Bitcoin Forum
June 27, 2019, 03:37:17 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: 2013-08-08 FinExtra - Bitcoin is real - get over it...  (Read 880 times)
hacknoid
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 417
Merit: 252


Proud Canuck


View Profile WWW
August 09, 2013, 02:35:26 PM
 #1


http://www.finextra.com/Community/fullblog.aspx?blogid=8019

Just skimmed the article, but seems well thought out.

Quote
Regulators can’t have it both ways. Bitcoin is either a currency or it isn’t. If it is, then the SEC can prosecute Shavers as operating a Ponzi scheme, but then trade in that currency is (by precedent) now legal, unless you want to write laws to specifically exclude Bitcoin from trade (or issue sanctions such as those imposed on Iranian Rial). If you outlaw Bitcoin explicitly by name, however, then if the name is changed or someone starts up Bitcoin v2 you have to outlaw the next virtual currency explicitly. Given the time it takes to change laws around this, that cycle could never be ‘won’. So then why not outlaw all virtual currencies?

The problem with that is if you want to outlaw all virtual currencies you have to make the laws broad enough to encompass any new configuration of a virtual currency that might arise. If you make it broad enough to accomplish that goal then you could very well end up inadvertently outlawing all non-local currencies, because at a broad level Bitcoin is indistinguishable from a real-world currency (as Judge Mazzant rightly pointed out). However, you would also make illegal more ‘legitimate’ virtual currencies such as Mint Chip, which is being incubated by the Canadian Mint currently. You’d probably end up making airline miles, zynga coins, and other such variations on the currency theme also illegal.  The upshot is that Bitcoin and all other virtual currencies or pseudo currencies cannot be made broadly illegal simply by virtue of the fact they are virtual, and current laws that define currency as a physical commodity or a financial instrument as written are hopelessly out of date and are essentially aiding the proliferation of Bitcoin.

BitcoinRunner : Side scroller game powered entirely by Bitcoin! 
Game (alpha): http://hacknoid.ca/bitcoinrunner
Discussion: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=907618.0
1561606637
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1561606637

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1561606637
Reply with quote  #2

1561606637
Report to moderator
1561606637
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1561606637

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1561606637
Reply with quote  #2

1561606637
Report to moderator
1561606637
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1561606637

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1561606637
Reply with quote  #2

1561606637
Report to moderator
NEW GAME FORMAT
JACKPOT UP TO $60000+
Guess The Symbols Of a Real Ethereum Hash
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1561606637
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1561606637

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1561606637
Reply with quote  #2

1561606637
Report to moderator
1561606637
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1561606637

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1561606637
Reply with quote  #2

1561606637
Report to moderator
superduh
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 602
Merit: 500


View Profile
August 09, 2013, 04:02:22 PM
 #2

finally, a smart thought out article.
we need more of these kind instead of just the really stupid ones

ok
deeplink
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 728
Merit: 500


In cryptography we trust


View Profile
August 10, 2013, 01:59:33 PM
 #3

Yeah finally another intelligent article.

Quote
Regulators can’t have it both ways. Bitcoin is either a currency or it isn’t. If it is, then the SEC can prosecute Shavers as operating a Ponzi scheme, but then trade in that currency is (by precedent) now legal, unless you want to write laws to specifically exclude Bitcoin from trade (or issue sanctions such as those imposed on Iranian Rial). If you outlaw Bitcoin explicitly by name, however, then if the name is changed or someone starts up Bitcoin v2 you have to outlaw the next virtual currency explicitly. Given the time it takes to change laws around this, that cycle could never be ‘won’. So then why not outlaw all virtual currencies?

The problem with that is if you want to outlaw all virtual currencies you have to make the laws broad enough to encompass any new configuration of a virtual currency that might arise. If you make it broad enough to accomplish that goal then you could very well end up inadvertently outlawing all non-local currencies, because at a broad level Bitcoin is indistinguishable from a real-world currency (as Judge Mazzant rightly pointed out). However, you would also make illegal more ‘legitimate’ virtual currencies such as Mint Chip, which is being incubated by the Canadian Mint currently. You’d probably end up making airline miles, zynga coins, and other such variations on the currency theme also illegal.  The upshot is that Bitcoin and all other virtual currencies or pseudo currencies cannot be made broadly illegal simply by virtue of the fact they are virtual, and current laws that define currency as a physical commodity or a financial instrument as written are hopelessly out of date and are essentially aiding the proliferation of Bitcoin.

But this approach would be way too logical and rational. There has to be a more complicated way.
cypherdoc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1764
Merit: 1002



View Profile
August 11, 2013, 12:47:24 AM
 #4

Yeah finally another intelligent article.

Quote
Regulators can’t have it both ways. Bitcoin is either a currency or it isn’t. If it is, then the SEC can prosecute Shavers as operating a Ponzi scheme, but then trade in that currency is (by precedent) now legal, unless you want to write laws to specifically exclude Bitcoin from trade (or issue sanctions such as those imposed on Iranian Rial). If you outlaw Bitcoin explicitly by name, however, then if the name is changed or someone starts up Bitcoin v2 you have to outlaw the next virtual currency explicitly. Given the time it takes to change laws around this, that cycle could never be ‘won’. So then why not outlaw all virtual currencies?

The problem with that is if you want to outlaw all virtual currencies you have to make the laws broad enough to encompass any new configuration of a virtual currency that might arise. If you make it broad enough to accomplish that goal then you could very well end up inadvertently outlawing all non-local currencies, because at a broad level Bitcoin is indistinguishable from a real-world currency (as Judge Mazzant rightly pointed out). However, you would also make illegal more ‘legitimate’ virtual currencies such as Mint Chip, which is being incubated by the Canadian Mint currently. You’d probably end up making airline miles, zynga coins, and other such variations on the currency theme also illegal.  The upshot is that Bitcoin and all other virtual currencies or pseudo currencies cannot be made broadly illegal simply by virtue of the fact they are virtual, and current laws that define currency as a physical commodity or a financial instrument as written are hopelessly out of date and are essentially aiding the proliferation of Bitcoin.

But this approach would be way too logical and rational. There has to be a more complicated corrupt way.

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!