Can there be some Bitcoin Central Agency in future?

[teosanru]

People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices

[AB de Royse777]

So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute?

That day there the philosophy of Bitcoin will die. They will have all the logs of the address you are giving them and they will know how much bitcoin you own. Do you think this is why bitcoin invented?

Bitcoin is a gift for us. There is nothing wrong with it. It's how we use it. We have nuclear power but we need to decide which will be the application to serve the mankind. Should we create more nuclear bombs or we should use it to generate electricity for city and country sides?
 

[DooMAD]

The way to avoid scams is by using your brain, not placing trust in central authorities. 

But if you want to persist with such a terrible idea and pay some people to do this job, go right ahead.  Or did you think they're going to do it for free?  Or that someone else was going to pay for it?  Think it through, please.

[Distraction]

People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices

I liked the way you think. If there was a control system for the scammers, scam projects etc. , it could be very beneficial. But I regret to say that a control system like you say contradicts the Bitcoin's decentralized nature.

[teosanru]

So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute?

That day there the philosophy of Bitcoin will die. They will have all the logs of the address you are giving them and they will know how much bitcoin you own. Do you think this is why bitcoin invented?

Bitcoin is a gift for us. There is nothing wrong with it. It's how we use it. We have nuclear power but we need to decide which will be the application to serve the mankind. Should we create more nuclear bombs or we should use it to generate electricity for city and country sides?
 

Nuclear power is restricted resource not everyone is capable of creating it or using it which is the reason why there is no harm created by it. Give it in hands of everyone and you will see what kind of agony it can create. Moreover I understand Bitcoin is a gift but what solutions do you have for ever increasing scams and hacks. Doesn't matter how much brain you use there is almost certainty that without regulation there will always be some or the other kind of shady things going around. If you don't trust me check out manipulation done by exchanges themselves and also what about the ICO wave? Name 10 ICOs who have completed what they said.

[ChrisPop]

I don't think that making a "Bitcoin Central Agency" as you name it would be a feasible option. I think the best way to  protect investors from scams is to organise educational campaigns and most importantly to limit their exposure to investors aka their advertising venues.

[BrewMaster]

well the real "goal" is to create a decentralized system not just have some decentralized aspects and other centralized aspects all around it.
so in this case the goal should still be to stick to that decentralization. what this means is that in your example (the scams) we should try and come up with decentralized ways. one way that comes to mind is usage of multi signature schemes with (2 of 3) or without (2 of 2) escrows.

[teosanru]

I don't think that making a "Bitcoin Central Agency" as you name it would be a feasible option. I think the best way to  protect investors from scams is to organise educational campaigns and most importantly to limit their exposure to investors aka their advertising venues.

Actually the thing is we are so much against the very concept of Bitcoin Central Agency but we almost have no issues while working on exchanges. Don't you think these exchanges too are types of central authority I recently read that top 5 exchanges hold 1 Billion Worth Bitcoin which I think is enough to manipulate markets. If they decide to form a cartel they can easily manipulate markets so why don't create some agency which can stop them from doing such things?

[th3nolo]

People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices

There's no way something like that will ever happen, by the own definition of Bitcoin.org..

Bitcoin uses peer-to-peer technology to operate with no central authority or banks; managing transactions and the issuing of bitcoins is carried out collectively by the network. Bitcoin is open-source; its design is public, nobody owns or controls Bitcoin and everyone can take part. Through many of its unique properties, Bitcoin allows exciting uses that could not be covered by any previous payment system.

I recommend you to watch this documentary about bitcoin to understand In deep its philosophy and why there wouldn't be ever a central agency on Bitcoin.

The Bitcoin Phenomenon

Bonus:
https://bitcoin.org/en/resources

Edit: typo

[carter34]

So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute?

This would not create adoption because many people who use bitcoin at this time are more into it since it does not disclose identity. They even don't like the idea of KYC, that mean legislation or litigation itself won't bring more investors.

[franky1]

first of all. if you dont know the true identity, location of the recipient.. no central authority can do anything about it. even if you get a shiny gold leaf certificate saying your the victim, it wont help you get funds back. after all how will you get your funds if you cant even slap the recipient

if you do know the true identity of the recipient. then take them to court. it doesnt matter if they stole btc, a goldfish, your wifes underwear or a lawnmower. you can still take them to court

secondly
with fiat many people who send funds somewhere do so for bad intentions of getting the goods/service they are buying and then once received. claim they are a victim of fraud to then get thier funds back too.. so any central authority wont just accept a simple victim cry story and you instantly win. you wont be compensated just for suggesting a victim story. you need to know the recipient and get them to defend their side and if proven guilty enforced to repay their illicit gains back to you.
i say this because idea's like this topic presents is not original. they end up turning into silly secondary idea's of making bitcoin transactions reversible if a known jury multisig is used to get the funds from the guilty persons private key. which as i said could be abused by what is termed 'chargeback scammers'. it also opens up other attack vectors of abuse. so it aint gonna happen

[CryptoBry]

People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can control certain malpractices

Scams are actually issues that the government should be addressing as the laws covering frauds are fairly established. Now, the problem is that we in this industry do not listen to warnings from the government and we patronize projects which are doubtful because we are enticed with the promises from the scammers. To be fair, this is not the problem of Bitcoin just like it is not the problem of the dollar if there is going to be a pyramiding scam and they happen to be using the dollar as the money to pay-in.

[teosanru]

first of all. if you dont know the true identity, location of the recipient.. no central authority can do anything about it. even if you get a shiny gold leaf certificate saying your the victim, it wont help you get funds back. after all how will you get your funds if you cant even slap the recipient

if you do know the true identity of the recipient. then take them to court. it doesnt matter if they stole btc, a goldfish, your wifes underwear or a lawnmower. you can still take them to court

secondly
many people who send funds somewhere do so for bad intentions of getting the goods/service they are buying and then once received. claim they are a victim of fraud to then get thier funds back too.. so any central authority wont just accept a simple victim cry story and you instantly win. you wont be compensated just for suggesting a victim story. you need to know the recipient and get them to defend their side and if proven guilty enforced to repay their illicit gains back to you.
i say this because idea's like this topic presents is not original. they end up turning into silly secondary idea's of making bitcoin transactions reversible if a known jury multisig is used to get the funds from the guilty persons private key. which as i said could be abused by what is termed 'chargeback scammers'. it also opens up other attack vectors of abuse. so it aint gonna happen

Actually all what you are saying is happening as of now too. I accept reversing transactions can be nasty but so is the problem of not reversing transactions. Bitcoins worth millions have been hacked. Moreover I am just suggesting an idea like a normal usual world with crypto instead of fiat. Because I think P2P is much more like a dream as of now. Moreover, even if you know the recipient most of the courts around the world have already warned that they won't entertain any such complaints as they do not acknowledge payments in crypto therefore people doing such things are doing it at their own risk. I know most of the European Countries do provide such protection but world is Not Europe only.

[franky1]

Actually all what you are saying is happening as of now too. I accept reversing transactions can be nasty but so is the problem of not reversing transactions. Bitcoins worth millions have been hacked. Moreover I am just suggesting an idea like a normal usual world with crypto instead of fiat. Because I think P2P is much more like a dream as of now. Moreover, even if you know the recipient most of the courts around the world have already warned that they won't entertain any such complaints as they do not acknowledge payments in crypto therefore people doing such things are doing it at their own risk. I know most of the European Countries do provide such protection but world is Not Europe only.

actually courts dont have a list of items that cant be judged on, they simply dont appreciate judging cases where the value of the item in question is not worthy of the court costs.
which as we both agree is the same fiat situations. scammers get away not because courts dont recognise an asset, but because the value stoln is not worthy of following up with, which a victim with court costs, lawyer costs, travel costs and days off work costs deem not worth it. and its these things scammers pray on as their get out of jail free card. not pray for courts ignorance of asset ownership laws or supposed btc banned from court as you seem to imply. just simple dont steal too much to risk a victim pursuing.

alot of people claim china, japan, africa, thailand, south america and many more are hesitant. yet there have ben bitcoin related court cases in those countries.

either way. fiat or bitcoin its still the same problem. knowing the recipient, having value stolen worthy of following up, proof you the victim are not just chargeback scamming. are things that cause issues in the legal system where a fair trial may not go a victims way.

but here is a solution to avoid being defrauded
1. dont give money to strangers.
would you stand in the middle of town and just hand a suitcase of money to a random passer by and say here you go, have this, but i want it back in full in 1 month... hoping they will just turn up.
2. know your recipient. if your giving funds to someone and you know you will want it back and its life changing amounts. find out about them. yea ok if its grocery value amounts dont worry so much, but if its a months rent or a lambo amount dont be so dumb trusting
3. in short if you dont know enough about someone to slap them with a wet fish should they wrong you. then you should slap yourself

[CLS63]

People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices

I think Bitcoin will need a control unit for security gaps and scams before the problems reach critical levels. I think a system that will not disarray Bitcoin's structure can be developed to solve these problems in the future.

[Shenzou]

I don't think that such thing can really happen, because the whole point of using bitcoin and what is based on is decentralization and creating an agency or something to control and centralize it is defying that idea, scams and other things happen because people are being stupid and uneducated, if you lose your money investing in some shady website that is your fault and no one else, bitcoin is secure and independent and odes not need any regulation due to its nature and how the blockchain works.

[franky1]

ok lets play hypothetical, for the sake of the topic creator

lets pretend ther is a country where a court simply wont even bother accepting a claim for any amount. purely because its crypto
lets presume a group of people set up their own arbitration system/tribuneral service

1. how punishable will the guilty person be. think about it. its not like he will get thrown in prison as that requires a court system
how feasible would a guilty party be forced to hand over the funds. we already know regular court systems put court orders on people to repay/compensate victims. but the guilty party simply walks out th door and doesnt come back, or at best just pays like $1 a month as a token gesture that he is following court order. so how can a independant group have any more or equal punishment powers as a court does.

i say this because even if the scammer gets identified, what power would some social group have to not only seize computer equipmnt, not only arrest the person. not only force thm to sit in arbitration/tribuneral. but to then actually get punished.
all i s happening is a knock at the door and the guy laughing in their face or getting a piece of paper demanding they attend a tribuneral and the guy saying, well that will make nice spare toilet paper

2. who is going to pay for the stuff involved with handling the scmmer just to get him to appear at tribuneral. remember it actually costs people money to have an office, staff it, write out appointment letters. sit as judge/jury. before the case is even heard. so who's paying upfront costs.
i say this because traditional courts are coverd upfront by government budgets and then compensation/court fee's win or lose come from the attendee's later to reimburse the courts. but in a hypothtical where a government legal system does not accept bitcoin. there wont be government assistance. thus victims will most definetly have to pay more upfront,

..
but anyway. its just much better to not hand world changing amounts to strangers (prevention better than remedy)

[qwertyup23]

People often tend to say that Bitcoin is a P2P currency based on the trust between two people. However it's obvious that these days scams are on rapid rise while governments are generally not providing any legal security to those who are involved in this. So do you think there can be some central Bitcoin Authority represented by various people who can become jury in such cases of dispute? I think this can also increase adoption as people can trust btc more. Also even countries would feel safer as such an authority can conyrol certain malpractices

I do not think you fully understand the technology which powers bitcoin- the blockchain technology where every transaction is reflected in a public ledger which unalterable and absolute. No person can ever tamper the information due to a number of people watching such ledger in the future.

Assuming that bitcoin were to be applied as our medium and there were to be some central agency that provides security, this totally defeats the purpose on why bitcoin was created - for decentralization. Eliminating the need for a third-party is the heart of the technology behind cryptocurrencies and that is why the government is against its implementation as a medium.

[target]

Lucky for that Central Agency if they can stand on their without funds from the community, I don't think we all are wiling to send funds to it to live a day. I bet Bitcoin Central Agency will only scam us all as like scammers in here who just walkaway after we send $1. Anyone who wants freedom wants real freedom, if there is a central agency what good does it do to freedom? If you read the comments here, you'd understand that BTC will die once this happen.

[WatchMaker]

We don't need a central authority in the bitcoin community to stop scammers. I think that's in our hands, you should know who you are dealing with when buying things with bitcoin. You are supposed to be super smart when using bitcoin by knowing the bitcoin transactions are irreversible. You have to trust your business partner first.