Is regulation really inevitable?

[kamvreto]

The government will do whatever it takes so that people do not have full control over what they have, so that the government can make follow-up rules very easily. For example, the government has set taxes for users or companies engaged in crypto. Strict laws will only be made when they (the government) are getting cornered and crypto is growing.
Maybe strict KYC will continue to be carried out on crypto users, local exchanges are now under the government.

[1715425480]

1715425480

[1715425480]

1715425480

[1715425480]

1715425480

[1715425480]

1715425480

[1715425480]

1715425480

[1715425480]

1715425480

[mindrust]

Broad adoption without regulation is impossible imo. If you want bitcoin to be adopted widely then you need to accept regulations by the governments. The regulations will make crypto exchanges look like banks because of the KYC enforcement (if it hasn't happened already) and that is not a good thing. Crypto means freedom and KYC is the exact opposite of being free. We are trying to escape the FIAT slavery system but regulations will turn crypto into a similar thing.

[Rruchi man]

Regulation will be inevitable but the fear for most bitcoin users and crypto enthusiast is the level and extent of regulation that the government will want to put in play for cryptocurrency. Serious regulations will prompt a lot of persons, especially those who became crypto users because of the freedom it offered them to rethink their options and dedication to cryptocurrency reason being that the previous reasons which they joined crypto currency for  are no longer looking valid.

[Ayers]

The only way for governments to regulate cryptocurrencies is to take control of centralized exchange so that they know who is buying and who is selling. Apart from this, there is no way to regulate them. If someone doesn't use a centralized exchange and buys Bitcoin or any other cryptocurrency from a P2P exchange and transfers it to his personal wallet, then no one will know who it is. Even, your governments won't be able to trace your identity.

that is exactly what i am interested in, apart from regulating us, when we're not using centralized exchange, how will the government regulate us if we're not using centralized exchange? i think the government is also aware of this and don't know how they will deal with us in case people just use p2p or DEX trading. if they blacklist p2p and DEX trading, it'll be trouble for us. i know regulations are inevitable but i hope they won't be too harsh on us

[Renampun]

Digital crime are keep increasing more and more, that's make governments want to regulate anything that they can including Bitcoin. They're not regulating by the network and manipulating the price, but they're regulating about their countries accept or not about Bitcoin and it make criminals are harder to use Bitcoin. Regulation isn't bad at all, but too much regulation make it bad.

IMO governments wouldn't ban Bitcoin, but they're trying to record every users who own Bitcoin in order to know who's the person behind each address.

there are some arms dealers, drug dealers, and even organ trafficking using bitcoin transactions, but whether they monitor all Bitcoin users for that reason is something that should be justified? times are sophisticated, they should be able to stop these crimes without having to scapegoat Bitcoin.

we do want the adoption of cryptocurrencies as soon as possible but regulation and monitoring are just an excuse for them to profit from taxes, if taxes are used for good it doesn't matter but the majority of tax money is used for negative things. when they see that cryptocurrencies have a large tax revenue opportunity, it is possible that in the future they will increase tax rates.

[Plaguedeath]

You're live in a country who have a complete infrastructure and someone who can control your country, how can you though regulation isn't inevitable? Regulation is inevitable since they're either want to adopt or ban Bitcoin, El Salvador is an example a country who regulate Bitcoin become legal tender while China is an example a country who ban Bitcoin. This mean regulation isn't only about bad thing for Bitcoin, but a good thing can be happen too as long as the president is a Bitcoin enthusiast.

[michellee]

Yes, indeed, the government wants to control bitcoin, but don't forget that it is not run by one or two people and because of its decentralized nature, the government cannot interfere in the process. Governments may be able to control the exchanges that trade bitcoins but what about decentralized exchanges? The government certainly will not be able to control it.

But the government will not stop trying to control it by making regulations for crypto users and they may be required to fill out forms about the crypto they have on the exchange. But the government will find it difficult to find crypto data outside of the exchange because it is a private right to keep what they own. But again, the government will continue to try to find it and impose taxes on us.

[Lizzylove1]

Fully regulating bitcoin in the future is impossible because of it decentralized nature and tracking every single transaction will be too costly. They just will be constrained to reported case or interested fund or personalities. Some non-custodian wallets will comply with security agents with the enforcement of KYC. We already saw popular blockchain wallet introducing KYC giving compliance customers some airdrops. I don't keep bitcoin in that wallet anymore.

[Ziskinberg]

Well, the main thing is that the government is looking for a way how to regulate the increase of fraud and money laundering. They have found out that crypto is also a medium use for illegal activities bringing their attention. I do opposing to the situation that they will imposed strict market regulations but if this could help to minize these activities, I no longer to stop it but giving their support as long there is a fair rules implemented.

This is already been applied to some countries who already accepting Bitcoin. Regulation is not the thing we worried about but the growing case of scams which I see this could help it.

[DVlog]

From all stand point as Bitcoin keeps gaining more popularity and adoptions it won't be inaccurate to say the government are endlessly finding a way to do a complete regulation on Crypto currency specifically Bitcoin, Despite most times the word crypto currency might be used to address all crypto related digital asset but the main target remains Bitcoin due to it's decentralised and distributed network as well as been the major crypto asset.

Why it is obvious getting full control of Bitcoin functionality and distribution seems impossible due the fact it has no central point of control one might expect stricter rules governing the use of custodian and non-custodian wallet, declaration of all cold wallet addresses, Setting up committee to monitor transactions on the blockchain public ledger, introduction of wallet trackers and ownership on different OS and maybe lots of wild experimentation to make regulation a possibility.

Believe you me no matter how advanced bitcoin decentralisation might look or sound the government will never risk giving their citizens full control of their assets. The always want to be in charge and has long has they have this limitation of full custody stricter laws regarding Bitcoin usage might spring up. Technology is advancing

Govt mostly wants to regulate bitcoin by accusing it as a medium of illegal deals and payments. But the real purpose is to control the financial freedom of people. When people have too much wealth in their hands which govt have no control over they could be a threat to that govt. They just can not allow it to stay free.

China knows this very well so they just simply ban bitcoin from their country and stop using their resources to develop a way to regulate it. They know how lethal it could be for them because of the possibility of anti-govt funding through cryptocurrency in china. So they just ban it without taking any risk.

[Franctoshi]

This very reason is why regulation has not been put in place yet , because I think Government (SEC and CFTC) is a kinda battling with a way to go about regulating cryptos and somehow be in control of cryptos because the government literally likes controlling everything, but the way with which Bitcoin and some cryptos are built makes it so difficult for them to have total control over cryptos.

Therefore,  I do think that, this is why they came up with CBDC'S to see if they can use it to track and control all transaction and too  tell you where and when to buy or sell.

[hugeblack]

A discussion that governments fear digital currencies is premature because the market capacity of this industry is still very small, and we cannot judge the motives of governments because there are not enough reasons to regulate such a market.
In general, small governments have accepted Bitcoin and still control most if not all of the people's money.

[kryptqnick]

Has any country outlawed non-custodial wallets? Perhaps some did, and in a few Bitcoin is banned altogether, but these aren't standard practices. I am okay with the lack of regulations, but I also think that for businesses to thrive and for better adoption, regulation is often important. So IMO, it's better to fight for reasonable regulations than for no regulation at all. The state does want to oversee many things, but the level of control and areas in which it prevails depends on a country. There are also some positive things that come out of regulations, such as actually fighting terrorism, limiting usage of funds that can be used for very malicious acts like firing missiles upon a foreign country, as well as encouraging businesses to not be afraid to adopt Bitcoin themselves, as they can be sure it's fully legal.

[BlackHatCoiner]

Regulation is inevitable centuries now. There's nothing changed. It just needs more adoption for most governments to intervene.

Another example of good regulations is banning ICOs which prevents a large number of scams which is the only thing they are used for.

You might feel it's a good decision, and I might feel it too, because I know ICOs are synonyms to scams. But it's not. For once more, we're making it clear that we believe we're incapable of protecting ourselves more than our government. Instead of using this little, apparently, thing between our ears, to critically judge whether a stockbroking instrument is legitimate or not, act responsibly, and avoid these scams, we allow politicians decide for the common good, as always.

The result is to have less responsible people, and more complains for injustice.

[Flexystar]

The main streamline process can never be disturbed and that’s what bitcoin is doing with traditional banking system. It’s literally disrupting the whole process flow with ownership criteria. If government shuts down and say nothing about it then believe me, by now economy would have collapsed and we wouldn’t be talking here.

They can’t just let it go around and make it official.

If bitcoin gets fully accepted then it is going to be the way it is currently. Partial laws, partial acceptance and full transactions as per the user.

If worlds money disappears then how will we trade? How everything will get valued and against what? If ownership surpasses then the deciding factor would be demand and supply. But it will cripple the tax system, how government sectors will work? How military will operate? How CIVIL services will work if there is no tax?

We can’t just expect bitcoin to take over the world. We are in immature stage right now.

[imamusma]

From all stand point as Bitcoin keeps gaining more popularity and adoptions it won't be inaccurate to say the government are endlessly finding a way to do a complete regulation on Crypto currency specifically Bitcoin,

Actually I don't like to say that the government has the power to do anything, but that's the truth. Although actually you can think that it is not accurate, but I think the government managed to prevent a lot of things with regulation even if the percentage is not at 100%.

Regarding the regulation of bitcoin that should not be used as a legal tender, users can still circumvent it. The government won't know who and where the money came from if these people are smart enough to hide their bitcoin transactions and history. Transactions that occur between wallet X to wallet Y may not be known for what purpose if bitcoin has been through the mixing process. so I think it's true that regulation can't prevent people from sticking to the rules but it might be the reason why someone gets punished.

[ChiBitCTy]

“ government are endlessly finding a way to do a complete regulation on Crypto currency specifically Bitcoin”.. I think if anything bitcoin is being the least regulated. It would seem to me that other altcoins that act more like securities are being paid closer attention to, a fact at least that the US government has come out and stated.

Also coins like Monero will face more regulation being that it’s nature is being anonymous.

Bitcoin regulation was always inevitable and in my opinion a good thing as long as governments don’t overstep their boundaries.

[darkangel11]

Bitcoin network being regulated by the government is an impossible mission, but the only means government can have some form of control or regulate Bitcoin is through its services, which are most times centralized such as the exchange and other Bitcoin payment processor gateway. That is why there have been a rise in the number of KYC compliances by bitcoin services providers like exchange and other p2p service providers.

Bitcoin itself cannot be stopped but it can be regulated through exchanges. They can also regulate all the investment platforms and attempt to regulate mining, although regulation of mining is a bad idea because mining is barely profitable due to low bitcoin price and expensive power. If people are required to apply for mining permits and licenses it's going to make things worse for them.

Bitcoin regulation that would allow for bitcoin retirement funds, trusts and such to exist would be great.

[hatshepsut93]

Believe you me no matter how advanced bitcoin decentralisation might look or sound the government will never risk giving their citizens full control of their assets. The always want to be in charge and has long has they have this limitation of full custody stricter laws regarding Bitcoin usage might spring up. Technology is advancing

Regulating Bitcoin requires resources, and not everyone in the government thinks that it's worth it to allocate them to tighten the grip on Bitcoin. They are trying to make it the responsibility of centralized exchanges and banks, expand the existing financial monitoring rules to cover transactions linked to crypto. This is easier than creating government-owned departments of crypto monitoring and trying to go after the decentralized use of crypto, which they understand is not feasible.

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Why it is obvious getting full control of Bitcoin functionality and distribution seems impossible due the fact it has no central point of control one might expect stricter rules governing the use of custodian and non-custodian wallet, declaration of all cold wallet addresses, Setting up committee to monitor transactions on the blockchain public ledger, introduction of wallet trackers and ownership on different OS and maybe lots of wild experimentation to make regulation a possibility.

In as much as quite agree with all you said, I must also emphasize on the fact that achieving such as advance regulation possibility will take years and years of hard work from the government, it will take a really great commitment on their path to pull this off, trust me, it's not gonna be easy, and even though, like you said, technology is advancing, we might have all gone to meet our maker in heaven before the government can be able to achieve this height of regulation.
This is just my opinion though.