What effect will Monday's US Congressional hearing have on price?

[Shak]

i'm nervous about this. are there any sources that talk about what US government officials, in any capacity i guess, think about bitcoin? i haven't seen much talk about this. i guess i will hold regardles.  

A bunch of old men, who now next-to-nothing about these strange internet-thingy, talking about an online currency that made criminal activities such as silk roads possible and could be used to finance terrorism *bang*

What do you expect?

I think it's gettin ugly in terms of accepting bitcoins as payment by us-companies, so the broad acceptance is postponed into the far future - thus postponing the "to the moon by mass adoption" plan of most bitcoin investors --> tulips --> major "correction"

[1714892619]

1714892619

[1714892619]

1714892619

[1714892619]

1714892619

[Rupture]

Price might jump if news outlets cover it.

[phelix]

Well, it's only a hearing, isn't it? Why should it have anything else then a mild/medium publicity effect?

The question is what will be the result from this hearing and when will it come.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_hearing

[BitcoinAshley]

The hearing itself will just function as a giant commercial for Bitcoin.

The price action will happen when they actually write some regulations.

Price went up after the FINCEN regulation announcement.

And in most other markets, regulation causes prices to go up.

However, this is just one country so it may not have a marked effect, especially now that China has so much more volume, and they only give about 1 1/2 shits about what the U.S. regulators do.

Drinking game: Every time someone mentions one of the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse in the hearing, take a shot.

(the four horsemen is a term referring to drug dealers, terrorists, money launderers, and child pornographers. i.e. the four most common bogeymen used as an excuse for things like the patriot act, the NDAA, CISPA, SOPA, the constant and unrelenting murder of innocent civilians in the middle east, etc)

[Kluge]

Idunno. I'm pretty freakin' excited just to see a two-hour Bitcoin discussion on basic cable (... even if it is CSPAN).  

This is probably the most extensive coverage of Bitcoin ever on a television station most US citizens have access to.

ETA: Son of a bitch - it's on CSPAN3. 

[Walsoraj]

Well, at least one thing is certain to happen: those already invested in bitcoin will interpret the hearing as bullish.

[the_sunship]

Idunno. I'm pretty freakin' excited just to see a two-hour Bitcoin discussion on basic cable (... even if it is CSPAN). 

This is probably the most extensive coverage of Bitcoin ever on a television station most US citizens have access to.

agreed - no matter what gets said, they are simply confirming the reality that this has arrived and has to be dealt with. That can't be anything but good in the long term.

Luckily, the US usually encourages competition in markets, so Bitcoin might be the darling of both Democrats (competing with western union, large banks, etc.) as well as Republicans (monetary freedom, entrepreneurial businesses etc.).

and I'm sure both parties are interested in bitcoin donations!

This could be framed as a win for everyone. I certainly hope that is the case.  

[ferda2mx]

Idunno. I'm pretty freakin' excited just to see a two-hour Bitcoin discussion on basic cable (... even if it is CSPAN). 

This is probably the most extensive coverage of Bitcoin ever on a television station most US citizens have access to.

agreed - no matter what gets said, they are simply confirming the reality that this has arrived and has to be dealt with. That can't be anything but good in the long term.

Luckily, the US usually encourages competition in markets, so Bitcoin might be the darling of both Democrats (competing with western union, large banks, etc.) as well as Republicans (monetary freedom, entrepreneurial businesses etc.).

and I'm sure both parties are interested in bitcoin donations!

This could be framed as a win for everyone. I certainly hope that is the case.  

Im not so optimistic at all, seems the only reason for hearing is one output: must be regulated

[Carlton Banks]

Drinking game: Every time someone mentions one of the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse in the hearing, take a shot.

(the four horsemen is a term referring to drug dealers, terrorists, money launderers, and child pornographers. i.e. the four most common bogeymen used as an excuse for things like the patriot act, the NDAA, CISPA, SOPA, the constant and unrelenting murder of innocent civilians in the middle east, etc)

Lol, how many shots if they just mention "criminals"? One for each sub-category? Plus one for luck?  

[CryptStorm]

I can't decide.

Will the $ value drop due to the negativity surrounding any perceived regulatory threat? Will the CNY price rise in sympathy, bouyed by the knowledge that the US market is being stifled?

Or, will the conclusions of the hearing add more perceived legitimacy to Bitcoin in the US, and send the price higher?

Hey Carlton,

There's an old trading saying "Buy the rumor, sell the news", so there will presumably be downward pressure on the news from pro-ish traders. However, news is news, and that usually brings attention and new money in this lower part of the sigmoid.

So, I'm with you... helluva question. Cheers! :-)

[DoomDumas]

It looks like it may coincide with a temporary top and subsequent trading range for a while.  I dont think the hearing will have much effect on price unless there is an all out assault on digital currencies. 

Agreed Congressional hearings are always meh anyway. Political theater. Ever see one with Bernanke?

Senator XYZ: Mr. Bernanke, [5 minute grandstanding on related political issue] blah blah blah, what do you think?

Bernanke: Yes, [5 minute speech on economics using academic terminology that neither makes any sense nor answers the question] blah blah, thank you.

Rinse and repeat for a few hours. It will be a chance for the public to hear more about Bitcoin, which is a good thing.

Lol, this is it..

IMO, there would be no real news after that.. But.. Can anyone tell me what is going to happen in this monday's US Congr. hearing ?  (yes, im not aware of any politric news)

[DoomDumas]

3pm (ET)  Monday on C-SPAN

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Hearings to examine Silk Road, focusing on potential risks, threats and promises of virtual currencies.

Ok, reading further I found it.  Thanks bitcon !

[CryptStorm]

The hearing itself will just function as a giant commercial for Bitcoin.

The price action will happen when they actually write some regulations.

Price went up after the FINCEN regulation announcement.

And in most other markets, regulation causes prices to go up.

However, this is just one country so it may not have a marked effect, especially now that China has so much more volume, and they only give about 1 1/2 shits about what the U.S. regulators do.

Drinking game: Every time someone mentions one of the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse in the hearing, take a shot.

(the four horsemen is a term referring to drug dealers, terrorists, money launderers, and child pornographers. i.e. the four most common bogeymen used as an excuse for things like the patriot act, the NDAA, CISPA, SOPA, the constant and unrelenting murder of innocent civilians in the middle east, etc)

As usual with your posts. +1

[cypherdoc]

zip

[antimattercrusader]

10 seconds after the 3rd mention of "coin validation" or "red list", don't bother to refresh just hit sell.

lol idk...

IDK indeed... But think about how absolutely impossible it would be to implement a red list or coin validation system.

Think of the jurisdictional issues - we're talking about a worldwide currency with users in dozens of countries with totally different sets of laws and regulations. And businesses that exist in one or multiple countries, with customers in multiple countries. Who would follow whose taint list, what agency would be responsible for maintaining the lists, how would one appeal a listing of one's coins if the agency made a mistake.....
Think of the ethical issues - we'd be penalizing future holders of coins for the misdeeds of their past owners - who are likely not to be connected with the crime whatsoever. Apply this to the USD for a sec. Think about if some of the laundromat's quarters were not accepted at the bank or by their supplier because they came from a drug dealer. What if the grocery store's money was placed on a blacklist because it came from a scammer/thief... or even worse, what if some of that was the money that  ended up in the cashier's paycheck. Could the cashier afford to hire a lawyer to appeal to the "US. Dollar Taint Council," and could she afford to wait the 8 months required for a decision? The ethical issue is a big one. Policymakers may assume that we'll nab all "black coins" the second they become "black" but this is not possible. Innocent people will get fucked, and they will get fucked big time.
Think of the alt-coins... and how incredibly easy it would be to fool, mix, match, color, taint, untaint, etc.
Think of the exchanges... and how different coins would have different prices based on which countries' redlists or blacklists they were on. There would be multiple exchange rates. Users withdrawing coins would have to choose between "clean coins" (and face a 25% withdrawal fee) or "possibly dirty coins" (and get their whole deposit but with the risk that some of them may be useless at participating businesses.

And that's just the tip of the iceberg in terms of potential complications!

If you really think about its implementation... a redlist/blacklist/validation scheme might be a nice pipe dream in the head of a power-hungry politician, but if implemented, it's going to fail harder than any regulation scheme ever concocted in the history of regulation schemes.

Everyone says "It would sure be nice if we could make it so Pirateeat40 could never spend his coins..." Naive retards. Do they really think it will stop there? Give the government an inch and they take a mile. Be careful what you wish for! I gave an example in the other threads. Of the person who says "I oppose the death penalty... except for that really horrible guy that raped and tortured murdered 15 teenage girls... THERE's the exception." Later in life they may find themselves sitting in death row completely innocent because of a DNA lab fuckup which will only be discovered after they are long dead. So be careful what you wish for, folks who "welcome" a taint list program! Think of how impossible such a program would be to implement, and how it could be abused.... You WILL get fucked, and not in any of the holes you like to get fucked in.

If they implement such a program, I'll be laughing and watching... with a sizeable amount of LTC ;-)

Ashley, I agree 100% with everything you said except for that final part - I do NOT want to get fucked in ANY hole.

I think we can look at the current state of the US government as an example of exactly what you're talking about. Income tax is a good example. Income tax was originally unconstitutional, but I believe that was initially *temporarily* amended to provide war funding. Precedent Set. Now we're dealing with a damn near 40% income tax, unless your poor, or rich.

Social Security, another example. I'm not a history guru in this regard, but I imagine that program was originally designed to set aside funds for retirees. Then someone decided to borrow some money from the fund for something, precedent set: now look at the shit situation we're in.

Loss of privacy, freedoms, etc. After Sept 11, people allowed the government to "take an inch" in an effort to stop terrorism. Precedent set. Now we have the NDAA (Ability to "disappear" people basically), government spying on all communications worldwide, drone strikes on US Citizens (And innocents), the list goes on and on. Most of those things are also "Precedents set" that are going to get much, much worse.

Ashley is correct, if we allow ANY precedent of coin blacklisting - it will be the end and fast. We cannot allow that to happen, and I cannot stress it enough, it will destroy everything this community has worked for. I cannot understand why anyone in this community would even support this concept. Sure it's annoying that people doing illegal things profit, but the problem is with their activity, not with a monetary medium of exchange.... a tool. Just like cash, bitcoin is simply a tool to exchange value - it is not the accomplice to anything. ugh. People never cease to amaze me.

[antimattercrusader]

The hearing itself will just function as a giant commercial for Bitcoin.

The price action will happen when they actually write some regulations.

Price went up after the FINCEN regulation announcement.

And in most other markets, regulation causes prices to go up.

However, this is just one country so it may not have a marked effect, especially now that China has so much more volume, and they only give about 1 1/2 shits about what the U.S. regulators do.

Drinking game: Every time someone mentions one of the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse in the hearing, take a shot.

(the four horsemen is a term referring to drug dealers, terrorists, money launderers, and child pornographers. i.e. the four most common bogeymen used as an excuse for things like the patriot act, the NDAA, CISPA, SOPA, the constant and unrelenting murder of innocent civilians in the middle east, etc)

Thought you might like this (Well, actually, if you're anything like me, it makes u mad and starts a internal mental political rant - but anyway, enjoy!)

[Zangelbert Bingledack]

Do you guys think it's possible that a bunch of the politico's will start buying bitcoin now that they know more about it?  I mean, we always talk about "them" as though the people in law enforcement and government act as a cohesive whole.  But the reality is that these organizations are just a bunch of men and women trying to look after themselves and those close to them.  If they see the bitcoin potential, I can easily imagine individuals in LE and Gov buying BTC in private while spinning pro-regulation memes in public, just for the optics.

Yes, exactly. Government is a bunch of individuals, and individuals who understand Bitcin enough to see it as a threat, understand it enough to see that they have to own some.

So bitcoin will slowly infiltrate the current political structures and government agencies, free-thinking individual by free-thinking individual.  The people that haven't yet "got it" may propose anti-bitcoin regulations and then wonder why there efforts are being hampered and the laws that make it into the books are neutered in such a way as to make them useless.  Slowly, more and more will understand that bitcoin is simply better money.  

A question someone might ask is why this dynamic isn't present with other things besides Bitcoin. Well for example, a government official opposing the Nazis in Nazi Germany took on a lot of risk, and a government official opposing central banking also hampers their career quite severely if they do it through political means, but not if they do it by buying BTC.

Bitcoin allows everyone, even those in powerful positions, to oppose the current monetary system without cost (in fact with massive profit) because buying and holding bitcoins can be done entirely privately.

[Its About Sharing]

The hearing itself will just function as a giant commercial for Bitcoin.

The price action will happen when they actually write some regulations.

Price went up after the FINCEN regulation announcement.

And in most other markets, regulation causes prices to go up.

However, this is just one country so it may not have a marked effect, especially now that China has so much more volume, and they only give about 1 1/2 shits about what the U.S. regulators do.

Drinking game: Every time someone mentions one of the Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse in the hearing, take a shot.

(the four horsemen is a term referring to drug dealers, terrorists, money launderers, and child pornographers. i.e. the four most common bogeymen used as an excuse for things like the patriot act, the NDAA, CISPA, SOPA, the constant and unrelenting murder of innocent civilians in the middle east, etc)

Pretty well stated.

I very strongly recommend everyone to watch this very well done video on BTC regulation and the nightmare that it is for the government. This will put things in perspective.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tR4e8zwnR6w  (Also, watch his other videos, he really has a better grasp of BTC than most people putting out information on it.)

The government is between a rock and a hard-place. They can't exactly come out with bad news when the rest of the world is embracing BTC.
Imagine the nightmare of bad news tomorrow and BTC going through $500? Seriously, at this point in time they have little to no choice (Well, sane people anyway.)
And imagine the nightmare of good news taking us through $500. It seems like they pretty much will have nightmares. Really, watch the video guys. Even add some to it here, as far as points go.

If they want more jobs moving overseas (and they might, after all it looks like the banks are doing everything they can to crash the economy), then they might attack it.
But, I think BTC is a bit of an unknown to them. Think of the people you mention BTC to. Most don't have a clue and these Gmen guys are busy.
I do have concerns about lobbyists getting in the ear of the Senate and DHS. I am particularly worried about the latter. They seem like a very scary entity that must be watched.

IAS

[smiley123]

10 seconds after the 3rd mention of "coin validation" or "red list", don't bother to refresh just hit sell.

lol idk...

3pm (ET)  Monday on C-SPAN

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Hearings to examine Silk Road, focusing on potential risks, threats and promises of virtual currencies.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/316289-1

Will we be able to see this live at that link?  If not, could someone post a live feed if possible, thanks.