-education, and
-awareness
of the PCI Security Standards, including the

-Data Security Standard (PCI DSS),
-Payment Application Data Security Standard (PA-DSS), and
-PIN Transaction Security (PTS) requirements.

The Council's five founding global payment brands --
*American Express,
*Discover Financial Services,
*JCB International,
*MasterCard Worldwide, and
*Visa Inc.
-- have agreed to incorporate the PCI DSS as the technical requirements of each of their data security compliance programs.

Each founding member also recognizes the
-QSAs,
-PA-QSAs and
-ASVs

certified by the PCI Security Standards Council.

All five payment brands, along with Strategic Members, share equally in the Council's governance, have equal input into the PCI Security Standards Council and share responsibility for carrying out the work of the organization. Other industry stakeholders are encouraged to join the Council as Strategic or Affiliate members and Participating Organizations to review proposed additions or modifications to the standards.

On this website you'll find useful information about the
-PCI Security Standards Council,
-the PCI DSS requirements for merchants,
-vendors and security consulting companies, and
-the Council's certification and merchant support services,
all created to mitigate data breaches and prevent payment cardholder data fraud.

**Note that enforcement of compliance with the PCI DSS and determination of any non-compliance penalties are carried out by the individual payment brands and not by the Council.

https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/organization_info/index.php

An interesting discussion could be had about the structure and organization of this group.

An even larger discussion could be had about it's efficacy.

Again this was an industry reaction to systemic problem within an industry.

I only hope any bitcoin effort can me more meaningful and effective then just a bunch of additional hoops for adherents to jump through as PCI has proven to become.

[bg002h]

This makes an apt comparison. Remember 15 years ago when credit card identity theft bankrupted people?  I mean, it used to be the card holders fault that the credit card network was so insecure.  Now, most credit card companies eat the cost of this insecurity.

[Coinseeker]

This dream is true for Bitcoin.

It is not true for the centralized closed-source currency-scheme called "Ripple" that you are supporting. Ripple has to face the harsh reality of US regulatory overkill, so it's quite understandable that they do ass-licking and propagate "self-regulation". That's why they joined the D.A.T.A. as the jester-in-chief.

I guess you just ignored all those Bitcoiners on that list that completely disagree with you.  Including Charlie Shrem, Tony Gallippi, well....here's the list below.  Thank God Bitcoin isn't being led by such small minded ignorance as yours.  If you want to be global, you have to play by global rules.  If you don't like that, start your own fork and ignore all the regulations you want.  That's your right.

And yes, Ripple is awesome.  Bitcoin is awesome.  Everything about crypto currencies is awesome...well...except the handful of zealots that drive me crazy but hey...I'm getting better.   

Let this not be a blind endorsement of what is to come from DATA.  As I've said, I don't currently have enough information to determine if this will produce positive or negative results.  I'm all for compliance and improving current and future regulatory requirements but I'm not interested in a new layer of regulation to add to the already near impossible task of US regulatory compliance.  Time will tell.

Here's that list:

Charlie Shrem, CEO, BitInstant and Vice Chairman, Bitcoin Foundation

Tony Gallippi, CEO, BitPay

Nejc Kodrič, CEO, Bitstamp

Jaron Lukasiewicz, CEO, Coinsetter

Megan Burton, CEO, CoinX

Edan Yago, CEO, Epiphyte

Yoni Assia, CEO, eToro

Stan Stalnaker, CEO, Hub Culture Group (Ven)

Jeremy Liew, Partner, Lightspeed Venture Partners

Patrick Murck

Chris Larsen, CEO, OpenCoin, Inc. (Ripple)

Jesse Powell, CEO, Payward, Inc. (Kraken)

Stephen Sunderlin, President, QikCoin, Inc.

Jered Kenna, CEO, Tradehill, Inc.

Sean Safahi, CEO, YoyoCard

Alan Safahi, CEO, ZipZap, Inc.

[nameface]

And yes, Ripple is awesome.  Bitcoin is awesome.  Everything about crypto currencies is awesome...

+1

Some people are so far into a "REVOLUTIONIZE EVERYTHING INSTANTLY!!!" mode that they don't really see how incredible it is that the community is taking real steps like DATA together.

[joecooin]

...by trying to regulate the unregulatable solution.

Bitcoin and the fact that it is unregulated _is_ the solution to our regulated problems...

 . I didn't know there were people who still believed in this fantasy.  You must have been gone awhile.  It is a good dream but like most dreams, does not line up with reality.

I did not know that there were people who still believed in this government fairy tale of the past. You must have not been around long enough to understand what is going on.

You have not yet realised that it is not a dream that is happening here, but the new reality, even if it seems to be a nightmare for you. Better get used to it!

Joe

This dream is true for Bitcoin.

It is not true for the centralized closed-source currency-scheme called "Ripple" that you are supporting. Ripple has to face the harsh reality of US regulatory overkill, so it's quite understandable that they do ass-licking and propagate "self-regulation". That's why they joined the D.A.T.A. as the jester-in-chief.

I guess you just ignored all those Bitcoiners on that list that completely disagree with you.  Including Charlie Shrem, Tony Gallippi, well....here's the list below. 

Thank you very much for your list of people in suits who run very profitable businesses which are relying on being accepted by the authorities of the most criminal government we have seen on this planet in decades to continue creating profits. Or any government at all, they would not care who they need a permit from and bend over anyways.

Thank God Bitcoin isn't being led by such small minded ignorance as yours.  If you want to be global, you have to play by global rules.  If you don't like that, start your own fork and ignore all the regulations you want.  That's your right.

Thank you for making so clear how much you have misunderstood the concept of crypto currency. For your information: Bitcoin is not 'led' by anyone, it is an open source protocol deployed peer to peer.

I'm all for compliance ....

For your understanding:

Bitcoin is not compliant to the current corrupt financial system as a matter of fact. In order to make it compliant we would in the end have to introduce reversable transactions and whitelisting, otherwise none of the governmental organisations ruling us will accept it.

You, your leaders, your list of suits and these authority-my-ass organisations may wish to introduce that and maybe you will succeed. You may even still call the perverted cool new law-abiding payment system 'Bitcoin' but it will by definition of the protocol be a bastard and the next successful chain will be much more resiliant to this kind of co-option.

You and the other 'lets-ask-the-government-what-it-wants-us-to-do'-folks are like Gutenberg turning around to the pope and saying 'look, I invented this printing-press-thing which will take your monopoly over the contents of books away from you. Now let's sit down and talk about what contents you would like people to print and what not!'.

But then, your need to offend people in this discussion by calling them dreamers and zealots and what not gives me the impression that you are not so far away from dissolving your obvious cognitive dissonances on this topic .

Joe

This makes an apt comparison. Remember 15 years ago when credit card identity theft bankrupted people?  I mean, it used to be the card holders fault that the credit card network was so insecure.  Now, most credit card companies eat the cost of this insecurity.

Please think about this for a minute!

No credit card company is 'eating up the cost of insecurity' ever. They merely redistribute the losses of their insecure system to the people who receive payments who then pass it on to the consumers.

I actually find it kind of funny that you picture credit card companies as someone who is kinda like 'eating up' costs to society, hence doing us some sort of good, while all they're eating is your and my money because they can do so because our leaders granted them monopoly to do so.

Ever heard about the Stockholm syndrome ?

Joe

[Coinseeker]

Try to relax Joe.  Everything is going to be alright.  I certainly wasn't trying to directly offend you, but if you felt like I was talking to you, then I was.  

[LightRider]

If there's one thing that the past has taught us, it's that when business leaders seize authority, they always do the right thing for everyone.

[nameface]

You and the other 'lets-ask-the-government-what-it-wants-us-to-do'-folks are like Gutenberg turning around to the pope and saying 'look, I invented this printing-press-thing which will take your monopoly over the contents of books away from you. Now let's sit down and talk about what contents you would like people to print and what not!'.

Gutenberg mostly printed bibles.

The point of DATA is to be the 'lets-tell-the-government-what-to-do'-folks. It's not a super-easy thing to change the financial system of the entire world, actually. It takes a hard work, and yeah, you have to make some compromises.

Here's Joe:

[TheButterZone]

Just heard this quoted on the latest Penn's Sunday School:

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube . . .

When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it’s picked up by scoundrels—and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil.

Galt’s Speech,
For the New Intellectual, 216
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/compromise.html

[phelix]

Somehow it reminds me of the Peace Authority - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Peace_War

Also of Eric Cartmen: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIVHNylH1Mk 

[Coinseeker]

Just heard this quoted on the latest Penn's Sunday School:

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube . . .

When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it’s picked up by scoundrels—and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil.

Galt’s Speech,
For the New Intellectual, 216
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/compromise.html

I'm reading this thinking, "This is the dumbest ish ever."  Then I see Ayn Rand at the bottom and say, "Oh, well that figures."   Please join humanity.  

[bg002h]

This makes an apt comparison. Remember 15 years ago when credit card identity theft bankrupted people?  I mean, it used to be the card holders fault that the credit card network was so insecure.  Now, most credit card companies eat the cost of this insecurity.

Please think about this for a minute!

No credit card company is 'eating up the cost of insecurity' ever. They merely redistribute the losses of their insecure system to the people who receive payments who then pass it on to the consumers.

I actually find it kind of funny that you picture credit card companies as someone who is kinda like 'eating up' costs to society, hence doing us some sort of good, while all they're eating is your and my money because they can do so because our leaders granted them monopoly to do so.

Ever heard about the Stockholm syndrome ?

Joe

Hey joe. Did you have a credit card 15 years ago? You are right to point out the trivial: they don't "eat it" they distribute it (again, a presumption...but it's not worth the time to discuss). The non-trivial point is that the individual card holder used to be on the hook for fraud.

[yayayo]

I guess you just ignored all those Bitcoiners on that list that completely disagree with you.  Including Charlie Shrem, Tony Gallippi, well....here's the list below.  Thank God Bitcoin isn't being led by such small minded ignorance as yours.  If you want to be global, you have to play by global rules.  If you don't like that, start your own fork and ignore all the regulations you want.  That's your right.

I'm not ignoring them - I'm just stating they do ass-licking in fear of US government which will not help them, because government is drowning in debt. Look at Argentina now than you will know where the US and many western economies are heading. Only enforcement will be more efficient and harsh in the US.

And yes, Ripple is awesome. 

Um... no. What's awesome about a closed-source centralized Paypal-clone?

Bitcoin is awesome.

Yes!

I'm all for compliance and improving current and future regulatory requirements but I'm not interested in a new layer of regulation to add to the already near impossible task of US regulatory compliance.

Contradiction within the very same sentence.


ya.ya.yo!

[BCB]

yayayo,

If you call following laws and regulations "ass-licking"  then I'm am an A1 ass-ass-licker.  I have to follow law and regulations in my daily life.  I have to follow law and regulations in my businesses.  And now the governments has said there are laws and regulations that certain bitcoin activity must follow.

While we may not like that it seems pretty simple to me.

[yayayo]

yayayo,

If you call following laws and regulations "ass-licking"  then I'm am an A1 ass-ass-licker.  I have to follow law and regulations in my daily life.  I have to follow law and regulations in my businesses.  And now the governments has said there are laws and regulations that certain bitcoin activity must follow.

While we may not like that it seems pretty simple to me.

One day you will notice that you can choose between following all laws and survival. Which choice do you make?
Something being legal does not automatically make it legitimate. Any dictatorship issues laws.


Bitcoin exchange businesses should be expected to be sufficiently intelligent to operate in countries with more liberal financial regulation.


ya.ya.yo!

[BCB]

Unfortunately the world is not so black and white my friend.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/3044794/How-we-all-break-the-law-every-day.html

[nameface]

Just heard this quoted on the latest Penn's Sunday School:

There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit. In that transfusion of blood which drains the good to feed the evil, the compromiser is the transmitting rubber tube . . .

When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it’s picked up by scoundrels—and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil.

Galt’s Speech,
For the New Intellectual, 216
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/compromise.html

Is it just me, or is this quote meaningless rubbish providing no benefit because it cannot be applied to the conversation in any functional way.

Good and evil? Come on, what is this, the 15th century? We're talking about solutions to modern problems, not witches.

[Coinseeker]

I think in a thread like this, it was expected to get some traditional "throw the baby out with the bath water" talk.  You know, government isn't perfect so let's get rid if all governments.  But for those of us that actually live in the real world and operate business', confronting the difficulties of regulations head on, is a good thing. 

Whether Bitcoin can be regulated is not worth arguing about.  The transmission of Bitcoin's is already under regulation.  Nobody likes it but it is what it is.  So moving forward, it would be helpful to have knowledgeable voices helping to guide regulatory policy in a sound and fair way.  Whether DATA is that group, remains to be seen but doing nothing but letting the fringe voices of "ignore the law" and "destroy the government" lead the charge, is certain disaster.

[joecooin]

You and the other 'lets-ask-the-government-what-it-wants-us-to-do'-folks are like Gutenberg turning around to the pope and saying 'look, I invented this printing-press-thing which will take your monopoly over the contents of books away from you. Now let's sit down and talk about what contents you would like people to print and what not!'.

Gutenberg mostly printed bibles.

Yes, in the beginning, which was a waste of a great new technology just as a regulated Bitcoin would be waste of a great new technology.

The point of DATA is to be the 'lets-tell-the-government-what-to-do'-folks.

Well, since I have already been called a dreamer in this thread I would now like to hear what one can call someone who believes he is going to tell the government what to do!?

It's not a super-easy thing to change the financial system of the entire world, actually. It takes a hard work, and yeah, you have to make some compromises.

I believe it is actually the other way around. The financial system of the entire world will change due to the appearence of crypto currency (be it Bitcoin or whatever comes after it). What really takes hard work is to try to manage the transition to a new economic system so society has the least amount of collateral damage, of victims who will loose everything, like retired people who may loose everything they have because they will intellectually never be capable of understanding what is going on and will only realise that they cannot buy anything anymore with the fiat they are getting into their old fashioned bank accounts.

Here's Joe:

Thanks for the image I actually like it .

But I believe your guess is wrong. As someone who does not believe in laws and coercion I actually have learned to compromise with my fellow human beings very well. I believe in cooperation based on the free choice of everybody involved.

The only party involved here who will never compromise is precisely the government and that is my whole point. Government will never say 'OK, we grant you some anonymity here and lift some regulations there and in exchange you do some KYC and AML on certain platforms'. Government will allways want to be in control completely, 100%.

I have stated here before what government needs to put cryptocurrency into their regulatory cages (reversability of transactions, whitelisting, ...) and no government will ever be satisfied before total control is achieved. They never did in recorded history and they never will for obvious reasons.

So going down this road will never take you to any sort of compromise but always to total surrender.

Then the suits listed above can continue making their profits in a safe and government approved way but the whole idea of a crypto economy based on free market currencies will be thrown back a few years or a decade. It cannot be stopped but it can be delayed. And the only way to moderate the above mentioned transition for government would be to give up some of it'S power, which will never happen.

Thinks Joe

[BCB]

I think in a thread like this, it was expected to get some traditional "throw the baby out with the bath water" talk.  You know, government isn't perfect so let's get rid if all governments.  But for those of us that actually live in the real world and operate business', confronting the difficulties of regulations head on, is a good thing. 

Whether Bitcoin can be regulated is not worth arguing about.  The transmission of Bitcoin's is already under regulation.  Nobody likes it but it is what it is.  So moving forward, it would be helpful to have knowledgeable voices helping to guide regulatory policy in a sound and fair way.  Whether DATA is that group, remains to be seen but doing nothing but letting the fringe voices of "ignore the law" and "destroy the government" lead the charge, is certain disaster.

Agreed.

And it is my opinion that we currently find ourselves in the US in this onerous regulatory position for exactly this reason.  Groups like DATA and the Bitcoin Foundation are trying to do something about that.  It doesn't mean that others have to agree or join this effort.

Download your own client.

Fork the code.

The choices belong to you.