fivejonnyfive (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 01:32:50 AM |
|
I made a crappy infographic: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FLH0ws0V.jpg&t=665&c=-2KAuHSOKD4ZcQ) The proposed rules are on page 14 of this PDF along with the email address for submitting comment to: http://docs.dos.ny.gov/info/register/2014/july23/pdf/rulemaking.pdfAnd the instructions which state that literally you're just supposed to send a damn email are here: http://www.dos.ny.gov/info/register/instruct.htmSuggestions for comments: - The regulations are far too broad.
- They would require anyone who wishes to even buy BTC with USD to have a license.
- They would require anyone who even casually mines any crypto to have a license with burdonsome requirements.
- They would cause the largest US based pool to shut down and the owner of BTCguild has stated.
- They should maybe be scrapped altogether.
- US law already has requirements for BTC exchanges so these are just redundant and burdonsome.
But whatever - do your own reading, make your own comments, but please don't just flame the email address and prevent real comments from getting through.
|
|
|
|
LostDutchman
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 04:08:51 AM |
|
Toldja.
Fuck'em.
Go around them.
Would you like to know more?
|
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 04:42:55 AM |
|
"We all know that no matter if 100% of law-abiding, non-crony public commentors sent in opposition to your tyranny, you would still engage in it. The End."
|
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
santaClause
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 11:28:34 AM |
|
"We all know that no matter if 100% of law-abiding, non-crony public commentors sent in opposition to your tyranny, you would still engage in it. The End."
The regulators will take what you say i to consideration provided you make a good argument and are coherent
|
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 06:52:03 PM |
|
"We all know that no matter if 100% of law-abiding, non-crony public commentors sent in opposition to your tyranny, you would still engage in it. The End."
The regulators will take what you say i to consideration provided you make a good argument and are coherent Like they take the US Constitution "into consideration" before they violate the fuck out of the rights it codifies, with impunity?
|
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
fivejonnyfive (OP)
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 06:56:36 PM |
|
Look at it this way - if there's a legal challenge to the regulations, whether or not they weighed public comments could be important.
I hope there is indeed a legal challenge.
The point is, the system affords us the chance to comment and it's important we do whether or not the system works or respects those comments.
If further action is required, it's key that we have exhausted previous options.
|
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 07:34:56 PM Last edit: July 24, 2014, 09:04:38 PM by TheButterZone |
|
LOL, as if an angry mob of government's future victims has ever been included as a factor in a pro-liberty written legal ruling (an exception, in and of itself).
Judicial rubber-stamping is the rule, and any ethical attorney will tell you a legal challenge would make him a lot of money, for you to lose on summary judgement.
|
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
LostDutchman
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 24, 2014, 07:44:09 PM |
|
Here is my suggestion to all those who would "regulate" Bitcoin:
GET THE FUCK OUT OF OUR BUSINESS!
|
|
|
|
rackcityb1
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 45
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 25, 2014, 04:25:46 PM |
|
"We all know that no matter if 100% of law-abiding, non-crony public commentors sent in opposition to your tyranny, you would still engage in it. The End."
The regulators will take what you say i to consideration provided you make a good argument and are coherent Like they take the US Constitution "into consideration" before they violate the fuck out of the rights it codifies, with impunity? Anything that violates the constitution will get overturned by the Supreme Court. You need to make a valid argument in order for what you say to carry any weight.
|
|
|
|
cech4204a
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 25, 2014, 04:29:37 PM |
|
i think licences are not good for bitcoin price, but it's good for worlds good, since transactions have to be controlled somehow. Maybe licences are not going to restrict much of the bitcoin, but it's not bad too much . Maybe price bump was there for a reason, you will never know.
|
Bitcoin is DEAD
|
|
|
TheButterZone
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3038
Merit: 1032
RIP Mommy
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 25, 2014, 06:07:46 PM |
|
"We all know that no matter if 100% of law-abiding, non-crony public commentors sent in opposition to your tyranny, you would still engage in it. The End."
The regulators will take what you say i to consideration provided you make a good argument and are coherent Like they take the US Constitution "into consideration" before they violate the fuck out of the rights it codifies, with impunity? Anything that violates the constitution will get overturned by the Supreme Court. You need to make a valid argument in order for what you say to carry any weight. Bullshit. I track petitions for certiorari for constitutional violation cases and not only do they almost never get overturned (where the lower court rubber-stamped the tyrants and the victims are appealing), SCOTUS refuses to even touch almost all of them (when they could simply GVR - grant, vacate, remand - or other methods short of requiring full written and oral arguments).
|
Saying that you don't trust someone because of their behavior is completely valid.
|
|
|
|