Is New York Going too far?

[westkybitcoins]

If you base your company in North Korea then you really can't whine when all your rights are stripped away by a bunch of demagogues.

This.

I think the idea of people operating their bitcoin business from New York, California, Massachusetts, Chicago, or anywhere near D.C. is a very unwise move, and this is the main reason why. Honestly, inside the U.S. is probably to be avoided if possible, but at the very least I would have thought that avoiding the worst control zones would be a top priority for more bitcoiners.

Then again, I'm also disturbed at the number of bitcoiners who believe in preemptively meeting with and working with "the authorities." 

[CasinoBit]

America is crazy. The Bitcoin witch hunt could get interesting. They may even make a reality tv show that hunts down bitcoin miners.

SWAT team conduct dawn raid on basement of middle class subburban house with T.V. crews in hot pursuit.
Pictures of fat spotty kid being dragged out of bed and cops smashing racks of computers and cooling towers with the buts of their riffles.
Mum in her nightie sobbing uncosolably.
Father looking distraught, 'Marijuana, cocaine, even crystal meth I could understand but this - I can't believe you're a bitcoiner. You're no son of mine.'
Son breaks away from the cops and whispers to his watching friend and neighbour 'behind the fireplace, my butterfly labs ASIC - it arrived, fire it up and change the world'.
He is then dragged away to the van and disappears.

 

[Carlton Banks]

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

It's laughable from a non-american standpoint how a single city can have it's own regulatory system. The whole states thing in America is probably the issue, needs merging.

[Lethn]

There's nothing wrong with a city operating on it's own and regulating itself as far as I'm concerned, the Greeks did this and a lot more recently Hong Kong was once operating independently of China as far as I'm aware and was almost it's own city state, I think it's had to give up some of it's powers to China though lately.

[SeanArce]

cliffs on what New york is doing?

[Twilight_Sparkle]

If you base your company in North Korea then you really can't whine when all your rights are stripped away by a bunch of demagogues.

This.

I think the idea of people operating their bitcoin business from New York, California, Massachusetts, Chicago, or anywhere near D.C. is a very unwise move, and this is the main reason why. Honestly, inside the U.S. is probably to be avoided if possible, but at the very least I would have thought that avoiding the worst control zones would be a top priority for more bitcoiners.

Then again, I'm also disturbed at the number of bitcoiners who believe in preemptively meeting with and working with "the authorities." 

+1

[CompNsci]

Their announcement just re-hashed the usual set of excuses about why it is necessary to regulate BTC. I wouldn't interpret it as just information gathering. You can do that in much cheaper and less intrusive ways. They clearly want to figure out who they can possibly pursue legally.

[Gabi]

The ironic thing is what they are doing for something whose economy is a billion $ or so and what they do NOT do for things like HSBC 

[LorenzoMoney]

Many cities have semi autonomous status from the state they are in. Mexico City, Cairo, Singapore are all cities which are either a city-state or have a semi-autonomous status from the rest of the country they are in.

Your comments are laughable and show a certain ignorance about the world, history, the polis and in particular the nature of NYC.

NYC has a population greater than most countries. Even if London is still considered the world's most important banking city, NYC is a close second and a great financial trading capital. NYC has an economy greater than most countries. Court cases brought into courts in NYC affect the whole of the US and also the economy of the world.

NYC, like London before it, and Rome long before, are cities which have certain aspects of being states of their own.

The way the US is set up politically, having individual states has certain benefits politically. Read some Machiavelli and Sun Tsu. A country with weak internal states and a strong central government tends to be repressive. It tends to be hard to conquer but easy to rule once conquered.

As far as your comment that it is laughable from a non-american standpoint how a single city can have it's own regulatory system, since you speak for all non-US citizens, I will merely point out, Singapore, Macao, Mexico City, Vatican City, The Hague, as examples of the stupidity of your comment.


Peace!

It's laughable from a non-american standpoint how a single city can have it's own regulatory system. The whole states thing in America is probably the issue, needs merging.

[skull88]

As you may be aware, today's news: http://www.talkgold.com/forum/r398092-.html

Do you think this is going too far?  Will other States follow in their footsteps.  On one hand I do think that the whole drug issues around Bitcoin may be hurting those using it legitimately.

90% of dollar bills have traces of cocaine on them, and most transactions are done with fiat. If I would want to buy drugs, it is actually way more easier for me to buy it with fiat than with bitcoins.

The drug thing is only a poor excuse.

[ElectricMucus]

Eventually Team America: World Police will make all Bitcoiners wear a yellow coin badge when they leave the house so the authorities can identify them on sight. This badge will be known as the Star of Satoshi.

<-- yellow badge, I got one!

[LostDutchman]

Eventually Team America: World Police will make all Bitcoiners wear a yellow coin badge when they leave the house so the authorities can identify them on sight. This badge will be known as the Star of Satoshi.

You are 100% spot on!

Those who say that this will help BTC go "mainstream" are going to get what they are asking for but they won't like it!

My $.02.

[prophetx]

Many cities have semi autonomous status from the state they are in. Mexico City, Cairo, Singapore are all cities which are either a city-state or have a semi-autonomous status from the rest of the country they are in.

Your comments are laughable and show a certain ignorance about the world, history, the polis and in particular the nature of NYC.

NYC has a population greater than most countries. Even if London is still considered the world's most important banking city, NYC is a close second and a great financial trading capital. NYC has an economy greater than most countries. Court cases brought into courts in NYC affect the whole of the US and also the economy of the world.

NYC, like London before it, and Rome long before, are cities which have certain aspects of being states of their own.

The way the US is set up politically, having individual states has certain benefits politically. Read some Machiavelli and Sun Tsu. A country with weak internal states and a strong central government tends to be repressive. It tends to be hard to conquer but easy to rule once conquered.

As far as your comment that it is laughable from a non-american standpoint how a single city can have it's own regulatory system, since you speak for all non-US citizens, I will merely point out, Singapore, Macao, Mexico City, Vatican City, The Hague, as examples of the stupidity of your comment.


Peace!

It's laughable from a non-american standpoint how a single city can have it's own regulatory system. The whole states thing in America is probably the issue, needs merging.

I'd like to point out, before this argument escalates, that the subpeona actually came from the STATE of New York.... as far as merging goes... that is a slippery slope issue... and merging into a one-world govt is probably not a good idea...

[LostDutchman]

If you base your company in North Korea then you really can't whine when all your rights are stripped away by a bunch of demagogues.

This.

I think the idea of people operating their bitcoin business from New York, California, Massachusetts, Chicago, or anywhere near D.C. is a very unwise move, and this is the main reason why. Honestly, inside the U.S. is probably to be avoided if possible, but at the very least I would have thought that avoiding the worst control zones would be a top priority for more bitcoiners.

Then again, I'm also disturbed at the number of bitcoiners who believe in preemptively meeting with and working with "the authorities."  

+1

I think that working with so-called "regulators" is a short road to a quick death for the security and privacy of crypto currency, if not the death of crypto currency itself.

The would-be "regulators" should be told to go pound sand, as it were!

My $.02.

[prophetx]

Eventually Team America: World Police will make all Bitcoiners wear a yellow coin badge when they leave the house so the authorities can identify them on sight. This badge will be known as the Star of Satoshi.

You are 100% spot on!

Those who say that this will help BTC go "mainstream" are going to get what they are asking for but they won't like it!

My $.02.

I'm guessing Congress will hire some people on this msg board to start PatriotCoin, the digital p2p currency that is constantly inflating

[Carlton Banks]

Their announcement just re-hashed the usual set of excuses about why it is necessary to regulate BTC. I wouldn't interpret it as just information gathering. You can do that in much cheaper and less intrusive ways. They clearly want to figure out who they can possibly pursue legally.

This. I still haven't heard how the policy makers and regulation enforcers plan to regulate something that in all practical terms simply cannot be done. They still have no tactics except intimidation.

- They can shut exchanges, in one country
- They can ban IRL business use, in one country
- They can ban outright use (in one country) and have no real hope of being able to enforce the ban
- They can ban distribution of the client and see how that cat & mouse game works out
- They can try getting ISPs to throws as many networking hurdles in the way, and watch while that gets circumvented

Without a comprehensive worldwide authoritarian presence, and I'm talking CCTV in every room of every building and Skynet style total drone coverage of every square inch, there is no way of defeating this design. I suppose initiating armageddon is viable option, but then who would they lord themselves over, cockroaches?

[wormbog]

Their announcement just re-hashed the usual set of excuses about why it is necessary to regulate BTC. I wouldn't interpret it as just information gathering. You can do that in much cheaper and less intrusive ways. They clearly want to figure out who they can possibly pursue legally.

This. I still haven't heard how the policy makers and regulation enforcers plan to regulate something that in all practical terms simply cannot be done. They still have no tactics except intimidation.

- They can shut exchanges, in one country
- They can ban IRL business use, in one country
- They can ban outright use (in one country) and have no real hope of being able to enforce the ban
- They can ban distribution of the client and see how that cat & mouse game works out
- They can try getting ISPs to throws as many networking hurdles in the way, and watch while that gets circumvented

Without a comprehensive worldwide authoritarian presence, and I'm talking CCTV in every room of every building and Skynet style total drone coverage of every square inch, there is no way of defeating this design. I suppose initiating armageddon is viable option, but then who would they lord themselves over, cockroaches?

If the Feds were able to brand bitcoin as a tool of terrorists and pornographers, and declare it illegal, all the US-based bitcoin businesses would shut down and venture funding would disappear overnight. Now let's say the US declares that any nation that allows bitcoin transactions supports terrorism and loses all US aid money, loses access to US banks, and is put under trade embargo. Bitcoin would forever remain an underworld currency with a small, mostly criminal user base. The US gov't would then claim that making it illegal was justified, since only criminals use it.

US regulators can't kill bitcoin, but they can condemn it to obscurity easily enough.

[BTCdirect]

Interesting to see where this is going.

I believe this is a good thing.
Issues like this are inevitable towards the further accepting of Bitcoin in the US and the rest of the world.

[TippingPoint]

Anonymity in financial transactions is fundamentally incompatible with government taxation and currency controls.

Which one do you prefer?

Do you like banks (and other "financial institutions") reporting your transactions to the government?
Do you like IRS rules and regulations?
Do you like mandatory payroll reporting and withholding?
Do you like low value (max $100) currency?
Do you like TSA searches that result in confiscation of "undeclared" currency?