Regulate my ass

[herzmeister]

A BANKER WANTS TO SEE THE BITCOIN PROTOCOL CHANGED SO THAT BANKS CAN PROTECT PEOPLE'S MONEY AND STABILIZE THE ECONOMY.

Banks protect people's money? Look at Cyprus. Look at Greece.

There is no way anyone can protect money for a long time in an inflationary system where all money is debt.

As a friend said previously, banks can use eur, usd etc for their purposes.

I think he was being slightly sarcastic.

[jackjack]

Sadly changing this will be easy for the powers that be. All it requires is to make sure the main developers change the protocol to their needs and use that as the offiicial Bitcoin client on bitcoin.org

All new people coming to Bitcoin wont realize these forums are screaming protocol changes and will believe whatever they are told to believe.

Gavin and crew will comply since they wont like a cell in Gitmo, and so dies Bitcoin.

As of this moment this wont happen, but if Bitcoin because what we all hope it becomes the fight will take new heights. Its messing with the most power people of this world, do you think they will stand by and see their printed trillions blow up? Hardly.....

Lol keep thinking that
Bitcoin.org would be so ddos'd that even PRISM couldn't handle the load
Someone anonymous and outside US+EU would take the lead

[joecooin]

To make something clear:

There has been no single word in the entire article about changing the protocoll.

There are just two information from the fidor-ceo:
- he wants to see the bitcoin integrated in the legal system
...

That's all. OP did misunderstand a lot in a hysterical kind. Or he thinks, the existing protocol makes these goals impossible.

You are correct on that the word 'protocol' has not even been mentioned in the whole article.

I do believe though, that 'integrating Bitcoin into the legal system' means exactly that.

The state desires full KYC- and AML-procedures to be applied on everything that allows people to transfer wealth, that is, to 'integrate' a payment system into the legal system.

Yes I think the existing protocol makes that impossible so in order to make it possible the protocol needs a little change. Please correct me on that one, it would make my day to realise that I am wrong on this.

I do have to admit some hysterical laughter in reaction to those following two statements though but I guess you understand that, given the fact that it comes from a banker:

- he wants to protect customers
- he wants to stabilze the economy

I had totally forgotten that that's why we need banks.

NOBODY DID TALK OF CHANGING THE PROTOCOL!

Well, for a German that sounds like "NOBODY IS INTENDING TO BUILD A WALL". (SCNR! Famous quote of Erich Honecker. )

Joe

[Anon136]

http://www.americanrestroom.org/gov/ohsa/

the government is already two step ahead of you, pun intended.

[RodeoX]

Gavin and crew will comply since they wont like a cell in Gitmo, and so dies Bitcoin.

You don't know Gavin, do you. 

No one on the dev team would support a protocol like this. They also can not be legally be compelled to write code.

[Itcher]

To make something clear:

There has been no single word in the entire article about changing the protocoll.

There are just two information from the fidor-ceo:
- he wants to see the bitcoin integrated in the legal system
...

That's all. OP did misunderstand a lot in a hysterical kind. Or he thinks, the existing protocol makes these goals impossible.

You are correct on that the word 'protocol' has not even been mentioned in the whole article.

I do believe though, that 'integrating Bitcoin into the legal system' means exactly that.

The state desires full KYC- and AML-procedures to be applied on everything that allows people to transfer wealth, that is, to 'integrate' a payment system into the legal system.

Yes I think the existing protocol makes that impossible so in order to make it possible the protocol needs a little change. Please correct me on that one, it would make my day to realise that I am wrong on this.

I do have to admit some hysterical laughter in reaction to those following two statements though but I guess you understand that, given the fact that it comes from a banker:

- he wants to protect customers
- he wants to stabilze the economy

I had totally forgotten that that's why we need banks.

NOBODY DID TALK OF CHANGING THE PROTOCOL!

Well, for a German that sounds like "NOBODY IS INTENDING TO BUILD A WALL". (SCNR! Famous quote of Erich Honecker. )

Joe

WE DID NEVER BUILD A WALL !!! IT WAS JUST A MONUMENT FOR TOURISTS!!!

Honestly, I don't know nothing nothing about KYC and AML procedures.

In dubio pro reo, and there is a banker, who is interested in bitcoin, and he wants, what bankers usually want - profit from it -  and he says, what bankers have to say - make it conform to legal issues, protecting consumers - what else should he say? - and I don't see a reason to suspect him to change the protocol. I think, if he sees no legal way to deal with bitcoin, he won't try to change anything, but do what most of the bankers do: don't touch it, maybe fight it. It's about the commandment of the financial flows, and there are only two options: fight or cooperate.
By now I think it's good he's more open minded than 99,9 percent of bankers, and there IS NO REASON TO SUSPECT HIM OF ANYTHING but saying, what bankers have to say. He wants to cooperate, he gives bitcoin in germany a respected face, and he has to worry about laws and the government. So it seems, and I SEE NO REASON TO -- you know

[Bitobsessed]

The banksters just don't get it.

I think the problem is that they are starting to get it...

[joecooin]

Honestly, I don't know nothing nothing about KYC and AML procedures.

'Know Your Customer': both sender and receiver of a transaction need to be 100% identified in regards to their real world identity, address, tax number, whatever.

'Anti Money Laundering' demands a central authority that monitors all transactions and reports suspicious activities to the government, whatever the government finds suspicious. It also demands funds to be confiscatable in case the government does not like these activities.

THAT is what a banker talks about when he talks about 'integrating the Bitcoin economy into the legal system' and NOTHING ELSE.

In dubio pro reo, ... and there IS NO REASON TO SUSPECT HIM OF ANYTHING but saying, what bankers have to say. He wants to cooperate, he gives bitcoin in germany a respected face, and he has to worry about laws and the government. So it seems, and I SEE NO REASON TO -- you know

I don't know this gentleman and I do not suspect him of anything, I just take his statements from the press.

I would doubt though that any banker can give Bitcoin a respected face in Germany. As far as I remember some surveys people here trust their bankers even less than the 2nd-hand car-dealer from around the corner (can't find source right now) .

Joe

[Itcher]

'Know Your Customer': both sender and receiver of a transaction need to be 100% identified in regards to their real world identity, address, tax number, whatever.

'Anti Money Laundering' demands a central authority that monitors all transactions and reports suspicious activities to the government, whatever the government finds suspicious. It also demands funds to be confiscatable in case the government does not like these activities.

THAT is what a banker talks about when he talks about 'integrating the Bitcoin economy into the legal system' and NOTHING ELSE.

Really? Shit. What about cash?

It's confusing. So you think there is no way to integrate Bitcoin in the legal system without changing the protoccoll?

I looked in wikipedia, it says:

Mit dem KYC muss so vor Eröffnung eines Kontos für Neukunden geprüft werden, wer der Kunde ist, wie das Geschäftsmodell aussieht und woher die Finanzströme stammen ...  Von der generellen Prüfung ausgeschlossen werden können „Standard-Kleinkunden“, die weder besonders umfangreiche noch besonders außergewöhnliche Geschäfte tätigen wollen und vorab in eine entsprechend sichere Risikoklasse eingeteilt wurden.

As I see, this law is for financial companys, not private people. Both exchanges and banks verify the identity of the customers, this is done by now, most bitcoin-exchanges meet KYC. I don't think any banker is responsible for private bitcoin-wallets, like he's not responsible for what people do with cash.

I would doubt though that any banker can give Bitcoin a respected face in Germany. As far as I remember some surveys people here trust their bankers even less than the 2nd-hand car-dealer from around the corner (can't find source right now)

Bankers, politicians, journalists - very unpopular ... but I think in common more trustworthy than Drug-dealers, hackers, money launderer and so on, which are by now still widely associated with bitcoin. As I know Kröner is respected in his business field, and the least his engagement (?) tell the people is, that it's some kind of serious business, not a joke.

[Cryddit]

No reason nations not use protocol. 

Issue cryptocoin convertible to/from regular currency that nation, "control" money supply same as now. 

Why pay attention existing bitcoins?  Can just replace all with "real" currency altcoin, not give away wealth to bitcoin holders.

[virtualmaster]

Big Brother is watching you

[ElectricMucus]

Uh I can't really see that statement as being about the Bitcoin Protocol. He's talking about the economy, most likely that concerns exchanges, merchants and such.

Everybody who uses Bitcoin is part of the Botcoin-economy and every transaction is an economic act. If someone demands "oversight" or regulation of the Bitcoin economy he talks about every user and every transaction.

Hence, he is talking about the protocol.

I just put my tinfoil hat on and tried to interpret it any other way but failed.

Joe

At first: I haven't said it's every aspect of the economy, I clearly stated what part this would be about. In particular mtgox(confirmed) and bitpay(probably) are what they are concerned about.
Second: This is about how Bitcoin is being used not what it is.

Do you think the FEDs are that stupid not to realize that the only way to fight silk road is on their terms? The signs should be pretty clear by now if you look at the succession of events. They won't to squash to undermine the legal efforts of the economy since that would only make it harder to hunt DPR & co.
Last: This requires no tinfoil hat but just common sense, which seems to be in short supply lately...  

[Bitobsessed]

Big Brother is watching you

[tclo]

The banksters just don't get it.

I think the problem is that they are starting to get it...

yes very true. Why don't we have electric cars and more solar power?  It's because Big Oil won't allow it.

Why won't bitcoin be allowed to flourish and grow naturally.  It's because the Big Banks won't allow it.

They both have hundreds of billions of dollars and the power that comes with that.  I doubt bitcoin will win this fight but of course I hope it does.

[Carlton Banks]

The banksters just don't get it.

I think the problem is that they are starting to get it...

yes very true. Why don't we have electric cars and more solar power?  It's because Big Oil won't allow it.

Why won't bitcoin be allowed to flourish and grow naturally.  It's because the Big Banks won't allow it.

They both have hundreds of billions of dollars and the power that comes with that.  I doubt bitcoin will win this fight but of course I hope it does.

The banks have lost their own industry already anyway, without Bitcoin doing any of the damage at all. The central banks just have to figure out when they're going to raise rates, or just never do it and keep increasing the rate at which they're printing money. Sooner or later, people will gradually begin to wake up from their dream (to a living nightmare, most likely)

[HGT24]

Definitely not surprised by this.