Curbing Blockchain evolution?

[jashbir67]

The concept of blockchain technology with rise of Bitcoin in 2009 which has created a decentralized ecosystem where the transactions are peer to peer while bypassing third parties & their heavy commissions. The transactions are executed with fast speed and low cost also there is full transparency with a comfort that the user is not required to reveal his/ her identity. The moral is that you are having full control of your assets and can do transactions as per your will.
Further as more and more people are interested and using blockchain technology so what is the meaning of banning bitcoin/crypto? Can anyone ban bitcoin in reality or its a part of fud which is created repeatedly every 2/3 months to keep out weak hands and took advantage?

[mk4]

Specifically, a certain country's government can definitely illegalize Bitcoin, probably scaring most of the masses into not owning bitcoin and effectively negatively affecting the price, but they can't effectively "ban" it unless they shut down the entire internet(but then we got satellites and shit).

You know how the United States tried to ban illegal drugs? Yea, didn't go well, ain't it? And now we're talking about Bitcoin, which is something digital and can be private(if done correctly). Best of luck to them if they wanted to kill it.

[pooya87]

The governments can ban bitcoin and a handful of them have already banned bitcoin. But the important distinction is that you can never prevent anyone from using a decentralized money.

You know how the United States tried to ban illegal drugs?

That's a bad example because it is a negative thing all over the world and by any logic. Whereas bitcoin is not only positive but also it is accepted in most of the world. A better example would be banning certain P2P networks such as banning torrent that is not negative by nature.

[Ozero]

Almost all states and their governments have very positively assessed blockchain technology, so it is hardly worth saying that states are holding back the development of blockchain technology. Most of them are now very actively implementing this technology in all spheres of state activity, including in the field of finance, creating their own digitized central bank currencies using this technology.
States have different attitudes towards cryptocurrency, but in general, they are not satisfied with cryptocurrency, primarily because it cannot be fully controlled. Therefore, states can legalize cryptocurrency in their countries, but they will not actively support it.

[mk4]

That's a bad example because it is a negative thing all over the world and by any logic. Whereas bitcoin is not only positive but also it is accepted in most of the world. A better example would be banning certain P2P networks such as banning torrent that is not negative by nature.

Doesn't matter if it's good or bad or whatever; the point is that the US government can't successfully "ban" almost anything, regardless if that "thing" is a good or a bad thing.

But yea since it's also digital, torrenting(or piracy in general) might definitely be a better example.

[amishmanish]

There have been a lot of things similarly deemed "illegal" that have not been "curbed" till now. Whether it is P2P torrents, synthetic drugs or plain smuggling (risky cross border trade that bypasses regulations); all of these things stand at various levels of "illegality" but still persist because the governments either CANNOT or, as in case of drugs and arms smuggling, WON'T.

So for anybody talking about curbs, there are far more things to be handled than blockchain. Sure the media will malign it as negative press is always more eye-catching, yet the fact is that Bitcoin and blockchain technology has been a huge positive in the lives of many many people.

Crypto will continue to be regulated and the usage will continue to increase as long as people, corporations and entrepreneurs think that these have potential. Why even ponder on these thoughts? This line of thought is now at least half-a-decade too old.

[hatshepsut93]

You know how the United States tried to ban illegal drugs? Yea, didn't go well, ain't it? And now we're talking about Bitcoin, which is something digital and can be private(if done correctly). Best of luck to them if they wanted to kill it.

Drugs are popular because it's a fast and simple way to achieve pleasure. That's why people are willing to take risks and pay a lot of money for them. And functionally there's not much difference between banned drugs and legal drugs.

Bitcoin is not the same, banning it would actually severely limit its utility, because you won't be able to spend it legally, and it won't be growing fast or at all without a large open market, so hodling will not be as lucrative as it is now.

[TheNineClub]

I doubt crypto can be totally eradecated, but it can be lown down. The issue is I think we are throwing blockchain at everything because of the increase in people's interest (and the opportunity to take advantage of it), and that's slowing down the actual tech development. And that could be the reason why people are predicting its downfall because it seems like the tech is losing its appeal and can't seem to be incorporated into anything else. But that's just wrong perception.

[Upgrade00]

Further as more and more people are interested and using blockchain technology so what is the meaning of banning bitcoin/crypto?

Countries which ban bitcoin tend to have something in common, they are not totally free nations and the government wants to control the finances of the nation in order to control the citizens.

Can anyone ban bitcoin in reality or its a part of fud which is created repeatedly every 2/3 months to keep out weak hands and took advantage?

Nations can ban themselves from the bitcoin network, and limit their banks ability to get involved in transactions related to it. The citizens can of course still covertly use bitcoin or travel to a more friendly nation.

[Wexnident]

They're curbing the curiosity of people for it with each ban wave they do but that's about it. People who have truly learned of what Bitcoin is will know that banning it wouldn't really do anything, so they'll just stay. As others have said, the only true way to really ban Bitcoin is to kill the entire internet, which would probably cost a LOT afaik, so to answer you, no, there's really no effective way to actually "ban" Bitcoin. The most they're doing is pushing users away from using it, a warning so to say. A completely ineffective one though.

[Welsh]

They're curbing the curiosity of people for it with each ban wave they do but that's about it. People who have truly learned of what Bitcoin is will know that banning it wouldn't really do anything, so they'll just stay. As others have said, the only true way to really ban Bitcoin is to kill the entire internet, which would probably cost a LOT afaik, so to answer you, no, there's really no effective way to actually "ban" Bitcoin. The most they're doing is pushing users away from using it, a warning so to say. A completely ineffective one though.

I'd argue that they create more curiosity by banning it than they would if they just left it alone. The thing is Bitcoin doesn't appeal to everyone, because it still has a niche appeal. For example, not everyone wants to be responsible for their money without any safety nets. Although, by banning it the government are sort of playing into the core concept of Bitcoin, and that's avoiding censorship.

If a government bans it that basically means people will want to know why it has been banned. If they they happen upon good resources they'll soon figure out Bitcoin was created to help with freeing people from banks. Though, I suspect if they aren't using a VPN, and they're searching from a country that has banned Bitcoin, the search results will likely be skewed to paint a picture of Bitcoin, rather than the truth.

I doubt crypto can be totally eradecated, but it can be lown down. The issue is I think we are throwing blockchain at everything because of the increase in people's interest (and the opportunity to take advantage of it), and that's slowing down the actual tech development. And that could be the reason why people are predicting its downfall because it seems like the tech is losing its appeal and can't seem to be incorporated into anything else. But that's just wrong perception.

I don't know, I feel that Altcoins are the ones which are implementing the Blockchain into everything they can, usually unnecessarily. However, Bitcoin's community hasn't really pushed the idea that Blockchain solves everything. In fact, I think the opposite message has been sent. Its common for new users to think that the Blockchain can be implemented everywhere, but in reality the Blockchain still has very niche appeal. I'm not sure if that's limiting development though, I would say its rather non influential in the development of Bitcoin.

[avikz]

Further as more and more people are interested and using blockchain technology so what is the meaning of banning bitcoin/crypto? Can anyone ban bitcoin in reality or its a part of fud which is created repeatedly every 2/3 months to keep out weak hands and took advantage?

Banning bitcoin is an entirely different matter than banning blockchain. Let's not mix that up! There are many countries who are planning to leverage blockchain technology but also planning to ban crypto. Example is India.

But in reality, it is extremely difficult to enforce a crypto ban unless someone had purchased that crypto from centralized exchanges. So bringing a rule of banning and actually banning crypto are two different matters of different complexity. Those who understand that fact, will not be afraid of a crypto ban!

[Zilon]

Most countries who apparently ban crypto currency in their states has some percentage of their countries revenue invested in cryptocurrency mostly Bitcoin. This public ban on cryptocurrency is just to stare up FUD amongst the weak maybe because the government always wants to dorminate and have full access to their citizens assets so the can closely monitor and manipulate things whenever they wish. But thanks to Blockchain technology a new monetary reform where one can manage their assets without government inference.

[Welsh]

Most countries who apparently ban crypto currency in their states has some percentage of their countries revenue invested in cryptocurrency mostly Bitcoin. This public ban on cryptocurrency is just to stare up FUD amongst the weak maybe because the government always wants to dorminate and have full access to their citizens assets so the can closely monitor and manipulate things whenever they wish. But thanks to Blockchain technology a new monetary reform where one can manage their assets without government inference.

Not sure where you've heard that, it doesn't really make a lot of sense for them to ban it in that case. This is likely false rumours spread on Bitcoin related communities because anything negative about Bitcoin seems to be met with hostility.

The only slightly plausible, and I use plausible rather distantly is a country trying to buy up a large amount of Bitcoin as an attempt to centralise the circulation, though that's very likely tin foil hat territory, and again wouldn't make much sense.

Those who understand that fact, will not be afraid of a crypto ban!

Not sure, usually most people actually conform to government restrictions. The only time change ever comes is when governments take it a little too far. I don't think with the current adoption rate, banning Bitcoin will have a massive backlash. It might create people to become a little more curious about it, but there aren't likely to be a majority of the population annoyed at the fact that Bitcoin has been banned. A few years down the line when there's a lot more adoption, maybe.

[Dunamisx]

 

Further as more and more people are interested and using blockchain technology so what is the meaning of banning bitcoin/crypto? Can anyone ban bitcoin in reality or its a part of fud which is created repeatedly every 2/3 months to keep out weak hands and took advantage?

The fear of uncertainty demand also contribute to this, government are  not the ones who initiated bitcoin and the people in power were just like an ordinary citizens that lack the technology initiative and since it's beyond their control to manage, they tend to create a frustrating atmosphere by placing or ban or enforcing regulation on crypto firms. The news we hear also play a significant role in determining the rate of bitcoin acceptability across the world, that's where you come about fake news that doesn't exist but being talked about in bitcoin.

[TheUltraElite]

Further as more and more people are interested and using blockchain technology so what is the meaning of banning bitcoin/crypto? Can anyone ban bitcoin in reality or its a part of fud which is created repeatedly every 2/3 months to keep out weak hands and took advantage?

Only few countries have done this and not the democratic ones as far as I am concerned. Since we have a number of countries out there who have not decided their stance or declared it, you could say that that many number of timew FUD will be created regarding bitcoin. But that does not change the reality that without banning internet and stopping electricity supply you cannot ban bitcoin use.

About weak hands, I dont think they can ever be remove from the bigger picture. They are a part and parcel of the trading ecosystem but they help in moving the market too.

[franky1]

they cannot ban bitcoin.
but they can ban the services/businesses/ and exchanges that sit at the sides of bitcoin offering services into and out of bitcoin.

and if you cant easily buy/obtain bitcoin because of lack of these side services. then you are going to prevent the growth.

however yes china banned businesses from legally doing bitcoin activities. but there are millions of chinese people still hoarding bitcoin and doing secret/private trading in their own trusted local community away from official businesses that are required to abide by chinese law
(much like drugs/alcohol was prohibited in the past but people still done bootlegging and street deals)

[Oluwa-btc]

Blockchain Technology Application can be curbed.
Bitcoin also cannot be stopped.
Blockchain application is in almost all the sector's and big industries now area's like;

Music
Insurance
Finance
Healthcare
The library.
In conclusion, because of it's high level of security, accuracy, and been transparent Blockchain Technology Application can't be stopped nor curbed.

[Foolhardy]

I don’t think it’ll help any of these countries, as everyone around the world has invested in bitcoin, it also helps the market flow and circulates profit, sometimes rumours either make or break your thought process, it may create the fear of uncertainty, but you must already be prepared for fake news regarding the latter.

[davis196]

The concept of blockchain technology with rise of Bitcoin in 2009 which has created a decentralized ecosystem where the transactions are peer to peer while bypassing third parties & their heavy commissions. The transactions are executed with fast speed and low cost also there is full transparency with a comfort that the user is not required to reveal his/ her identity. The moral is that you are having full control of your assets and can do transactions as per your will.
Further as more and more people are interested and using blockchain technology so what is the meaning of banning bitcoin/crypto? Can anyone ban bitcoin in reality or its a part of fud which is created repeatedly every 2/3 months to keep out weak hands and took advantage?

BTC transactions weren't always "fast speed and low cost".
I remember several time periods,when BTC transactions were "slow speed and high cost".
Yeah,you could bypass third parties by using Bitcoin,but in reality most BTC users ARE USING third parties-custodial exchanges.
Yes,Bitcoin can be banned by any government in the world,but that doesn't mean that all the Bitcoiners would stop using it.
Blockchain technology can be used without Bitcoin/cryptocurrencies.Many banks and financial services have stated that they want to adopt blockchain technology,but that doesn't mean that they would adopt Bitcoin/altcoins.