For those of you who say governments can't ban bitcoin

[skooter]

Sure they can. They can't get rid of the protocol, but they can make it useless.

Let's say for you have a totalitarian country.

They can make a law saying that they'll execute anyone who uses bitcoin. Nobody would dare touch it anymore. That's an extreme, but it's still possible in some countries (more realistically they'd seize your assets).

For a country like the US. The government probably can't make it illegal to possess or use bitcoin, but they can do the following to effectively kill it:
- Give it unfavorable tax treatment
- Force merchants who accept it to adhere to complex and expensive accounting rules, so that it's not economical to accept it as payment for any legitimate business
- Call it a counterfeit currency and prosecute people who try to use it. (2 words: Liberty Dollar). I don't care if you want to believe it or not, but if you print up your own money (even if it doesn't resemble US dollars at all, eg. Bitcoin bills), go to a store, and try to pay with it you CAN get in trouble.
- Make a few high profile examples. Find a company doing bitcoin mining who's books aren't correct to the letter, seize their assets. Find a bitcoin user who didn't report capital gains on their coins and throw them in jail for tax evasion.
- Use the fact that bitcoin is commonly used for criminal purposes to have law enforcement harass bitcoin users. Government can seize coins that are traced to have been used in illegal activity (or if the government SUSPECTS they were used in illegal activity). This can easily be done to merchants by mandating they report transactions and wallet addresses. The govt could even go a step further and mandate that merchants give access (private key) to those wallets to a govt agency.

Sure, things like drugs are illegal and are a thriving economy, but that's different. You can't grind up a bitcoin, snort it, and get high, so if the government hassles people who use it, and no legitimate business will accept it because it's too much of a pain in the ass, nobody is going to bother using it unless they want to use it to buy drugs online or something.

[1715333365]

1715333365

[1715333365]

1715333365

[1715333365]

1715333365

[crazynoggin]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

[skooter]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

Again, this applies to legitimate business, and people who don't want problems with the law, which are the majority.

Obviously criminals don't give a shit about following regulations.

What I'm saying is, the government can easily block it from becoming mainstream. Some people here have this idea that bitcoin can compete with the central banking system. The reality of it is, the major governments of the world won't let that happen.

[Beliathon]

Sure they can. They can't get rid of the protocol, but they can make it useless.

Let's say for you have a totalitarian country.

They can make a law saying that they'll execute anyone who uses bitcoin. Nobody would dare touch it anymore. That's an extreme, but it's still possible in some countries (more realistically they'd seize your assets).

For a country like the US. The government probably can't make it illegal to possess or use bitcoin, but they can do the following to effectively kill it:
- Give it unfavorable tax treatment

If they can't kill it with law (as you have already conceded), they can't effectively tax it with law, either.

Neither of these two methods will be effective is because they are unenforceable for the same reason copyright law is unenforceable.

It is a problem of scale. 150 million Americans today illegally download movies, music, and other culture. You cannot win a battle against that many law-breakers, without draconian, liberty and creativity-suffocating bullshit legislation that will make everyone despise you, and will slowly but surely erode your legitimacy.

Bitcoin doesn't have 150 million Americans using it today. But it will, and when it does, it's game over for any government that behaves like a parasite.



P.S.

[CurbsideProphet]

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

[franky1]

Sure they can. They can't get rid of the protocol, but they can make it useless.

just like they got rid of the alcohol distilleries of the last century (prohibition era). hmmmmmmm, yet people found a way to still get drunk

weed, cocaine, heroine is illegal. yet people find a way to get stoned

being naked in public is illegal. yet people still find a way to go skinny dipping, visit naturist resorts or nude/topless beaches.

a government ban never means game over

[amspir]

Sure they can. They can't get rid of the protocol, but they can make it useless.

Let's say for you have a totalitarian country.

They can make a law saying that they'll execute anyone who uses bitcoin. Nobody would dare touch it anymore. That's an extreme, but it's still possible in some countries (more realistically they'd seize your assets).

Just to be clear, you state suppositions, none of this has happened.

- Give it unfavorable tax treatment

The last move by the IRS gives preferential tax treatment for long term capital gains,  but not good for miners that mined at a high BTC price and sold at a lower price.  In essence, they did not realize they were speculating between mining and realizing the profit.

- Force merchants who accept it to adhere to complex and expensive accounting rules, so that it's not economical to accept it as payment for any legitimate business

This is silly.  You are supposing that a merchant has the technology to accept bitcoin, but is unable to keep track of bitcoin sales and access historical price data.  They have apps for that.

- Call it a counterfeit currency and prosecute people who try to use it. (2 words: Liberty Dollar). I don't care if you want to believe it or not, but if you print up your own money (even if it doesn't resemble US dollars at all, eg. Bitcoin bills), go to a store, and try to pay with it you CAN get in trouble.

This was a centralized money system run by people with strong anti-government views.   I'm not saying it was right to prosecute them, but they made themselves a target.

- Make a few high profile examples. Find a company doing bitcoin mining who's books aren't correct to the letter, seize their assets. Find a bitcoin user who didn't report capital gains on their coins and throw them in jail for tax evasion.

This is a supposition with no evidence that it's going to happen.   Currently, the IRS has been starved of money by conservative forces in the government, which prevents them from collecting a lot of taxes (even though stronger enforcement would bring in more revenue than would be spent on enforcement.)   According to IRS statistics, the chance that a person making 50K-70K a year has a 0.7% chance of a tax return (or a non-existent tax return with reported W2 or 1099 income) being examined.   Over 5 years, that's about a 3.1% chance of getting caught.

- Use the fact that bitcoin is commonly used for criminal purposes to have law enforcement harass bitcoin users. Government can seize coins that are traced to have been used in illegal activity (or if the government SUSPECTS they were used in illegal activity). This can easily be done to merchants by mandating they report transactions and wallet addresses. The govt could even go a step further and mandate that merchants give access (private key) to those wallets to a govt agency.

In regards to illegal activities, many jurisdictions (as a revenue generating procedure) will seize large amounts of cash from travelers on interstate highways as suspected drug money.  This is nothing new, and nothing inherent to bitcoin.

In reality, the majority of merchants will convert immediately to fiat and not speculate on bitcoin.  The government is more likely to give merchants a Cyprus-style haircut through their bank accounts than to demand direct access to any bitcoins they hold.   Cyprus haircuts would be very unpopular, and in the United States, the history has been to support sick financial institutions by selling T-bills to prop them up (taxing dollar holders in a non-obvious way)

Supporting legitimate business using bitcoin is the way to go, to reduce the stigma of illegal activity, which makes it harder for the government to use the "illegal activities" excuse to crackdown on bitcoin.

Sure, things like drugs are illegal and are a thriving economy, but that's different. You can't grind up a bitcoin, snort it, and get high, so if the government hassles people who use it, and no legitimate business will accept it because it's too much of a pain in the ass, nobody is going to bother using it unless they want to use it to buy drugs online or something.

Even if the government totally cracked down on bitcoin, there would still be a bitcoin economy -- street level bitcoin dealers that traded bitcoins for cash to users that gambled and bought drugs through the internet.  

I see the future of bitcoin as positive, as legitimate money is being invested in bitcoin services and merchants.  It will reach a tipping point where it becomes a significant portion of the legitimate economy, where a crackdown would cause harm to the country as a whole.

[mymenace]

does not matter

this was the same approach to file sharing (napster, megaupload), how did that turn out



the purpose of bitcoin is to provide people with their own money not controlled by banks or finance for their own personal gains out of our money.

if bitcoin is illegal something else will arise, or people will be smart enough to dodge legislation

if that is then illegal something else will arise

and so on and so on

to completely make bitcoin illegal, every country will have to unite (never gonna happen)

example. I buy bitcoin in USD on swiss exchange as bitcoin is legal, exchange back to USD on swiss exchange rinse and repeat

[tvbcof]

...
For a country like the US. The government probably can't make it illegal to possess or use bitcoin, but they can do the following to effectively kill it:
...

All true.  The main problem with that is that distributed crypto-currencies are quite new and under rapid evolution.  They will probably adapt rather quickly to whatever pressures one puts on them.  It seemed like a great idea to treat everything with antibiotic compounds for a while.  Whaddayaknow, but suddenly there were a lot of resistant bacteria strains popping up at an alarming rate.

If 'the powers that be' are smart they would treat this issue with kid gloves and significant caution and thoughtfulness at this juncture.  Whether that is what is happening in certain countries now or not I have no idea.  I think it would be a mistake to consider the leaderships to be mentally challenged whether it happens to be the case or not.

[bazzip]

The paranoia libertarians who sit around and imagine horrible things that could happen in their minds 24/7 are more of a threat to virtual currency then anything.  "You know what could happen if I leave the house today?  I could get run over by a car, I could get sick from someone coughing on me, I could get shot by a stranger.  OMG I'd better never leave the house."  Could any of the above happen?  Of course.  Is any of the above likely to happen?  I highly doubt it.  About the same odds of my leaving the house scenarios.  Without main stream adoption, virtual will never go up in price.  Paranoid fringe people scare mainstream people.  Not me but Im not mainstream.

[bitgeek]

LOL have you ever seen "governments" work together? Last time I heard about such cooperation was during WWII.

[mechew]

Keep in mind this isn't gold.  Bitcoin relies on the internet which the USA currently controls.

They could force ISP's to block or throttle it to a crawl or they could simply use their resources to fork it if they wanted to destroy it.  I think it'd be very simple for any major government to pull off a 51% heist.

Considering recent news about what the government HAS done I find it impossible to believe they couldnt shut it down.

With that said, they took a stance and doesnt look like they'll ban it.  Hard to ban something they can tax

[Beliathon]

...
For a country like the US. The government probably can't make it illegal to possess or use bitcoin, but they can do the following to effectively kill it:
...

All true.  The main problem with that is that distributed crypto-currencies are quite new and under rapid evolution.  They will probably adapt rather quickly to whatever pressures one puts on them. It seemed like a great idea to treat everything with antibiotic compounds for a while.  Whaddayaknow, but suddenly there were a lot of resistant bacteria strains popping up at an alarming rate.

Excellent analogy.

[corebob]

Here's the catch, governments have companies like facebook, google and others working around the clock to provide internet and online gadgets to every nutcase stalking about out there, so that we can all be happy citizens in their brave new surveillance state, and that will make crypto-currencies like bitcoin even stronger than they already are.

The truth is, from a technical viewpoint, they can't touch it.

[skooter]

Drugs, alcohol, etc.. people get high or get some kind of pleasure out of it. Again, you can't grind up a bitcoin and snort it to get high. Heroin addicts have a desperate need to inject more heroin into their veins.

And a lot of what the government does is indeed a scare tactic. But it does work. How many people file their taxes honestly because they're afraid of an audit? And legitimate businesses like amazon have to comply with the law. If the government passes a regulation saying that they need to have access to everyone's bitcoin wallets (just like they have access to everyone's bank accounts, and have the ability to seize/freeze assets), individuals who don't comply likely won't have anything happen, but you can bet that major businesses will be complying. Without major businesses accepting it, it can't go mainstream and it'll just be a drug trader currency.

Look at what happened with online poker a decade ago. Government got involved, seized bank accounts, forbid banks from doing business with online gambling sites, etc etc.

They didn't have to go after individuals to cripple something, they go after the big institutions.

So for bitcoin, if they want individuals to comply with laws, they could set up an agency where you have to register your bitcoin addresses with (and possibly give them access to freeze/seize your funds if they deem necessary). If you don't have a valid registration with that agency, banks will not allow you to do any transactions related to bitcoin (eg, wire transfer to an exchange). The government would use the banking system to enforce their laws.

[corebob]

...
Look at what happened with online poker a decade ago. Government got involved, seized bank accounts, forbid banks from doing business with online gambling sites, etc etc.

They didn't have to go after individuals to cripple something, they go after the big institutions.

So for bitcoin, if they want individuals to comply with laws, they could set up an agency where you have to register your bitcoin addresses with (and possibly give them access to freeze/seize your funds if they deem necessary). If you don't have a valid registration with that agency, banks will not allow you to do any transactions related to bitcoin (eg, wire transfer to an exchange). The government would use the banking system to enforce their laws.

That would probably make both governments and banks both unpopular and unsuccessful.
Big institutions are a no-no in the bitcoin sphere. Something a lot of people doesn't seem to get.

[tvbcof]

...
but you can bet that major businesses will be complying. Without major businesses accepting it, it can't go mainstream and it'll just be a drug trader currency.

Look at what happened with online poker a decade ago. Government got involved, seized bank accounts, forbid banks from doing business with online gambling sites, etc etc.

They didn't have to go after individuals to cripple something, they go after the big institutions.

The natural solution seems to me to be keep Bitcoin away from:

 - Large institutions which can be pressured

 - A large fraction of individual users who simply don't have an never will have the ability to manage their sensitive data.  They have caused the system more damage so far than probably any other factor in my opinion, and I cannot see it getting any better.

At first blush this may seem limiting, but it's a big world so even the relatively small fraction of people who have the native ability to deal with Bitcoin constitute a decent userbase.  By the same argument, there are a lot of niches where Bitcoin works extremely well and will be leveraged.  My hope is that a primary one of these niches will be as backing for a plethora of purpose tuned 'second tier' or 'off-chain' solutions.

I contend that the potential 'market cap' for Bitcoin is enourmous even if 'mainstream' use is cut out, especially since there would evolve plenty of 'mainstream' use by proxy.

So for bitcoin, if they want individuals to comply with laws, they could set up an agency where you have to register your bitcoin addresses with (and possibly give them access to freeze/seize your funds if they deem necessary). If you don't have a valid registration with that agency, banks will not allow you to do any transactions related to bitcoin (eg, wire transfer to an exchange). The government would use the banking system to enforce their laws.

If black/red-listing (aka, tainting) can be arranged in a way which is even a little bit credible, I believe that it would open the door for such registration.  This because large institutions (Google/Facebook, Overstock/TigerDirect, etc) can be forced to honor it and it will rapidly create fungibility problems for everybody.  And also, of course, that forced registration would in and of itself change the nature of Bitcoin beyond recognition.

[amspir]

That would probably make both governments and banks both unpopular and unsuccessful.
Big institutions are a no-no in the bitcoin sphere. Something a lot of people doesn't seem to get.

To put things in perspective:

The market cap of bitcoin is currently $5.7 billion.
The market cap of Apple is $579 billion.
The monetary base of the USD is estimated to be $3 trillion ($3000 billion)
The M1 of USD is estimated to be $10 trillion.

Currently, bitcoin is a very small thing in the institutional finance world.   I believe things will change.

[skooter]

...
Look at what happened with online poker a decade ago. Government got involved, seized bank accounts, forbid banks from doing business with online gambling sites, etc etc.

They didn't have to go after individuals to cripple something, they go after the big institutions.

So for bitcoin, if they want individuals to comply with laws, they could set up an agency where you have to register your bitcoin addresses with (and possibly give them access to freeze/seize your funds if they deem necessary). If you don't have a valid registration with that agency, banks will not allow you to do any transactions related to bitcoin (eg, wire transfer to an exchange). The government would use the banking system to enforce their laws.

That would probably make both governments and banks both unpopular and unsuccessful.
Big institutions are a no-no in the bitcoin sphere. Something a lot of people doesn't seem to get.

The US Govt and the US banking system is incredibly unpopular. Look at the crappy congress approval ratings, and how many people are angry about what wall street and the big banks did. But they're very successful. The US Govt is still in power, and the US Banking system still has control over the economy.

Big institutions are already in the bitcoin sphere. What do you call CEX.io who has 1/4 of the network hash power? What do you call bitstamp and the other big exchanges that handle the bulk of trading volume? They have huge influence over the bitcoin economy.

If black/red-listing (aka, tainting) can be arranged in a way which is even a little bit credible, I believe that it would open the door for such registration.  This because large institutions (Google/Facebook, Overstock/TigerDirect, etc) can be forced to honor it and it will rapidly create fungibility problems for everybody.  And also, of course, that forced registration would in and of itself change the nature of Bitcoin beyond recognition.

That's not what I was getting at though. Forcing people to register/provide access to their wallets to a govt agency makes it possible for the govt to seize your coins.

[tvbcof]

If black/red-listing (aka, tainting) can be arranged in a way which is even a little bit credible, I believe that it would open the door for such registration.  This because large institutions (Google/Facebook, Overstock/TigerDirect, etc) can be forced to honor it and it will rapidly create fungibility problems for everybody.  And also, of course, that forced registration would in and of itself change the nature of Bitcoin beyond recognition.

That's not what I was getting at though. Forcing people to register/provide access to their wallets to a govt agency makes it possible for the govt to seize your coins.

The converse seems much more likely to me.  That is, the ability to seize ones coins produces the ability to force registration.  The difference between seizing and devaluing is minimal if the devaluation is significant, and I think that the impacts of tainting may be more effective in this than most people imagine.

There is no real reason for the government to even wish to seize people's BTC.  They have as much funding as they need under the current system where they basically pull it out of thin air.  The plebs are prone to trade assets away in exchange for peanuts within a few months of obtaining it anyway...and the peanut vendors are the ones who the government caters to.

The thing which is of extreme value to understand who is doing what with what resources.  That is why I expect that there will be a strong and growing interest in correlating individuals to transactions. [edit->] And that will be the driving force behind registration(s).

[skooter]

If black/red-listing (aka, tainting) can be arranged in a way which is even a little bit credible, I believe that it would open the door for such registration.  This because large institutions (Google/Facebook, Overstock/TigerDirect, etc) can be forced to honor it and it will rapidly create fungibility problems for everybody.  And also, of course, that forced registration would in and of itself change the nature of Bitcoin beyond recognition.

That's not what I was getting at though. Forcing people to register/provide access to their wallets to a govt agency makes it possible for the govt to seize your coins.

The converse seems much more likely to me.  That is, the ability to seize ones coins produces the ability to force registration.  The difference between seizing and devaluing is minimal if the devaluation is significant, and I think that the impacts of tainting may be more effective in this than most people imagine.

There is no real reason for the government to even wish to seize people's BTC.  They have as much funding as they need under the current system where they basically pull it out of thin air.  The plebs are prone to trade assets away in exchange for peanuts within a few months of obtaining it anyway...and the peanut vendors are the ones who the government caters to.

The thing which is of extreme value to understand who is doing what with what resources.  That is why I expect that there will be a strong and growing interest in correlating individuals to transactions. [edit->] And that will be the driving force behind registration(s).

Well, the ability to force registration would only apply to US businesses/residents. So it'd still be very hard to trace coins in the overall system.

And the point of seizure is the same as being able to seize someone's bank account. It'd likely need a court order to do so.

[tvbcof]

Well, the ability to force registration would only apply to US businesses/residents. So it'd still be very hard to trace coins in the overall system.

And the point of seizure is the same as being able to seize someone's bank account. It'd likely need a court order to do so.

Actually, you are probably wrong.

If the U.S. Govt can force U.S. companies who want to deal with Bitcoin to honor the output of a chartered taint authority, they could force anyone who has BTC no matter what jurisdiction they happen to be in to register.  Of course people won't have to register, but if they do not the coins they hold will be unusable for many services.

And if someone tries to give me a BTC that I cannot use to buy something at TigerDirect, I will want a discount.  This even if I personally don't plan to buy anything from TigerDirect I'll want a discount because I'll have to take a discount from whoever I try to trade the Bitcoin to.  (This is the mechanism by which devaluation happens.)

As for a court order, I doubt if the goobmint would need one for taint.  They would issue a charter to entities who would taint coins upon request and yank the charter from those who would not.  Since the U.S. Govt has the power to force institutions to honor the output of a tainting authority the charter is make-or-break to an entity such as Mellon/Waters/Guo's 'Coin Validation' service.  They'll have no choice but to play ball.  In fact, such entities would probably not even have a business model unless they can expect to partner with the government who will force customers to their doorstep.

[franky1]

If the government passes a regulation saying that they need to have access to everyone's bitcoin wallets (just like they have access to everyone's bank accounts, and have the ability to seize/freeze assets), individuals who don't comply likely won't have anything happen, but you can bet that major businesses will be complying. Without major businesses accepting it, it can't go mainstream and it'll just be a drug trader currency.

they can have my privkey containing 10ksat, but the other privkey containing many bitcoins... i dont know who that belongs to mr IRS man

that is what most newbies think the IRS will do, the fact is that when you sell bitcoins for fiat above $600 amounts (so yes you dont have to declare a starbucks purchase of $10 worth. much like you dont declare if someone buys you a sandwich or a coffee now with FIAT, or a relative gives to some money for a special occasion) all you need to declare and log is the larger priced items. such as a TV, car, a whole weeks worth of income/lifestyle costs.

businesses are 99.9% set up for tax, whether they accept fiat or bitcoin
businesses display their prices in FIAT and they at checkout have that FIAT price converted to bitcoin. So already they know that their income from a product sale nets them X fiat, whether accepting bitcoin or fiat. its the same. so dont worry about business accounting, many businesses can do it as easily as clicking 3 buttons on a mouse.

too many people worry about small things and make their minds believe the small things are enormous. the IRS tax announcement is not a bad thing, its not going to catch anybody out or cause them big problems in the future.

i simply cant believe that people think government hates bitcoin, and that their tin foil hat theories that making bitcoin now classified as something that holds real value, is:
1. a bad thing
2. a thing that governments will use to arrest and seize assets with
3. cause a world wide ban
4. other crackpot doomsday events

people can finally now transact and know exactly where they stand when it comes to tax, the government has declared bitcoin valuable, and as long as you pay taxes nothing will happen.

so relax folks.

[jonald_fyookball]

If governments out right banned bitcoin, it could set bitcoin back 10 years...
But you can't stop it... It is similar to marijuana prohibition... People
Want it too much.   That is taking nearly a century to crumble mostly without any Internet.
The Internet accelerates the spread of knowledge and information and that acceleration is accelerating.

[pening]

I think what the OP is trying to say is that if they want, governments can make Bitcoin useless as a mainstream replacement for national currencies.

And he's got a point.  For every example of people ignoring the law there's a dozen where the law is observed.  Government decrees the speed limit and outlaws travelling faster than that.  Most people, most of the time abide by that even when they have motivation to break the law.  (people tend to download music etc because there's no visible deterrent.  Put internet police in the ISPs and most people would soon stop).

It doesn't matter much if you carry on using Bitcoin, if the wider population doesn't, then you are trading in a small corner of the wider economy.  Whether this matters really depends on where you believe Bitcoin needs to be, what its objectives are.  If its to replace conventional money, there's a definite problem.  If its to create a parallel money, it may matter to some extent (depends on other countries, people's risk assessment).  If its build an alternative for those of a certain mindset, well its already there and that cant be stopped. But its not going to change other peoples minds to fit that last scenario and it will be a small niche.

[leopard2]

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

Exactly. If you have a door to kick in, it's useless. Same with Ripple Hullcoin etc.

[skooter]

If the government passes a regulation saying that they need to have access to everyone's bitcoin wallets (just like they have access to everyone's bank accounts, and have the ability to seize/freeze assets), individuals who don't comply likely won't have anything happen, but you can bet that major businesses will be complying. Without major businesses accepting it, it can't go mainstream and it'll just be a drug trader currency.

they can have my privkey containing 10ksat, but the other privkey containing many bitcoins... i dont know who that belongs to mr IRS man

You might be willing to do that, but the mainstream public follows banking laws for the most part.

And yes, major businesses are set up for accounting, but more complex accounting systems DO cost money to set up. And since bitcoin is, for now, officially property, it's fairly trivial for the IRS to impose a transfer tax on it. Which again, YOU might snub and send/receive bitcoin to whoever you want and ignore the tax, but a company like amazon can't do that.

Remember, you're not spending a currency, you're transferring property every time you "spend" bitcoin.

And there's plenty of precedent for taxes/fees on transferring property. Transferring (non-publicly listed) company stock often has fees/taxes associated with it. Transferring real estate has fees/taxes with it. Buying shares of a public company has regulatory fees associated with it.

By ruling bitcoin as a property, not a currency, it opens to door on all kinds of taxes on it. If someone opens up a store where you can physically buy bitcoin with cash, states could easily say that you have to pay sales tax on those purchases now.

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

Exactly. If you have a door to kick in, it's useless. Same with Ripple Hullcoin etc.

There's definitely doors to kick in. There's datacenters with petahashes of equipment, and mining pools that control petahashes of power.

Those entities can be forced to to adhere to regulations or risk getting seized.

[tuaris]

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

This is a little off topic, but I am curious as to why the Disney Dollar hasn't suffered the same fate as the Liberty Dollar.

[skooter]

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

This is a little off topic, but I am curious as to why the Disney Dollar hasn't suffered the same fate as the Liberty Dollar.

Simple.

The disney dollar is basically a multiple use gift card. Also, Disney corporation doesn't spew a bunch of anti-government crap when selling these store credits.

The liberty dollar had all kinds of anti-government propaganda on their website. It was also very scammy. They were basically selling people gold/silver bullion at a HUGE markup with deceptive marketing. IMO, good riddance. If someone tried to pay me with a liberty dollar I'd call the cops on them. Basically every "liberty dollar" would be backed by like 50 cents worth of gold. Total scam.

Even their website, had that shit where it's like "Special offer, expires in <a date 5 days from now>", but every day the "expiration" date on the "special" offer moved back a day. Sold exactly the way a scam would be sold.

[amspir]

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

This is a little off topic, but I am curious as to why the Disney Dollar hasn't suffered the same fate as the Liberty Dollar.

The people behind Disney Dollar probably aren't anti-Federal Reserve.

[vqp]

My theory: One of the three letter agencies will be in charge of crypto and will receive funding and make sure cryptos never go away. All happy. Source:my ass

[EvilPanda]

What do you mean by "governments"? Local, state, governments? China? Russia? There will never be something like a "world ban" some countries may be against it but not all.

[cbeast]

Source:my ass

Confirmed 

[Bit_Happy]

I think Liberty Dollar is a poor example for two reasons.  One, it was made to look very similar to US coin and two, it was centralized so it was very easy to kick down a door and shut it down.  Neither applicable to Bitcoin.

"Trust in God"
I still have a couple of paper Liberty dollars and God isn't going to help me with them.

[skooter]

What do you mean by "governments"? Local, state, governments? China? Russia? There will never be something like a "world ban" some countries may be against it but not all.

US Federal/state governments.

Rest of the world doesn't mean shit.

[tvbcof]

What do you mean by "governments"? Local, state, governments? China? Russia? There will never be something like a "world ban" some countries may be against it but not all.

The threat to capital management options posed by crypto-currencies (after they grow some more) will be pretty universally felt by all governments.  I would not be at all surprised if this is one area of cooperation between nations which are otherwise in a lukewarm state of conflict.  The best hope we (hodlers) have is that one nation sees Bitcoin as an artifact which harms and adversary disproportionately and thus partially supports it.

[igorr]

governments can ban everything and your life if necessary.

[leopard2]

That would probably make both governments and banks both unpopular and unsuccessful.
Big institutions are a no-no in the bitcoin sphere. Something a lot of people doesn't seem to get.

To put things in perspective:

The market cap of bitcoin is currently $5.7 billion.
The market cap of Apple is $579 billion.
The monetary base of the USD is estimated to be $3 trillion ($3000 billion)
The M1 of USD is estimated to be $10 trillion.

Currently, bitcoin is a very small thing in the institutional finance world.   I believe things will change.

You need to look at the GLOBAL money supply which is very roughly around 75 trillion, so around 10 000 times the market cap of BTC.

[jbreher]

It was also very scammy. They were basically selling people gold/silver bullion at a HUGE markup with deceptive marketing. IMO, good riddance. If someone tried to pay me with a liberty dollar I'd call the cops on them. Basically every "liberty dollar" would be backed by like 50 cents worth of gold. Total scam.

Bullshit. Every Liberty Dollar that I've seen was redeemable on demand for a set weight of silver bullion - just as the original US Dollar was redeemable for a set weight of gold or silver.

I have one such $20 silver certificate on my desk right now. Up until the feds came in and (illegally, in my mind) confiscated all their precious metals holdings, one could go to their Shelter System Warehouse in Coeur d'Alene, ID, and exchange this $20 Silver Certificate for one ounce of .999 fine silver.

[skooter]

It was also very scammy. They were basically selling people gold/silver bullion at a HUGE markup with deceptive marketing. IMO, good riddance. If someone tried to pay me with a liberty dollar I'd call the cops on them. Basically every "liberty dollar" would be backed by like 50 cents worth of gold. Total scam.

Bullshit. Every Liberty Dollar that I've seen was redeemable on demand for a set weight of silver bullion - just as the original US Dollar was redeemable for a set weight of gold or silver.

I have one such $20 silver certificate on my desk right now. Up until the feds came in and (illegally, in my mind) confiscated all their precious metals holdings, one could go to their Shelter System Warehouse in Coeur d'Alene, ID, and exchange this $20 Silver Certificate for one ounce of .999 fine silver.

Reread what I said.

At the time silver was like $10 - $15 / oz, so they charged a massive markup.

That IMO is a scam. I never said they didn't honor redemptions. I said they charged a huge markup on their product and marketed it in a way to deceive stupid people.

[S4VV4S]

I truly hate repeating my self, but I will say this one more time.

NO COUNTRY WILL EVER SUCCESSFULLY BAN BITCOIN!!!!!

Black Markets will emerge - much like Silk Road but not necessarily for drugs and guns and shit.

The only thing a gov can do is TAX it, nothing else.

If they try to ban it, they will lose money from taxable goods.
It's as simple as that!

Bitcoin is a revolution and they know this.
That is why they are fighting it with stupid laws and false media FUD.

 

[amspir]

The only thing a gov can do is TAX it, nothing else.

I came across this will reading about the history of currency:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_Notes_Tax_Act_1910

Essentially, in 1910, the Austrian government put a 10% tax on the creation of bank notes that were not the official Austrian banknotes.

I'm wondering if any attempt has been made in Austria to apply this to bitcoin.

[smoothie]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

Again, this applies to legitimate business, and people who don't want problems with the law, which are the majority.

Obviously criminals don't give a shit about following regulations.

What I'm saying is, the government can easily block it from becoming mainstream. Some people here have this idea that bitcoin can compete with the central banking system. The reality of it is, the major governments of the world won't let that happen.

Free-markets are stronger than Governments.

 

[S4VV4S]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

Again, this applies to legitimate business, and people who don't want problems with the law, which are the majority.

Obviously criminals don't give a shit about following regulations.

What I'm saying is, the government can easily block it from becoming mainstream. Some people here have this idea that bitcoin can compete with the central banking system. The reality of it is, the major governments of the world won't let that happen.

Free-markets are stronger than Governments.

 

^^^ True story!

[skooter]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

Again, this applies to legitimate business, and people who don't want problems with the law, which are the majority.

Obviously criminals don't give a shit about following regulations.

What I'm saying is, the government can easily block it from becoming mainstream. Some people here have this idea that bitcoin can compete with the central banking system. The reality of it is, the major governments of the world won't let that happen.

Free-markets are stronger than Governments.

 

Wait, we have a free market? since when?

[RodeoX]

Hey guys, maybe he's right? The government banned drugs. Now no one does drugs anymore.

[S4VV4S]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

Again, this applies to legitimate business, and people who don't want problems with the law, which are the majority.

Obviously criminals don't give a shit about following regulations.

What I'm saying is, the government can easily block it from becoming mainstream. Some people here have this idea that bitcoin can compete with the central banking system. The reality of it is, the major governments of the world won't let that happen.

Free-markets are stronger than Governments.

 

Wait, we have a free market? since when?

Since Bitcoin stepped in the scene

[skooter]

I say goodluck to any government who thinks it is easy to seize a Bitcoin wallet. Maybe people should start using brainwallets so that they can always access their funds even if a government thinks they "seized" the wallet. You still can't kill it, there will still be people who use it, it will just be pushed underground. Even if a government will punish someone by death if they use i, there will still be people who use it, just as there are people who will kill others even though it can be a offense punishable by death in many places.

Again, this applies to legitimate business, and people who don't want problems with the law, which are the majority.

Obviously criminals don't give a shit about following regulations.

What I'm saying is, the government can easily block it from becoming mainstream. Some people here have this idea that bitcoin can compete with the central banking system. The reality of it is, the major governments of the world won't let that happen.

Free-markets are stronger than Governments.

 

Wait, we have a free market? since when?

Since Bitcoin stepped in the scene

Keep telling yourself that.

All the big retailers have to follow government regulations regardless of how they take payment.

[marcus_of_augustus]

...
Look at what happened with online poker a decade ago. Government got involved, seized bank accounts, forbid banks from doing business with online gambling sites, etc etc.

They didn't have to go after individuals to cripple something, they go after the big institutions.

So for bitcoin, if they want individuals to comply with laws, they could set up an agency where you have to register your bitcoin addresses with (and possibly give them access to freeze/seize your funds if they deem necessary). If you don't have a valid registration with that agency, banks will not allow you to do any transactions related to bitcoin (eg, wire transfer to an exchange). The government would use the banking system to enforce their laws.

That would probably make both governments and banks both unpopular and unsuccessful.
Big institutions are a no-no in the bitcoin sphere. Something a lot of people doesn't seem to get.

The US Govt and the US banking system is incredibly unpopular. Look at the crappy congress approval ratings, and how many people are angry about what wall street and the big banks did. But they're very successful. The US Govt is still in power, and the US Banking system still has control over the economy.

Big institutions are already in the bitcoin sphere. What do you call CEX.io who has 1/4 of the network hash power? What do you call bitstamp and the other big exchanges that handle the bulk of trading volume? They have huge influence over the bitcoin economy.

If black/red-listing (aka, tainting) can be arranged in a way which is even a little bit credible, I believe that it would open the door for such registration.  This because large institutions (Google/Facebook, Overstock/TigerDirect, etc) can be forced to honor it and it will rapidly create fungibility problems for everybody.  And also, of course, that forced registration would in and of itself change the nature of Bitcoin beyond recognition.

That's not what I was getting at though. Forcing people to register/provide access to their wallets to a govt agency makes it possible for the govt to seize your coins.

You make it sound like USA has a Police State problem.

[Cryddit]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

[S4VV4S]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

I strongly disagree.

Let's say I have a business that sells product A.
And just like me there are many other businesses but they have more money to invest in PR, etc.

Now I do not want to go bankrupt just because my gov said "Bitcoin is illegal".

And if my product is welcomed to Bitcoiners then Tor is the way to go about it.
I do not go bankrupt and guess what?....
I don't even have to declare TAX!

Like I said, black markets will emerge and that is NOT what the governments want.
That's why they are trying to find a way to regulate BTC, which will not happen IMO.

[skooter]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

I strongly disagree.

Let's say I have a business that sells product A.
And just like me there are many other businesses but they have more money to invest in PR, etc.

Now I do not want to go bankrupt just because my gov said "Bitcoin is illegal".

And if my product is welcomed to Bitcoiners then Tor is the way to go about it.
I do not go bankrupt and guess what?....
I don't even have to declare TAX!

Like I said, black markets will emerge and that is NOT what the governments want.
That's why they are trying to find a way to regulate BTC, which will not happen IMO.

All right, so you're no different then a drug dealer at that point.

Most legitimate businesses don't want to go that route.

[Bit_Happy]

It was also very scammy. They were basically selling people gold/silver bullion at a HUGE markup with deceptive marketing. IMO, good riddance. If someone tried to pay me with a liberty dollar I'd call the cops on them. Basically every "liberty dollar" would be backed by like 50 cents worth of gold. Total scam.

Bullshit. Every Liberty Dollar that I've seen was redeemable on demand for a set weight of silver bullion - just as the original US Dollar was redeemable for a set weight of gold or silver.

I have one such $20 silver certificate on my desk right now. Up until the feds came in and (illegally, in my mind) confiscated all their precious metals holdings, one could go to their Shelter System Warehouse in Coeur d'Alene, ID, and exchange this $20 Silver Certificate for one ounce of .999 fine silver.

The Lib$ markup was very high.
They were backed by real metals in a warehouse.

[S4VV4S]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

I strongly disagree.

Let's say I have a business that sells product A.
And just like me there are many other businesses but they have more money to invest in PR, etc.

Now I do not want to go bankrupt just because my gov said "Bitcoin is illegal".

And if my product is welcomed to Bitcoiners then Tor is the way to go about it.
I do not go bankrupt and guess what?....
I don't even have to declare TAX!

Like I said, black markets will emerge and that is NOT what the governments want.
That's why they are trying to find a way to regulate BTC, which will not happen IMO.

All right, so you're no different then a drug dealer at that point.

Most legitimate businesses don't want to go that route.

Legitimate?

What is legitimate about raising a war on another country in order to get their oil?

What is legitimate about the way your gov and the banks fuck you right over day after day?

Seriously, don't talk about legitimacy.

You are an idiot.

EDIT: Don't call me a drug dealer. Idiot.
Do a search on my previous posts and you will find out that you are way far from the truth.
Once again, IDIOT!

[amspir]

The Lib$ markup was very high.
They were backed by real metals in a warehouse.

I get it why some would be nostalgic for the pre-1933 system of money being backed by precious metals, but such a system has a centralized point of failure.  In the case of Liberty Dollars, it was a warehouse that could be seized by the government, and with pre-1933 USD, it was Fort Knox, which suffered the same fate.

[jbreher]

It was also very scammy. They were basically selling people gold/silver bullion at a HUGE markup with deceptive marketing. IMO, good riddance. If someone tried to pay me with a liberty dollar I'd call the cops on them. Basically every "liberty dollar" would be backed by like 50 cents worth of gold. Total scam.

Bullshit. Every Liberty Dollar that I've seen was redeemable on demand for a set weight of silver bullion - just as the original US Dollar was redeemable for a set weight of gold or silver.

I have one such $20 silver certificate on my desk right now. Up until the feds came in and (illegally, in my mind) confiscated all their precious metals holdings, one could go to their Shelter System Warehouse in Coeur d'Alene, ID, and exchange this $20 Silver Certificate for one ounce of .999 fine silver.

Reread what I said.

At the time silver was like $10 - $15 / oz, so they charged a massive markup.

That IMO is a scam. I never said they didn't honor redemptions. I said they charged a huge markup on their product and marketed it in a way to deceive stupid people.

You wrote HUGE markup, it was by your later admission, 50% to 100%. Standard retailer markup. Further, they honored their redemption terms when spot climbed above face value.

You also claimed their marketing was deceptive. I again call bullshit. The terms are clearly printed right on the note.

[skooter]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

I strongly disagree.

Let's say I have a business that sells product A.
And just like me there are many other businesses but they have more money to invest in PR, etc.

Now I do not want to go bankrupt just because my gov said "Bitcoin is illegal".

And if my product is welcomed to Bitcoiners then Tor is the way to go about it.
I do not go bankrupt and guess what?....
I don't even have to declare TAX!

Like I said, black markets will emerge and that is NOT what the governments want.
That's why they are trying to find a way to regulate BTC, which will not happen IMO.

All right, so you're no different then a drug dealer at that point.

Most legitimate businesses don't want to go that route.

Legitimate?

What is legitimate about raising a war on another country in order to get their oil?

What is legitimate about the way your gov and the banks fuck you right over day after day?

Seriously, don't talk about legitimacy.

You are an idiot.

EDIT: Don't call me a drug dealer. Idiot.
Do a search on my previous posts and you will find out that you are way far from the truth.
Once again, IDIOT!

Guess what. The government gets to decide what's legitimate and what's not. Because they have power. They can throw your ass in jail for breaking the laws they made up.

You can say that isn't fair or isn't right, but that's how the world works.

I live in the real world, not some fantasy of what the world should be like.

It was also very scammy. They were basically selling people gold/silver bullion at a HUGE markup with deceptive marketing. IMO, good riddance. If someone tried to pay me with a liberty dollar I'd call the cops on them. Basically every "liberty dollar" would be backed by like 50 cents worth of gold. Total scam.

Bullshit. Every Liberty Dollar that I've seen was redeemable on demand for a set weight of silver bullion - just as the original US Dollar was redeemable for a set weight of gold or silver.

I have one such $20 silver certificate on my desk right now. Up until the feds came in and (illegally, in my mind) confiscated all their precious metals holdings, one could go to their Shelter System Warehouse in Coeur d'Alene, ID, and exchange this $20 Silver Certificate for one ounce of .999 fine silver.

Reread what I said.

At the time silver was like $10 - $15 / oz, so they charged a massive markup.

That IMO is a scam. I never said they didn't honor redemptions. I said they charged a huge markup on their product and marketed it in a way to deceive stupid people.

You wrote HUGE markup, it was by your later admission, 50% to 100%. Standard retailer markup. Further, they honored their redemption terms when spot climbed above face value.

You also claimed their marketing was deceptive. I again call bullshit. The terms are clearly printed right on the note.

50 - 100% markup for buying gold/silver coins is HUGE markup. And again, their website advertised their product exactly how those "how to make money fast" type websites advertise it. The fake "limited time offer" who's expiration date moves back by 1 day every day.

So, good riddance.

[cambda]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

I strongly disagree.

Let's say I have a business that sells product A.
And just like me there are many other businesses but they have more money to invest in PR, etc.

Now I do not want to go bankrupt just because my gov said "Bitcoin is illegal".

And if my product is welcomed to Bitcoiners then Tor is the way to go about it.
I do not go bankrupt and guess what?....
I don't even have to declare TAX!

Like I said, black markets will emerge and that is NOT what the governments want.
That's why they are trying to find a way to regulate BTC, which will not happen IMO.

All right, so you're no different then a drug dealer at that point.

Most legitimate businesses don't want to go that route.

Nope, he is right, Bitcoin is global payment method and we dont have here one country/government. Thats why you cannot regulate Bitcoin globally

[skooter]

While it is true that bitcoin cannot be effectively totally banned, the facts are that if it is legislated against in any way that makes it not worth the time and effort of most of the population, it will become effectively valueless to the remainder because there will be no network effects.

IOW, if you can't use a Bitcoin to buy anything from a "legit" vendor, then the network effects will be such that it's worth under a buck to everyone else.  A tiny corner of the financial world, indeed.

I strongly disagree.

Let's say I have a business that sells product A.
And just like me there are many other businesses but they have more money to invest in PR, etc.

Now I do not want to go bankrupt just because my gov said "Bitcoin is illegal".

And if my product is welcomed to Bitcoiners then Tor is the way to go about it.
I do not go bankrupt and guess what?....
I don't even have to declare TAX!

Like I said, black markets will emerge and that is NOT what the governments want.
That's why they are trying to find a way to regulate BTC, which will not happen IMO.

All right, so you're no different then a drug dealer at that point.

Most legitimate businesses don't want to go that route.

Nope, he is right, Bitcoin is global payment method and we dont have here one country/government. Thats why you cannot regulate Bitcoin globally

Individual countries can regulate it.

If all the first world countries regulate it what the rest of the world does isn't really relevant.

[serenitys]

Guess what. The government gets to decide what's legitimate and what's not. Because they have power. They can throw your ass in jail for breaking the laws they made up.

You can say that isn't fair or isn't right, but that's how the world works.

I live in the real world, not some fantasy of what the world should be like.


Guess what. The government can't regulate the cryptocurrency that was designed by its very code to be unregulated, so no, they don't have the power. They can throw your ass in jail for breaking laws they made up for now because of a mentality such as yours that apparently is too cowardly to do more than live on its knees. It works that way because there WAS no viable way to change it that did not result in corrupt abuse against those who attempted it.

What you are missing is that this currency, bitcoin, is the one single thing ever invented that exists here and now that IS the viable way to change it.

There will always be cowards in the world but not everyone accepts that paradigm. The rest of us see how embracing bitcoin or any cryptocurrency of its kind (if not all of them, making it even stronger), pulls the rug out from under corrupt enforcers regardless of their laws.

It's called government by consent of the governed.

Consent is voluntary.

At the end of the day, government is not an all powerful entity. It's a network of smaller agencies and units made up of individuals with any number of tasks to perform and at the end of the day, they only do that for a paycheck. They are ALL just people in uniforms doing a job, getting paid, and returning to consumerism same as you, me, us and them. They are not all powerful oz. They're people with jobs who have given themselves roles and titles and threaten other people with brute force to comply or be injured, or they lie, con, deceive and control as a threat to those who are weak minded cowards who won't do shit but bend over....and consent to be governed. Just men telling other men what to do and nobody's stopping them so it becomes a way of life. Servitude, slavery, cowardice.



The second people wise up to this and see through the big ugly threat is the moment the threat goes away. Doesn't mean they'll just stop, it means they will go on the defense.

Using any currency is voluntary.

Embracing a currency that protects you 100% shifts the power of money back to the PEOPLE who then have the wealth and power to not BE governed by psychopaths (unless they're just useless). It gives the PEOPLE back real leverage to refuse corruption as each individual in that agency still has to make a choice.

The PEOPLE who work in government, politics, and even banks are not morons. They clearly see the destruction of the corruption and greed. They see no alternative but to protect it because it's all they know...but if you asked any fiat millionaire whether he'd seriously rather have fiat currency or a guaranteed secure protected wealth and store of value, he's opting for Door #2.

The reason they haven't is because there was no option.

Now there is. And it's gaining traction. And corporations ARE accepting it, and it's becoming more social...it's not a small fad. It's a shift in wealth and value...and anyone who is fucking sane and intelligent sees the security and value - which is why bitcoin is holding solid as the alternative that DISRUPTS the chokehold government/political/banking policy and regulation has over individual finances.

Before the government as a whole agency could even understand the potential disruptive elements of bitcoin in order to then argue for years over some sort of "policy" about bitcoin, and then bicker between election cycles as to whether to pass legislation or not, it will have long since become a way of life for most of the planet - coexisting rather peacefully at first but rooted in so that any moment the government rule makes a shred of an attempt to stop it, it becomes as simple as exchanging all fiat for crypto -and going full digital...which will tank the dollar and any other fiat...because nobody wants it.

If the agencies cannot pay their enforcers, they won't be putting anyone in jail because at the end of the day, the enforcers are still people with jobs and families who are consumers...and they will say fuck the fiat money - digital IS the way. And since this cannot be regulated from the inside and it can't be controlled from the outside, the disruption to the OLD WAY of bully corruption and people needing some other jackass in a suit to give them permission to spend money or have sex is OVER.

You're on the wrong side of this game...

[BADecker]

Governments are people. Usually they are small in number.

Governments get their strength from two things. Either they have the guns and nobody else does, or they have the support of a substantial number of people. If they have the support, it is usually because of propaganda (lies) spread by their politicians.

Something like MaidSafe will change all that; MaidSafe, while not being based on Bitcoin, has similar encryption forms, used much more extensively.

How will MaidSafe change things? People will be able to organize and communicate so that they can spread the truth. And doing it through MaidSafe will allow a hundred times more privacy and anonymity than can be found in anything on the current Internet.

Privacy and anonymity will allow people to prepare for all kinds of governmental actions against them. They will be able to communicate safely. Nobody will be able to keep them from spreading the truth about things governments and their law enforcement branches are doing. They will be able to cover for each other much more easily and effectively.

Currently there are slightly less Google hits on "cops" (the TV show) searches than on something like "police brutality." Two years ago there were something like 3.5 times more on "cops" as "police brutality." People are waking up. MaidSafe will make the wake-up practical.

With Counterparty and Mastercoin, protocols can be built right on top of the Bitcoin protocol so that people can start to communicate and organize to find out what the truth is, RIGHT NOW. And when MaidSafe becomes completely active, if we don't like government the way it is, we will be able to organize to change it without political interference.

This stuff isn't dreams. It is active and partially active right now. And Bitcoin is the focal point that's making it all come together. Bitcoin is also the focal point that just might de-fund government while Congress tries more and more to increase funds to government.

When the Internet goes "radio," there will be no stopping it outside of complete electronic shutdown. And such a thing as that will shut down government as we know it, as well.

[serenitys]

Do you have anymore details on use cases for maidsafe? I went to check out their site - this is phenomenal if it can garner the support for widespread use. Is it its own thing or is it something that can be built into/onto bitcoin tech?

If maidsafe does what it claims, added with bitcoin or any of the cryptos that establish themselves, that's truly the game changer.

These are exciting times.