Gov must have power to reverse transactions, says co-chair of blockchain caucus

[bbc.reporter]

Is he telling everyone that if someone is using bitcoin and other cryptocoins, he or she will be a willing participant in a conspiracy to commit crime? I am shaking my head.

The congressman also said that cryptocoins must become compliant with federal regulations and laws for them to ever become mainstream instruments for conducting transactions. Does everyone really want regulations or do those people only want a pump and thought regulations would bring it?



Foster continued that cryptocurrencies must become compliant with federal regulations and laws for them to ever become mainstream instruments for conducting transactions.

“We’re going to have to establish a law between the legal and illegal regimes here,” Foster said. “There’s a significant sentiment, increasing sentiment, in Congress that if you’re participating in an anonymous crypto transaction that you’re a de-facto participant in a criminal conspiracy.”

Read in full https://www.marketwatch.com/story/government-must-have-power-to-reverse-crypto-transactions-says-co-chair-of-blockchain-caucus-11624995008

[1714033637]

1714033637

[ranochigo]

You know, some of them aren't really the sharpest tool in the shed. Just search up on their Google hearing LOL. Putting the most incompetent people on subjects that they're not sure about.

If you're giving up your control to the government, just use fiat. Don't bother with cryptos, really. That is not what most cryptos aim to do. Good luck trying to block any transactions on Bitcoin though. I use fiat, am I complicit with money laundering

[leea-1334]

I do not see what is wrong with that. If you have a private blockchain and only the owner or creator able to control it,,, then go ahead and reverse it if you want.

Remember,,, ETH did that before too and it was fine and today it is even called decentralized.

Governments should be able to reverse, they do it already. Not saying it is good,,, but who cares what they do?

[Kong Hey Pakboy]

I wouldn't care about it being implemented if there aren't any people that will use it for sinister or malicious purposes but given that it's not the case, I don't think that it is a good idea even if they try to put a lot of positives to outweigh the negatives.

[avikz]

Not everyone is smart enough to understand cryptocurrency and its technological benefits. Being a congressman, doesn't make you smart! Being a politician, doesn't make you knowledgeable enough to comment on anything. Even in my country, a politician compared bitcoin with ponzi scheme in parliament back in 2017. Stupid pople are everywhere and we must ignore them for our own benefit. This is one of such cases!

[pooya87]

The congressman also said that cryptocoins must become compliant with federal regulations and laws for them to ever become mainstream instruments for conducting transactions.

What some governments have not yet realized is that they should be complaint with the world and what people want not the other way around. Bitcoin and decentralization is what they want and these governments can not change that so they better catch up or be left behind from the rest of the world.

[bbc.reporter]

I wouldn't care about it being implemented if there aren't any people that will use it for sinister or malicious purposes but given that it's not the case, I don't think that it is a good idea even if they try to put a lot of positives to outweigh the negatives.

Did you read the whole article? It appears that you have not read it. Also, people really are and will always be using bitcoin for criminality. This also does not make bitcoin bad not like many other people’s comments.

Many people attempt to protect bitcoin by saying only 1% use it for crime according to Chainalysis. This is foolish. They are really hurting bitcoin because they are indicating that bitcoin is not as good as cash as a monetary tool.

[NeuroticFish]

There’s a significant sentiment, increasing sentiment, in Congress that if you’re participating in an anonymous crypto transaction that you’re a de-facto participant in a criminal conspiracy.

And here comes the way the state and government gives a shit on peoples presumption of innocence.
These rednecks ruling the countries already see us guilty until proven innocent, just because we noticed that their printed paper is not as good as they want us to believe.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Bill Foster sounds like he has no idea what he is talking about, despite being head of the House blockchain caucus. Just look at some of the nonsense he has come out with:

Foster suggested new laws should require a different form of pseudo-anonymity, wherein a court — that is, a third party — could learn the real-world identity of a cryptocurrency user through a “very heavily guarded key.”

Right. Let's just set up a global centralized database and not let anyone create a new address without first completing KYC. We'll obviously have to erase the memories of everyone who understands elliptic curve multiplication and can create a private key and associated address from nothing.

“For most people if they’re going to have a big part of their net worth tied up in crypto assets, they’re going to want to have that security blanket of a trusted third party that can solve the problem.”

What absolute nonsense. That is the exact opposite of the founding principle of bitcoin. The entire reason bitcoin was created is to not trust third parties.

They are really hurting bitcoin because they are indicating that bitcoin is not as good as cash as a monetary tool.

Bitcoin is not as good as cash if your goal is to remain anonymous and commit crimes. Cash has always been the preferred option of criminals and money laundering.

[virtualdn]

Centralization...this is what the government wants. When the government will control BTC it's all over. They will control you also. If the governments will do what they want with your BTC then BTC will become a joke and will be no better than fiat. I see no difference.

[dkbit98]

They are never going to see this reversible transactions for Bitcoin, but I am sure that bunch of altcoins would be glad to reverse any transaction, this happened before with ethereum and I am sure it can happen with binance chain.
This is also telling us that any new centralized digital currencies will have this option to reverse anything they want and to freeze and close accounts.

[dothebeats]

Some people seated in the government should really ask themselves if they are a fit for this job. Seriously, most of them just blurts out random nonsense on topics they know nothing about, and thinks that they have uttered something that is completely logical and understandable to all parties involved. Perhaps next time people should elect officials that know what they should do in their respective offices.

Then again you can't expect most people to know this. We are still in the age wherein people elect celebrities and entertainment personas with the expectation that they'd do an awesome job on their position.

Also, the government always wants direct access to anything cryptocurrency-related, especially on things that will certainly compromise the security of the crypto in question. I guess they just can't keep their hands to themselves and let people use whatever they want on transactions and whatnot.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Yeah good luck with that one. They really don’t like it do they but there’s nothing they can do about it. You just love to see it

The best part is, if they do a China & ban bitcoin then in the long run they will suffer badly. The fiat banking system is on its knees, they just have to be bitcoin friendly or their demise will be even quicker.

[decodx]

If we allow the government to cancel transactions, then why do we need a cryptocurrency at all?

This will never happen as long as there is decentralized mining. I don't think governments can do anything about it.

[Little Mouse]

You would be mad at Bangladeshi media and govt authorities who talk about cryptocurrency. This may sound off-topic. In each and every crime where bitcoin is used for transaction, media and police have highlighted bitcoin. All the recent case had issues with hacking credit card. This is too an criminal activity but they only highlighted bitcoin because bitcoin was purchased by hacking cards.

Don't they see how Bangladesh Bank lost 81 million USD from Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Did they use Bitcoin? No.

[Ucy]

They could build a separate application within a global blockchain network if they want the transactions of their citizens and others reversed. If reversing transactions within a global network is going to be possible, it's must be done in decentralized manner through public consensus. It's not a lawless network.

By the way, I wonder what national government this is coming from. Nations have to deal with this individually to avoid lumping others countries together in ones country's internal affairs. And their decision can only apply to centralized financial system within their jurisdiction.

Well, we regularly participate in anonymous transactios with physical currencies in real world , i don't see why it should be different in crypto world. It shouldn't be a problem if transacting peers prefer to keep their identify private even though they may have had their identities verified, encrypted and stored within the network for their eyes alone. The identity can only be de-anonimized by authorized persons when necessary.  This can be an additional feature within a decentralized cryptocurrency network and it should be made in such a way that every participants has full control over his/her identify and data. ..no one else can for security and legal/moral reasons.


Anonimity feature is important feature in decentralized crypto and can't be taken away else you expose participants to lots of risk as true crpto is transparent and public. People will probably begin to demand that the transparency be taken away to help them feel private/anonymous in a dangerous cyberspace.  
Besides, alot of people will need strong privacy and Anonimity when things become really bad in the world that no one can be trusted anymore.

[qwertyup23]

You know, some of them aren't really the sharpest tool in the shed. Just search up on their Google hearing LOL. Putting the most incompetent people on subjects that they're not sure about.

If you're giving up your control to the government, just use fiat. Don't bother with cryptos, really. That is not what most cryptos aim to do. Good luck trying to block any transactions on Bitcoin though. I use fiat, am I complicit with money laundering

I very much agree with your statement.

The problem is, the government is inclined to control at least everything. Without control, it threatens their very existence since they think that by having no power to control transactions, it may backfire in the future where decentralization of transactions may take over the conventional fiat.

Unfortunately, there are people who are just generally biased over cryptocurrencies. They do not even bother to do their respective research on the topic; they mindlessly throw misleading statements that prejudice cryptocurrencies in the process.

[leea-1334]

Remember,,, ETH did that before too and it was fine and today it is even called decentralized.

Reversing damage due to DAO hack on ETH isn't easy, miner/node need to update their software and many blocks become invalid. Even ETH community don't want bother doing it many times

It definitely was not easy,,, and it caused a big rift, and even it took people like me years to "trust" it. I know that was very big circumstance at the time but it somehow proved also that sometimes they were benefits (and of course a big negative for decentralization). I know they will probably never do it again!

Anyway, we should expect government crypto to still be controlled and permissioned. Anyone who thinks they will do different is deluded:)

[o_e_l_e_o]

Some people seated in the government should really ask themselves if they are a fit for this job.

It is ridiculous, when you think about it. In any other professional job, you have to demonstrate that you are keeping up to date with recent developments and new technology, show evidence of ongoing learning, attend educational conferences and seminars, and so on. But in politics, you can just sit in your safe seat for 40 years without changing anything. I bet half of Congress have the password to at least one account written on a post-it and stuck to their monitor, yet they think they can lecture and pass laws regarding cryptography. It's laughable.

I guess they just can't keep their hands to themselves and let people use whatever they want on transactions and whatnot.

Of course not. They want power. This comes largely from a financial system which lets them spy on their citizens, control or reverse your transactions, rig markets for their own benefit, take their cut off of the top, and accept huge bribes and gifts from corporations. They can't possibly accept an invention such as bitcoin which prevents them from doing all of these things. Thankfully, bitcoin adoption is steadily growing around them, while they rant and rave about how important third parties are.

[Wind_FURY]

Reversing damage due to DAO hack on ETH isn't easy, miner/node need to update their software and many blocks become invalid. Even ETH community don't want bother doing it many times

It definitely was not easy,,, and it caused a big rift, and even it took people like me years to "trust" it. I know that was very big circumstance at the time but it somehow proved also that sometimes they were benefits (and of course a big negative for decentralization). I know they will probably never do it again!

I agree, there are several major bug within smart contract which causes big loss (such as Parity Wallet vulnerability which lock at least half million ETH). But in the end, ETH community decline to reverse the damage.

But i expect newer cryptocurrency which controlled by few company/group wiull have built-in protocol to reverse transaction easily.

The current legacy banking system we have could already be used for that. Plus I believe it shouldn’t be called A “cryptocurrency”, or even considered to be a “version” of one. “Cryptocurrency” has a cypherpunk origin to it, and from what we learned from Bitcoin, what you are talking about is merely like “database rewards” from a technological standpoint.