Please stop blaming "the government" for lack of Bitcoin mass payment adoption

[legiteum]

Certainly in the USA that is not the case--Bitcoin and other cryptos are perfectly legal here.

Perfectly?
you might want to check the legislation terms .. its not so perfect
i preferred the era before legislation, back when bitcoin was termed 'not illegal' (separate status different to 'legal' ratified by legislation)

There are no meaningful restrictions on the use of Bitcoin in the USA. Anybody can buy, hold and sell Bitcoin, cryptos, and non-blockchain digital currencies. This is demonstrated by the fact that billions of dollars worth of Bitcoin is traded every single day in the USA, and there are millions of holders of Bitcoin investments which are ultimately backed by companies that trade directly in Bitcoin.

When you can go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card and the US government will not arrest or otherwise penalize you for doing so, this is what I call "perfectly legal". Maybe your definition of that is different, but that's how I use the term.

[1715201074]

1715201074

[1715201074]

1715201074

[1715201074]

1715201074

[Jawhead999]

So what is the solution ? Is it possible to have one system that suits the government and the people at the same time? The question is: If we get one system that is fast, low-fee, decentralized and private, will governments agree to adopt?

It contradicts the whole system, if you're looking for decentralization and privacy, if you ask government to adopt it, they will ruin the decentralization and privacy.

The question is in another way: If Bitcoin were developed to solve all these problems and we obtained the required speed and low fees, would governments agree to adopt mass payments with Bitcoin?

Unfortunately Bitcoin isn't private, anyone can see all address, balance and history on the explorer. Fast, low fee, decentralized and private are suit to Monero, but there are many centralized exchanges already delist Monero. So there's no way the government will adopt Monero.

[bitterguy28]

agreed instead we should strive to try to improve the current system being delusional and saying that bitcoin is perfect as it is won’t get us anywhere.
the first step in solving a problem is identifying the problem

i believe… That bitcoin has a lot in store and we should take a step backward to reflect on what can we improve on i just hope that actually someone comes up with a solution whether that would be another genius or satoshi himself 

[franky1]

When you can go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card and the US government will not arrest or otherwise penalize you for doing so, this is what I call "perfectly legal". Maybe your definition of that is different, but that's how I use the term.

compared to how things were pre 2013. things have changed
compared to how things were pre 2015. things have changed
compared to how things were pre 2017. things have changed
compared to how things were pre 2020. things have changed

one note, just to poke
many exchanges now dont accept credit card, they prefer wire transfer (avoids chargeback scamming)

many exchanges now require KYC which takes upto 24 hours to validate before you can exchange

so ill ask you
When can you go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card ?

[ABCbits]

These are the reasons there is not mainstream adoption of Bitcoin for everyday payments, not some conspiracy by "the government".

But without Bitcoin legal status as currency/payment method, merchant can't just accept Bitcoin which also hinder adaption.

When you can go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card and the US government will not arrest or otherwise penalize you for doing so, this is what I call "perfectly legal". Maybe your definition of that is different, but that's how I use the term.

compared to how things were pre 2013. things have changed
compared to how things were pre 2015. things have changed
compared to how things were pre 2017. things have changed
compared to how things were pre 2020. things have changed

one note, just to poke
many exchanges now dont accept credit card, they prefer wire transfer (avoids chargeback scamming)

many exchanges now require KYC which takes upto 24 hours to validate before you can exchange

so ill ask you
When can you go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card ?

None. At best, you can find P2P marketplace or instant exchange with optional KYC (they can ask for KYC under certain condition). And such place usually have bad exchange rate or high fees.

[simonova]

Not all governments are against bitcoin and its adoption - while many governments support and give permission for its adoption and trading.

You are right about this. Countries like USA support bitcoins so far.

Bitcoin ETFs have also been approved in USA and they will further boost the growth of bitcoin and other crypto. Personally , I feel that whatever USA does, most of the other good economies in the world, just try to follow that. Also, USA has the highest income overall and thus lot of money is flowing towards crypto from them.

[Blitzboy]

I've been around the block(chain), and "the government" being the only culprit in Bitcoin adoption is simplistic. Your points about transaction speeds, prices, and usability resonate. They're brutally true. Lets not forget regulatory frameworks and government attitudes' complex impact on the ecosystem.

I agree that technological and usability challenges are substantial. However, government actions - or inaction - impact adoption. The complicated relationship between innovation and regulation should be acknowledged, not blamed.

Bitcoin has the capacity to transform financial systems, but its a community effort. Supporting Bitcoin entails advancing technology and handling regulations with wisdom and resilience. Finding the right balance between innovation and user and regulator acceptance is key.

[legiteum]

But without Bitcoin legal status as currency/payment method, merchant can't just accept Bitcoin which also hinder adaption.

How do explain the thousands of merchants all over the world, including the USA, who accept Bitcoin then? Are they all breaking the law?

[...]
one note, just to poke
many exchanges now dont accept credit card, they prefer wire transfer (avoids chargeback scamming)

many exchanges now require KYC which takes upto 24 hours to validate before you can exchange

so ill ask you
When can you go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card ?
[...]

I said meaningful hinderances. There are freakin Super Bowl commercials selling Bitcoin to millions of people. This sure doesn't look like a country where Bitcoin is banned to me.

And not only not banned, but not hindered in any way such that it would meaningfully reduce adoption.

And doing a little KYC--which is required for every sort of financial instrument, not just Bitcoin--does not hurt anything.

And for what it's worth, if I understand it correctly, most of that stuff is done voluntarily by the brokerages to protect themselves from fraud, not some commandment from the government. At minimum they would have to do at least some checks or they would get ripped off. This is not some government killing their business through regulation specially targeted at Bitcoin because they want to eliminate Bitcoin because it "competes with the dollar" or something.

[avikz]

That is what is required for a currency to replace the current status-quo, and Bitcoin and other blockchain-based cryptocurrencies can't do it, and they can't even get close.

Fully agreed! Bitcoin is not built to handle mass transactions. It simply cannot handle the volume. From the practical view point, Bitcoin is a bad currency as a payment method. It cannot scale to the level to compete with traditional payment methods.

But Bitcoin is a great investment asset. That's why people save more Bitcoins than spending it. Because the potential of price increase in Bitcoin is second to none.

[KiaKia]

It's such a shame that till this day many offline stores are still not accepting digital currencies as payment, it always come in handy but it seems that I am the only one that think this way.

I ran out of fiat money today, trying to purchase a brand new laptop for myself, and I asked the seller if they have other ways that I can balance up the money for the laptop and he replied me with a no, I was like how about Bitcoin and he still said no, this is a country where there is no ban on bitcoin, it's a shame, bitcoin is more like gold than payment solution, I wish it was the other way around or both.

It was later that he said he have some Bitcoin that he is holding but those are for holding sake he said, he wasn't planning to add more because of reasons, I guess that's why he didn't want to collect Bitcoin as payment.

[titular]

I said meaningful hinderances. There are freakin Super Bowl commercials selling Bitcoin to millions of people. This sure doesn't look like a country where Bitcoin is banned to me.

And not only not banned, but not hindered in any way such that it would meaningfully reduce adoption.

And doing a little KYC--which is required for every sort of financial instrument, not just Bitcoin--does not hurt anything.

And for what it's worth, if I understand it correctly, most of that stuff is done voluntarily by the brokerages to protect themselves from fraud, not some commandment from the government. At minimum they would have to do at least some checks or they would get ripped off. This is not some government killing their business through regulation specially targeted at Bitcoin because they want to eliminate Bitcoin because it "competes with the dollar" or something.

While the government may not explicitly aim to eliminate Bitcoin, regulatory actions can impact the ecosystem. For instance, stringent regulations could stifle innovation and deter investment in the industry. It's crucial to acknowledge that regulatory challenges might not manifest as an outright ban but could include restrictive measures that impede the development and adoption of decentralized technologies.

The absence of an outright ban and the visibility of Bitcoin in mainstream media do not necessarily mean that the cryptocurrency faces no hindrances in the U.S. The regulatory landscape is multifaceted, and a more comprehensive understanding is required to evaluate the potential challenges that could affect Bitcoin adoption in the long run.

[legiteum]

While the government may not explicitly aim to eliminate Bitcoin, regulatory actions can impact the ecosystem. For instance, stringent regulations could stifle innovation and deter investment in the industry. It's crucial to acknowledge that regulatory challenges might not manifest as an outright ban but could include restrictive measures that impede the development and adoption of decentralized technologies.

The absence of an outright ban and the visibility of Bitcoin in mainstream media do not necessarily mean that the cryptocurrency faces no hindrances in the U.S. The regulatory landscape is multifaceted, and a more comprehensive understanding is required to evaluate the potential challenges that could affect Bitcoin adoption in the long run.

Yes, it's theoretically possible to curtail trade in Bitcoin with government regulations.

But it hasn't happened, and there's no sign of it happening in the USA (quite the opposite, given the approval of the ETF), and millions of people own Bitcoin and other cryptos.

People complaining about Bitcoin not being a mainstream means of payment right now have no reason to blame "the government".

[franky1]

[...]
one note, just to poke
many exchanges now dont accept credit card, they prefer wire transfer (avoids chargeback scamming)

many exchanges now require KYC which takes upto 24 hours to validate before you can exchange

so ill ask you
When can you go on the Internet and buy Bitcoin in five minutes with your credit card ?
[...]

I said meaningful hinderances. There are freakin Super Bowl commercials selling Bitcoin to millions of people. This sure doesn't look like a country where Bitcoin is banned to me.

And not only not banned, but not hindered in any way such that it would meaningfully reduce adoption.

And doing a little KYC--which is required for every sort of financial instrument, not just Bitcoin--does not hurt anything.

And for what it's worth, if I understand it correctly, most of that stuff is done voluntarily by the brokerages to protect themselves from fraud, not some commandment from the government. At minimum they would have to do at least some checks or they would get ripped off. This is not some government killing their business through regulation specially targeted at Bitcoin because they want to eliminate Bitcoin because it "competes with the dollar" or something.

awww, your so cute..
now you are defending the government oversteps by you trying to sweep things under the rug

you do realise the superbowl adverts dont just appear.. adverts based on bitcoin(now ratified as currency) now have to go through a review by the FTC that regulates advertising for financial services..
so when superbowl advertised a CEX it had to have approval

unlike years ago where someone just rented a billboard and promoted bitcoin, no approval needed

yes you see it on TV but to get on TV was not just a private deal sponsorship of money changing hands and thats it.. there is more to it, thats superbowl advert needed approval,

also people are getting arrested for promoting things where they are not officially doing it via the legislation of advertising financial services, currencies..
where as years ago promoting bitcoin or other crypto or services were equal to talking about beany babies or pokemon cards

..
as for exchanges doing kyc. no they dont do it voluntarily to stop fraud..
exchanges have to:
  be regulated now
  follow the regulations
  employ a compliance officer
  create policies that meet regulated standards of:
     vetting customers ID via official channels
     monitor customers activity and flag suspicious activity
     log customers activity and keep records for 5-10 years
     review suspicious activity for signs of possible law breaking
     report highly suspicious activity
     should authorities court order it after they review highly suspicious reports received:
         provide further data on customers,
         lock their accounts
         freeze/seize value and pass to authorities
      
and its not voluntary
    

yes we are no longer in the wild west where anyone can just set up a swap shop.. but thats the thing, not everyone can just set up a swap shop now..

i am in complete laughter how you started in this forum warning of government oversteps.. but now you are like dont worry about them, their oversteps arnt harmful, hindering, conditional

sorry to inform you but things have changed over the years.. and its time you learn about the changes due to legislation over the years

..
each time a government ratifies bitcoin via legislation those ratifications come with conditions of jurisdictional power that allow governments to then apply new conditions of use by its citizens(either personally or professionally)

but yea i am still chuckling how you first were in uproar about people trying to lobby government for legislative ratification.. and now your like pfft doesnt matter

[legiteum]

awww, your so cute..
now your defending the government by trying to sweep things under the rug

you do realise the superbowl adverts dont just appear.. adverts based on bitcoin(now ratified as currency) now have to go through a review by the FTC that regulates advertising for financial services..

so when superbowl advertised a CEX it had to have approval

So you object to governments providing any oversight on commerce whatsoever?

[franky1]

awww, your so cute..
now your defending the government by trying to sweep things under the rug

you do realise the superbowl adverts dont just appear.. adverts based on bitcoin(now ratified as currency) now have to go through a review by the FTC that regulates advertising for financial services..

so when superbowl advertised a CEX it had to have approval

So you object to governments providing any oversight on commerce whatsoever?

they government does not "oversight"
there are not enough government agents to watch everything
they instead create legislation that condition businesses to police their own customers which create hindrances for businesses to start up and people to use bitcoin freely

im all for crime prevention, especially scammy thieving services that trick people.. however government can and have and do overstep the line with their legislation

did you know that in NYC you cant just start up a currency swap shop between fiat and btc unless you have a bitcoin licence.
its easier to open a coffee shop and sell coffee beans than it is to open a bitcoin business in NYC

..
you attempted to come to this forum with a username portraying some knowledge about the legislations(evidence of your own post show both lack of research and knowledge)
yet you went from "stop asking for legal tender status" to now saying you support governments extra ratifications that endorse a currency and come with extra conditions that tighten the previous openness of said currency.. but in your narrow view that the government have not harmed or hindered bitcoins utility(you ignoring many factors)

[legiteum]

you attempted to come to this forum with a username portraying some knowledge about the legislations(evidence of your own post show both lack of research and knowledge)
yet you went from "stop asking for legal tender status" to now saying you support governments extra ratifications that endorse a currency and come with extra conditions that tighten the previous openness of said currency.. but in your narrow view that the government have not harmed or hindered bitcoins utility(you ignoring many factors)

Okay, this is getting too personal for me, so I'm going leave this conversation.

[ABCbits]

But without Bitcoin legal status as currency/payment method, merchant can't just accept Bitcoin which also hinder adaption.

How do explain the thousands of merchants all over the world, including the USA, who accept Bitcoin then? Are they all breaking the law?

On some country (such as US), Bitcoin has legal status as money. Here's an example, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-jpmorgan-cyber-bitcoin-idUSKCN11P2DE/. On country without clear regulation, i would guess the merchant assume it's not forbidden or dare to take some risk.

[franky1]

But without Bitcoin legal status as currency/payment method, merchant can't just accept Bitcoin which also hinder adaption.

How do explain the thousands of merchants all over the world, including the USA, who accept Bitcoin then? Are they all breaking the law?

On some country (such as US), Bitcoin has legal status as money. Here's an example, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-jpmorgan-cyber-bitcoin-idUSKCN11P2DE/. On country without clear regulation, i would guess the merchant assume it's not forbidden or dare to take some risk.

to clarify yet again

when there is no legislation its "not illegal". but also not ratified/recognised as "legal"...
by having no legislation its "not illegal".... as opposed to legal/illegal

this means, and we seen it for years merchants were using it,* but the 'trust' was low.
* alpaca socks, bitcoin cupcakes, bitcoin pizza, wikileaks, silkroad, [ list goes on]

it was also treated as similar to collectables in buyer/sellers eyes same 'not illegal' bases as antiques/pokemon/magic the gathering cards

and yes anything can be treated as unofficial currency. even when not deemed as trusted/ratified "money"
EG even couples in a relationship can treat sexual favours as currency
EG even a neighbour helping another neighbour fix a car/mow the lawn, treat a beer/vodka as currency in exchange for the help
but those are not ratified/official currency

we have now seen that now legislation exists the barriers of entry have heightened
the more people lobby for government recognition, the more people end up requiring government to give permission for official channels to then use it(CEX) under government terms and conditions

[blckhawk]

For Bitcoin to become a mass payment method, the government have to approve for it to be possible, if they don't agree, bitcoin will only be available for payment in those countries that have chosen to allow their citizens use it. If you agree with me, for Bitcoin to become a max payment method, the government will have to make it centralized to enable them control it very well. If Satoshi is not dished out, the government can not make Bitcoin centralized. Bitcoin wasn't created to fight against the bank or to fight against cash. Bitcoin is good the way it is.

They don't have to, you can use Electrum wallet and many other wallets to trade bitcoin with other people and there's also decentralized exchanges that isn't connected to the government, with those systems already existing, it's just a matter of time before everyone uses them even without the intervention of the government. I also don't believe that bitcoin transactions in a country is stopped because it's prohibited in a country, remember that it's a pseudonymous currency which means that you can somehow mask your identity and if there's a will, there's a way for people to use bitcoin no matter how harsh the restrictions for usage are, also who said that it wasn't created to fight the banks? Bitcoin wanted to eliminate the middlemen and banks are the middlemen is a lot of transactions so piece the puzzle.

[yazher]

As of now, many countries let their citizen invest in Bitcoin but with caution because there are still some scammers who are convincing them to invest in their Ponzi Schemes and other scam projects. if only not for these people, we would be free and not get much attention from the government but because they always create some kind of problems that always involve money and huge numbers of victims, they put tight and complicated requirements just to create an account in our local exchanges which was not the case before back then.