FBI is after bitcoin? Good!

[Wary]

You all know the yesteday's news: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1k9jhv/congress_appropriations_bill_directs_fbi_to/
Congress wants FBI to investigate bitcoin threat and report what resources FBI would need to contain it.

What would any sane bureaucrat would answer to it?
Yes, sirs, BTC is a problem. Yes, sirs, we work on it. No sirs, there is not enough people and money. We need more. Heaps more! Because the problem is HUGE! We need to create a special Anti-Bitcoin Department and make me the head of it!

So, the FBI will have vested interest in BTC: It will want bitcoin to be a big problem. This is both a good and bad news.

The bad news is that FBI need to bitcoin to be a problem. Sorry, Gavin, but all efforts of "upstanding, law-abiding, clear-thinking citizens doing interesting things with Bitcoin" will not help. Bitcoin won't be allowed to become a respectable, reputable business. It will be pushed, with all might of "coordinated Federal response" to the area of pedo-terro-launder-underminers. Because FBI will want bitcoin to be there.

The good news is that FBI will want bitcoin to be. The end of BTC will mean the end of Anti-BTC Department. And the Anti-BTC department will not want to die, it will want to live and grow! So the FBI will want bitcoin not just to be, but to be a big problem. Yes, they will push us underground, but they will help us grow down there!

And a year from now the head of Special Anti-BTC FBI Department will be saying something like this: "The bitcoin problem is solved, I can be fired. We were fighting like lions, but what could we do? We were outnumbered because we were understaffed and underfunded! I warned Congress, but they didn't listen! They gave me only a half of what I was asking for! And as a result for this year the bitcoin has grown tenfold! And my secret personal stack of coins have ghown tenfold as well. Now we need ten times more staff and ten times more money!"

tl; dr: FBI will push BTC undergroud, but will help it grow.

[SeanArce]

Any publicity is good publicity

[neordicICE]

Typical american institutions. The only threat is national debt and colapse of current monetary system

[elor70]

im happy i dont live in the us..

[totemITnow]

im happy i dont live in the us..

+1

Must be shame to be US citizen

[pacojones]

im happy i dont live in the us..

I've thought about moving myself!

[Wary]

Any publicity is good publicity

Sure, but there is more to it. The point is that FBI will want BTC to grow.

[og kush420]

none of what you said will happen. in my opinion your assumptions are irrational.

if something similar would happen(it will not), the FBI would slowly close bitcoin. juicing every dollar out of the government and only doing just enough to keep their department open. if they completely fail, they will just be closed.

[tvbcof]

The OP is very high quality observation and analysis, and very prescient actually.  Sad (in a way) but very likely quite true.

Indeed it has seemed to me at times over the past few years that 'they' were actually propping the solution up and incubating it if anything.  Most clued in people see distributed crypto-currencies as a stunningly powerful thing fairly early on in their research.  It would not surprise me in the least if fighting Bitcoin were anticipated by some as a rich vein of revenue and power if it could just get off the ground.

[countryfree]

...on the nature and scale of the risk posed by such ersatz currency...

I know BTC is safe, but it will more and more difficult to offer exchange services in the U.S.

[drawingthesun]

If the busybodies, bureaucrats and lawyers take Bitcoin away from the American people, for their safety I would be very happy.

Hopefully the next silicon valley will be forced to form outside of the United States and finally bring an end to American technology dominance.

Just like the Government has killed the cloud industry (NSA Prism) in the states they now stand to destroy one of the next tech paradigms.

Of course for people outside the United States this could not be more welcome.

Like I predicted a while ago, the US will eventually be destroyed from the inside out by vile lawmakers and clueless policy setters. People who hold power because it makes them feel better will be the downfall of the US and the faster it happens the better.

So US lawmakers, please ban all the Bitcoins, make the internet slower, stop all pornography and make sure no US citizen can send a encrypted email or wander onto a bad internet page. Ban it all and make those Americans safe!

Thanks, the World.

[cbeast]

While all this brouhaha sounds ominous, there is little they can really do. There is no legal standing (nor logical reasoning) to consider Bitcoin any more of a threat than any other payment system. There will soon be a tipping point where government is seen as bullying Bitcoiners and some other nation will step in as a voice of reason. Smart money will go there (hello France, Iceland, Japan, India, and others). Until there is more than breast-beating, this is a good time to get cheap bitcoins.

Here's a test: One of the greatest potential threats about Bitcoin is *gasp* kidnapping with a ransom in Bitcoin. It's the perfect crime, right? Yet nobody has done so. Why? Because Bitcoin is not good for that. If Bitcoin was so great for narcotics, then why aren't the cartels using it? Because it's not good for that. Bitcoin is not good for crime. It is not anonymous. It *is* private. There is a difference. Maybe they are more afraid of privacy than anything else. Are you listening NSA?

[Wary]

tvbcof, Holliday

Thanks

in my opinion your assumptions are irrational.

I assume actors' rational self-interest. Departments want to grow. Parkinson's Law, you know. They grow if they can justify it to the tax-payers. Anti-BTC department will have very good justifications.

FBI would slowly close bitcoin. juicing every dollar out of the government and only doing just enough to keep their department open.

Person that "just doing enough" can't become the head of a department. Not ambitious enough. And there are ambitious deputies anyway.

if they completely fail, they will just be closed.

But who is talking about failure? Billlions of $ confiscated, millions of captives in prisons - are not signs of failure, but signs of great victory, aren't they?   Such victories get rewarded not by closures, but by promotions and fundings. That's how war on drugs is waged. Any reasons to believe that war on bitcoin will be different?

[Elwar]

The war on bitcoins will do to the Bitcoin price what the War on Drugs has done to the price of drugs.


We are all about to get stinking rich.

[Wary]

The war on bitcoins will do to the Bitcoin price what the War on Drugs has done to the price of drugs.

We are all about to get stinking rich.

I'm not an economist, but it seems to me that it is not quite true. If exchange is made more difficult, buyer does pay more. But the seller on average does not receive more. The difference goes to state or get wasted (Today you sell for $$$, tomorrow you get jail and confiscation. Or get shot by competitors). I wouldn't like to become that rich.  

Although real price will grow as well, because of side-effects of the war, such as publicity.

[Wary]

There is no legal standing (nor logical reasoning) to consider Bitcoin any more of a threat than any other payment system. There will soon be a tipping point where government is seen as bullying Bitcoiners and some other nation will step in as a voice of reason. Smart money will go there (hello France, Iceland, Japan, India, and others).

Agree, bitcoin is no more threat to a citizen than any other monetary system. But it is a threat (or at least a very big nuisance) to the states. That's why they will try to persuade their citizens that BTC is a theat for them as well. And for such persuagion you don't need logical reasoning, you need an emotional picture. Such as kidnapped child or blown-up skyscraper. First - hypotetical cases, then, when BTC grows bigger - real cases.

As for "France, Iceland, Japan, India and others", printing money is a source of income for all states (including ones you've listed). Why would they voluntary forfeit it? Or who would force them? Voters? What percentage of voters understand that inflation is a tax?

That's why I'm glad that we may get an ally in the enemy's camp, namely the FBI's Anti-BTC Department. 

[tclo]

im happy i dont live in the us..

It used to be pretty good but yeah, now it does sort of suck..  I mean it's still better than Somalia or Iran, but I suspect not nearly as good as the Netherlands or New Zealand and most of western europe.

But the evil interests have taken control of this country...they own most everything and always getting more and they don't do it by "playing fair".  If they have to, they will make a law that equates bitcoin with heroin or cocaine.  Yes those are still around but definitely underground and relatively dangerous to be buying or selling.

[tclo]

While all this brouhaha sounds ominous, there is little they can really do. There is no legal standing (nor logical reasoning) to consider Bitcoin any more of a threat than any other payment system.

You don't need "legal standing" when you can just change the laws.  Then you are suddenly standing on very solid ground.

[Elwar]

difference goes to state or get wasted (Today you sell for $$$, tomorrow you get jail and confiscation. Or get shot by competitors). I wouldn't like to become that rich.  

You gotta get bitcoins first. Then when you get the bitcoin, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the woman.

[DobZombie]

Who cares what happens in the United States.

I don't 

[mises]

Sounds like a lot of people here don't live in the states.

[cloudTc]

People aren't dumb, especially people in the FBI.

Bitcoin was really well designed..imo one of the most genius inventions of our time.

[solex]

The reply that really matters is the one which the Federal Reserve writes to the Senate. They will have the opposite imperative to claim that it is irrelevant. If the Fed talks up the "threat" of Bitcoin then that really will rocket this disruptive technology onto the front pages everywhere.

Unfortunately, like Tom's Illuminati, the secretive Fed would prefer its report to remain secret. Hopefully someone will dump it on Wikileaks.

[johnyj]

After a careful study of bitcoin, FBI people finally wake up and understand the fiat money scam is the biggest national thereat that they should investigate: Who get the ownership of newly created dollar

[solex]

After a careful study of bitcoin, FBI people finally wake up and understand the fiat money scam is the biggest national thereat that they should investigate: Who get the ownership of newly created dollar

Answer: FBI salaries, benefits, and ex-FBI retiree pensions (and the banks they use). They will all get some of the newly printed dollars first. When they spend the money then the private sector finally gets some of those dollars.

[600watt]

let´s hope bitcoin price rises fast enough for us to be able to bribe all those bureaurocrats. give em some btc...

[ElectricMucus]

The comments in this thread kind of remind me of this

[FNG]

Typical american institutions. The only threat is national debt and colapse of current monetary system

Bitcoin can be a scapegoat to USD hyperinflation

"There's nothing we could do...." "Don't blame us..you caused the $ to collapse"

[btctraderr]

Meh, if the US do something stupid and start attacking bitcoin more than they already are- they need to realise that bitcoin is a GLOBAL currency and shutting bank accounts and closing exchanges does nothing. They just miss out on the current (and next wave) of entrepreneurs starting Bitcoin businesses in their country. Bitcoin will still be there tomorrow- itll flourish in friendlier jurisdictions.  

[crumbs]

[westkybitcoins]

none of what you said will happen. in my opinion your assumptions are irrational.

if something similar would happen(it will not), the FBI would slowly close bitcoin. juicing every dollar out of the government and only doing just enough to keep their department open. if they completely fail, they will just be closed.

The U.S. has an agency called the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). It's job is to fight and win a "war on drugs."

They have utterly, undeniably failed, yet they keep marching right along.

Never underestimate the fortitude of bureaucratic inertia.

[faiza1990]

The war on Bitcoin will do to the Bitcoin price what the War on drugs has done to the price of drugs.

[Kouye]

The good news is that FBI will want bitcoin to be. The end of BTC will mean the end of Anti-BTC Department. And the Anti-BTC department will not want to die, it will want to live and grow! So the FBI will want bitcoin not just to be, but to be a big problem. Yes, they will push us underground, but they will help us grow down there!

They might even ask for an annual bitcoin budget... They need to be insiders to fight the evil, right ?

[bg002h]

The OP is very high quality observation and analysis, and very prescient actually.  Sad (in a way) but very likely quite true.

Indeed it has seemed to me at times over the past few years that 'they' were actually propping the solution up and incubating it if anything.  Most clued in people see distributed crypto-currencies as a stunningly powerful thing fairly early on in their research.  It would not surprise me in the least if fighting Bitcoin were anticipated by some as a rich vein of revenue and power if it could just get off the ground.

+1

That's why we need to educate.

[TheLoser]

lol damn 

[ninjarobot]

[faiza1990]

absolutely right and good

[GigaDice]

Who cares what happens in the United States.

I don't 

Well you should as their policies tend to transcend borders. I'm not quite sure what to make of this news just yet, although it's blatant obvious that the Fed's never supported BTC.

[faiza1990]

Who cares what happens in the United States.

I don't 

Well you should as their policies tend to transcend borders. I'm not quite sure what to make of this news just yet, although it's blatant obvious that the Fed's never supported BTC.

even Fes supported or no when they want to destroy they do this its their hobby destroy good things for selfishness

[Luckybit]

While all this brouhaha sounds ominous, there is little they can really do. There is no legal standing (nor logical reasoning) to consider Bitcoin any more of a threat than any other payment system. There will soon be a tipping point where government is seen as bullying Bitcoiners and some other nation will step in as a voice of reason. Smart money will go there (hello France, Iceland, Japan, India, and others). Until there is more than breast-beating, this is a good time to get cheap bitcoins.

Here's a test: One of the greatest potential threats about Bitcoin is *gasp* kidnapping with a ransom in Bitcoin. It's the perfect crime, right? Yet nobody has done so. Why? Because Bitcoin is not good for that. If Bitcoin was so great for narcotics, then why aren't the cartels using it? Because it's not good for that. Bitcoin is not good for crime. It is not anonymous. It *is* private. There is a difference. Maybe they are more afraid of privacy than anything else. Are you listening NSA?

All of these posts are FUD. If the US was trying to stop Bitcoin so would all of it's allies so there would be no where to go. But the US wont try to stop Bitcoin for the same reason Russia and China haven't stopped the Internet. Bitcoin is just too useful, and too important to be stopped.

Government regulation on the other hand is welcome. People who don't want any regulation are the ones fear mongering because they are worried about their Silkroad being shut down but the vast majority of people coming into Bitcoin now are speculators, investors, business owners, gamblers, but not the drug addicted paranoid of the government crowd who were into Bitcoin in 2011-2012.  Bitcoin now is in a completely different era and while it's still early adopter innovator stage the attitudes will change over time.

The originators were cypherpunk grad student and hacker types. Then you had the drug users and dark net types who came in right around the time when Bitcoin was announced to be supported by Wikileaks (which also happend to be the time that Satoshi left the scene). Then you had Gavin speaking with the CIA in 2012 right around the peak of the Bitcoin darknet era. That was also a few months after the FBI report which you can find on Wired.

Now the era is changing into the more professional era where you have businesses forming, people actually are getting rich now and speculators and a new generation of innovators are becoming involved. The new generation have the goal of mainstreaming Bitcoin and of upping the price as much as possible because the new generation are businessmen. Previous generations who were more about being pseudo-revolutionaries (the darknet generation) or the technological intellectuals (the satoshi generation), have differing views. Some of the satoshi generation want Bitcoin to be mainstream because they have or will have millions of dollars worth in Bitcoin and its all useless if they cannot spend it anywhere except on Silkroad.

These people want to be able to live on Bitcoins and you simply cannot do that if it's not regulated.  Then you have the revolutionaries and darknet crowd who never intended to have any legitimate use for the currency and who just want some anonymous form of money for their revolution or to buy drugs. And the newest generation the professionals are busy trying to push Bitcoin into the mainstream so their businesses can profit and they can become millionaires like the satoshi generation, and generally speaking they don't care about Silkroad.

There are different common reasons why people get involved with Bitcoin but I'll list some.

1. The beauty of the technology. (this reason attracts the college students and nerds)
2. The politics, how it protects civil liberties. (this is what attracted the darknet generation and they are concerned with Wikileaks, funding Snowden, and all that)
3. The people who want to start their own businesses and never have to work a 9-5 again (the people who saw Bitcoin as attractive to invest in, or who want to run businesses).

It's possible to be part of all three camps but it's important to know there are different camps and all camps support Bitcoin for different reasons. The political darknet oriented camps are the only ones in my opinion who are terrified of regulation. For their camp it's an existential threat and goes against every reason they are involved with Bitcoin.

It is my opinion that the governments are really only targeting that crowd. If you're into Bitcoin because you want to fund Wikileaks or give money to Snowden then don't be surprised if you get put on some FBI watch list. The regulation is not being put in place because the government is worried about Charlie Lee at Coinbase, or about mom and pop investor trying to shift some of their savings into Bitcoin. The FBI/DHS are targeting the people who are part of the dark net generation going around talking about how the government is evil and how revolution is necessary.

For the record I don't trust the government either but I also don't agree with some of the extreme and stupid positions I read sometimes. Regulation for me wouldn't be so bad and if you're so afraid of regulation perhaps you have something you're trying to hide from the authorities but not all of us do.

[Kuroth]

Any publicity is good publicity

Sure, but there is more to it. The point is that FBI will want BTC to grow.

That is true man.. Just look at the History of the DEA and drugs..  You think the DEA whats drugs to go away?   Hell I think they are even in on it..

Its all a damn Sham..   And I live in the US..

[faiza1990]

Any publicity is good publicity

Sure, but there is more to it. The point is that FBI will want BTC to grow.

That is true man.. Just look at the History of the DEA and drugs..  You think the DEA whats drugs to go away?   Hell I think they are even in on it..

Its all a damn Sham..   And I live in the US..

you live in US who cares you cannot have effect on these policy so Dea is big supplier of drugs and now same happen to bitcoin they want to go this up and their commission just this is

[Kouye]

For the record I don't trust the government either but I also don't agree with some of the extreme and stupid positions I read sometimes. Regulation for me wouldn't be so bad and if you're so afraid of regulation perhaps you have something you're trying to hide from the authorities but not all of us do.

So you don't trust governments, but want to be regulated by authorities.
Care to give me a little more insight about those trusted authorities you're talking about? 

[Luckybit]

For the record I don't trust the government either but I also don't agree with some of the extreme and stupid positions I read sometimes. Regulation for me wouldn't be so bad and if you're so afraid of regulation perhaps you have something you're trying to hide from the authorities but not all of us do.

So you don't trust governments, but want to be regulated by authorities.
Care to give me a little more insight about those trusted authorities you're talking about?  

Yes. I accept some regulation otherwise we'd all be killing each other over road rage.
That does not mean I want my personal life regulated, and if you can't see the difference then you're being an extremist about it.

As far as trusted authorities go, you trust the authority of the red light to mean stop and you stop to avoid an accident or is that regulation worse than when there were no lights?

Do you prefer we let drunk drivers get behind the wheel because it's a regulation expense?

What about when you use SSL and you deal with the certificate authority, isn't that a trusted authority that you count on to encrypt your data?

You cannot have any order and any system if there are no regulations at all. If there are no regulations then violence becomes the form of communication and regulation, and accidents are far more likely to happen when there are no rules.

I don't want the government involved in my personal life, most people don't.
There are places where I do want the government involved but those places are not my personal life.

The final question for you is this, if you're so against regulation if you were facing extortion and threats would you call the police or would you deal with it yourself?

If you expect to be able to call the police then you want regulation.

[Kouye]

Thanks for taking time to answer.

I actually agree with most of your post.

We just have a semantic divergence, you call that regulation, I call that public services, and am, even today, glad to pay taxes for those.

I also understand we need to delegate some responsabilities, and need people we trust to decide for us on small matters.
But I think everyone should be able to talk to those representants to complain or issue congratulations easily. Nations are way too big to acheive this.

And above all, those people who we trust to decide for us, should systematically evaluated by those who trusted them, once their time is over. And people should be allowed to vote on how many years the "leader" and his team should rot in prison, judging his overall performance in taking decisions.

This would hopefully turn away all the greedy fucks that currently take decisions for you, and for me.

[djtriggz]

First thailand and now the us i think the uk will be next

[MagicBit15]

What are they going to do, come to everyone's house and take their computers away. That worked real well when they did that with BitTorrent....Oh wait!!

*Opens BitTorrent*

[Luckybit]

I also understand we need to delegate some responsabilities, and need people we trust to decide for us on small matters.

But I think everyone should be able to talk to those representants to complain or issue congratulations easily. Nations are way too big to acheive this.

All regulators and authorities are not equal. Some will understand what Bitcoin is and just sorta get it and some wont understand and wont be open minded enough to try to. So there will be some who are easier to work with. I think most of the regulation should somehow be done internally if it's possible and then bring in outside help to handle stuff like extortion and scammers. It's a balance that has to be found.

Nations are made up of parts, and businesses influence those parts to bring favorable conditions to their special interests. I don't see why Bitcoin community cannot have it's friends in congress and law enforcement. It obviously should and that is how Apple went about it when trying to launch the personal computer. Apple managed to get the personal computer put in every school by working with the congress to pass laws which benefit children and that is when lawmakers finally got it. Apple was for the benefit of education of the children of America.

And above all, those people who we trust to decide for us, should systematically evaluated by those who trusted them, once their time is over. And people should be allowed to vote on how many years the "leader" and his team should rot in prison, judging his overall performance in taking decisions.

This is why we need complete transparency so all decisions can be reviewed. We need to know certain things like how money influences the political decisions of certain candidates and which candidates are pro cryptocurrency, which are against, and which just aren't educated enough on the subject to understand what they are saying.

This would hopefully turn away all the greedy fucks that currently take decisions for you, and for me.

They who make decisions shouldn't be making decisions for you and me, but on our behalf and according to our standards. Just as there is an Internet defense fund and just how Facebook has fwd.us or whatever, there must be both think tanks and lobbyist groups for cryptocurrencies and virtual currencies. This should not be about Bitcoin but be about the technology. It should not be about radical libertarian or anarchist politcs but purely about protecting the technology itself.

If people want to promote their political views they can join the libertarian party, or start a US version of the pirate party, but I don't think all cryptocurrencies should be linked to a specific political side because that will kill it in the womb. Most of America might be able to understand Bitcoin just fine, but they aren't going to understand some of the conspiracy theories and other stuff that gets talked about on here.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I also understand we need to delegate some responsabilities, and need people we trust to decide for us on small matters.

But I think everyone should be able to talk to those representants to complain or issue congratulations easily. Nations are way too big to acheive this.

All regulators and authorities are not equal. Some will understand what Bitcoin is and just sorta get it and some wont understand and wont be open minded enough to try to. So there will be some who are easier to work with. I think most of the regulation should somehow be done internally if it's possible and then bring in outside help to handle stuff like extortion and scammers. It's a balance that has to be found.

Nations are made up of parts, and businesses influence those parts to bring favorable conditions to their special interests. I don't see why Bitcoin community cannot have it's friends in congress and law enforcement. It obviously should and that is how Apple went about it when trying to launch the personal computer. Apple managed to get the personal computer put in every school by working with the congress to pass laws which benefit children and that is when lawmakers finally got it. Apple was for the benefit of education of the children of America.

And above all, those people who we trust to decide for us, should systematically evaluated by those who trusted them, once their time is over. And people should be allowed to vote on how many years the "leader" and his team should rot in prison, judging his overall performance in taking decisions.

This is why we need complete transparency so all decisions can be reviewed. We need to know certain things like how money influences the political decisions of certain candidates and which candidates are pro cryptocurrency, which are against, and which just aren't educated enough on the subject to understand what they are saying.

This would hopefully turn away all the greedy fucks that currently take decisions for you, and for me.

They who make decisions shouldn't be making decisions for you and me, but on our behalf and according to our standards. Just as there is an Internet defense fund and just how Facebook has fwd.us or whatever, there must be both think tanks and lobbyist groups for cryptocurrencies and virtual currencies. This should not be about Bitcoin but be about the technology. It should not be about radical libertarian or anarchist politcs but purely about protecting the technology itself.

If people want to promote their political views they can join the libertarian party, or start a US version of the pirate party, but I don't think all cryptocurrencies should be linked to a specific political side because that will kill it in the womb. Most of America might be able to understand Bitcoin just fine, but they aren't going to understand some of the conspiracy theories and other stuff that gets talked about on here.

Do they pay you by the word?

Edit: there is no foxhunt without a fox

[seafarer124]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal.

Once you earn or inherit, pay taxes then put it in the bank.  Once you have done that you should feel free to do whatever you want with your money.  Problem is, once your money is in the bank they then want it as well.

Banks are scared they will not have the monopoly to become fat cats.  They should get a life and understand it cannot be all their way.

BTC is just another form of redistributing wealth, and we have control.  Vote with your feet, walk from the bank to BTC.

[melon]

LMAOff topic:

 I usually  don't pay attention to respect =? ratings

 ...then I noticed kuroths avatar of none other than-

al bundy and the immediate respect =0 right underneath

...the only better option would be rodney Dangerfield...or both...
LMAO

[QuestionAuthority]

What are they going to do, come to everyone's house and take their computers away. That worked real well when they did that with BitTorrent....Oh wait!!

*Opens BitTorrent*

Force works pretty well in the USA today.



Just like it worked throughout history.



Don't fool yourself into believing that government force against it's citizens won't work because it always works.

[WinVery.com]

We welcome American players.

[faiza1990]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

[ElectricMucus]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

[faiza1990]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

dumb dumb

[jbreher]

These people want to be able to live on Bitcoins and you simply cannot do that if it's not regulated.  

Unsupported assertion. Care to show your derivation?

[Luckybit]

These people want to be able to live on Bitcoins and you simply cannot do that if it's not regulated.  

Unsupported assertion. Care to show your derivation?

So all those people who are planning not to cash out into USD who already have thousands or tens of thousands of Bitcoins, you don't think they wont want to be able to pay their utility bills and rent?

Bitcoin can become something we can all live off someday or it can get completely ruined by the crowd who under any circumstances are against regulation. At some point you have to weigh whether or not under-regulation will stifle the currency just as you have to weigh whether or not over-regulation will.

I'm saying under-regulation is equally as bad as over-regulation and that the goal should be to find the proper balance.

[jbreher]

The final question for you is this, if you're so against regulation if you were facing extortion and threats would you call the police or would you deal with it yourself?

I routinely submit to extortion and threats. And, if you live in almost any contemporary society, so do you. For this is the only mechanism by which governmental authority acts.

To believe that 'governmental authority' is legitimate requires the belief that the immoral can be magically transformed into moral by decree of the collective.

[jbreher]

If people want to promote their political views they can join the libertarian party, or start a US version of the pirate party, but I don't think all cryptocurrencies should be linked to a specific political side because that will kill it in the womb.

If I can locate someone who is willing to give me his pig in exchange for my magic number, we can trade. This is an inherently apolitical act. It is your position that is trying to insert politics into this simple interpersonal exchange.

[jbreher]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

What do you mean? 'Steal' is right there in black & white.

[jbreher]

These people want to be able to live on Bitcoins and you simply cannot do that if it's not regulated.  

Unsupported assertion. Care to show your derivation?

So all those people who are planning not to cash out into USD who already have thousands or tens of thousands of Bitcoins, you don't think they wont want to be able to pay their utility bills and rent?

I would just like to point out that no regulation is needed for private businesses to decide to accept bitcoin as direct payment for goods and services. It already happens on a small scale today, despite the lack of regulation, and dispite the fact that total bitcoin market cap is lost in the noise compared to the daily change in the federal deficit.

[emunebtk]

Whats to stop the US from making their own Digital Coin and mining factory for it to force people to use that one instead? I am sure if the US came out with a coin that you could mine and easily trade for USD everyone would jump on it pretty quick imo.

 On another thought if they decide to regulate Bitcoin and/or force it out of the States what would that mean to Litecoin and the other 75 coins out there? In theory they would have to put a law or regulation on all digital currencies right? This is so much bigger than bitcoin now

[ElectricMucus]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

What do you mean? 'Steal' is right there in black & white.

Kind of my point.
Depending on who you ask it falls into different categories, so it's better to have it's own.

[Foxpup]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

What do you mean? 'Steal' is right there in black & white.

Charging interest is firmly in the "earn" category, as you're providing a service (lending money) that your clients voluntarily pay for.

[ElectricMucus]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

What do you mean? 'Steal' is right there in black & white.

Charging interest is firmly in the "earn" category, as you're providing a service (lending money) that your clients voluntarily pay for.

As do meth dealers.

[crumbs]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

What do you mean? 'Steal' is right there in black & white.

Charging interest is firmly in the "earn" category, as you're providing a service (lending money) that your clients voluntarily pay for.

Making money from scratch -- building presses, graving plates, mixing inks -- stealing.
Taking money away from dumber traders on Gox -- making money.
 

[faiza1990]

There are probably only three ways to obtain money.  Earn, inherit or steal

You did forget charging interest & printing new money.

What do you mean? 'Steal' is right there in black & white.

Charging interest is firmly in the "earn" category, as you're providing a service (lending money) that your clients voluntarily pay for.

Making money from scratch -- building presses, graving plates, mixing inks -- stealing.
Taking money away from dumber traders on Gox -- making money.
 

all is going hell so just put it off all and do chat and watch MLB its better

[westkybitcoins]

These people want to be able to live on Bitcoins and you simply cannot do that if it's not regulated.  

Unsupported assertion. Care to show your derivation?

So all those people who are planning not to cash out into USD who already have thousands or tens of thousands of Bitcoins, you don't think they wont want to be able to pay their utility bills and rent?

Bitcoin can become something we can all live off someday or it can get completely ruined by the crowd who under any circumstances are against regulation. At some point you have to weigh whether or not under-regulation will stifle the currency just as you have to weigh whether or not over-regulation will.

I'm saying under-regulation is equally as bad as over-regulation and that the goal should be to find the proper balance.

You did not show how they "simply cannot do that if it's not regulated." Plenty of people live as well as they like off of their bitcoins already (the yahoos trying to make it into news items and documentaries are trying to do it without using intermediaries like Gyft cards. If you allow for that kind of thing though, then it's clear: bitcoin requires NO regulation.)