[XMR] Monero Speculation

[smooth]

You guys can correct me if I'm wrong but adding tor or ip2 will no necessitate a hard fork at all and can also be backward compatible.

Correct, no hard fork. Nothing related to how the nodes communicate with each other would require a hard fork, it is completely independent.

[onemorexmr]

You guys can correct me if I'm wrong but adding tor or ip2 will no necessitate a hard fork at all and can also be backward compatible.

Correct, no hard fork. Nothing related to how the nodes communicate with each other would require a hard fork, it is completely independent.

in the spirit of RFC1149 we should make a MRL for Avian Carriers
(maybe when you are bored after a hard work day )

[illodin]

because you quoted yourself? LOL.

Because the quote implies that no matter which anonymous technology you pick, it will eventually be criminalized anyway.

[ArticMine]

Edit: Why would one pick a technology that is subject to regulation over one that is not?

Because masternodes don't transact money, and because:

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

Sure like US currency is illegal in the United States.

[smooth]

You guys can correct me if I'm wrong but adding tor or ip2 will no necessitate a hard fork at all and can also be backward compatible.

Correct, no hard fork. Nothing related to how the nodes communicate with each other would require a hard fork, it is completely independent.

in the spirit of RFC1149 we should make a MRL for Avian Carriers
(maybe when you are bored after a hard work day )

A bit OT but one of the more interesting proposals regarding Bitcoin (but applies to any coin) is to have a gateway that broadcasts transactions/blocks over a radio frequency. You could then at least receive payments without any active connection at all, just a passive receiver. You would only need a connection to send, but as you point out even  a carrier pigeon gateway could work for that.

[smooth]

Edit: Why would one pick a technology that is subject to regulation over one that is not?

Because masternodes don't transact money, and because:

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

Sure like US currency is illegal in the United States.

Cash transactions above even a very modest size (e.g. 1000 EUR) are being made illegal in some countries and are already heavily restricted in the US. Not mention the implicit incremental cash ban of inflating away the value of the largest bill.

[bitcoin4eva]

Edit: Why would one pick a technology that is subject to regulation over one that is not?

Because masternodes don't transact money, and because:

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

I have to agree with you. If they have any reason to believe that Cryptocurrencies are threatening their own currency they'll make cryptos illegal to own. No idea how to control this kind of law though

[bitcoin4eva]

Edit: Why would one pick a technology that is subject to regulation over one that is not?

Because masternodes don't transact money, and because:

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

Sure like US currency is illegal in the United States.

Cash transactions above even a very modest size (e.g. 1000 EUR) are being made illegal in some countries and are already heavily restricted in the US. Not mention the implicit incremental cash ban of inflating away the value of the largest bill.

I think in Finland cash deposits of over 1000 EUR via atm's are checked by bank and if you go to the bank with over 2000 EUR they'll ask a few questions on where you got the money from.

[bitcoin4eva]

I have to agree with you. If they have any reason to believe that Cryptocurrencies are threatening their own currency they'll make cryptos illegal to own. No idea how to control this kind of law though

its very simple, you shut down the internet

Yea cause its easy to do, just pull down the switch in the White House

[thelibertycap]

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

"Guaranteed" is a ridiculous assessment at this stage. At least try to back it up with some observable trend that is happening or at the very least why it can't go any other way in your opinion.
I think they could rather closely watch and regulate exchanges and track and tax transactions - withdrawing fiat or people buying goods/services above certain fiat amount.

[smooth]

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

"Guaranteed" is a ridiculous assessment at this stage. At least try to back it up with some observable trend that is happening or at the very least why it can't go any other way in your opinion.
I think they could rather closely watch and regulate exchanges and track and tax transactions - withdrawing fiat or people buying goods/services above certain fiat amount.

The claim was that anonymous would be made illegal. I agree "guaranteed" is incorrect, but in this case by definition the countries wouldn't be able to track transactions, so that isn't a reason they wouldn't do it.

[illodin]

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

"Guaranteed" is a ridiculous assessment at this stage. At least try to back it up with some observable trend that is happening or at the very least why it can't go any other way in your opinion.

Just think how dangerous anonymous money can be to them compared to stuff they have already banned and it seems clear what's gonna happen. And as a cop-out/disclaimer, I said "some countries", so it's enough for my vision to come true if Vanuatu bans it.

[onemorexmr]

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

"Guaranteed" is a ridiculous assessment at this stage. At least try to back it up with some observable trend that is happening or at the very least why it can't go any other way in your opinion.

Just think how dangerous anonymous money can be to them compared to stuff they have already banned and it's seems clear what's gonna happen.

many people thought the same will happen to bitcoin.
but what happend? KYC/AML and regular compliance.

i think the same will happen to all anon coins.
governments are slow - cryptos are fast. as soon as we have good adoption around the world they have lost.

[thelibertycap]

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

"Guaranteed" is a ridiculous assessment at this stage. At least try to back it up with some observable trend that is happening or at the very least why it can't go any other way in your opinion.
I think they could rather closely watch and regulate exchanges and track and tax transactions - withdrawing fiat or people buying goods/services above certain fiat amount.

The claim was that anonymous would be made illegal. I agree "guaranteed" is incorrect, but in this case by definition the countries wouldn't be able to track transactions, so that isn't a reason they wouldn't do it.

well, sure i see your point. however i am not sure we agree on what does illegal mean in this case. i am trying to argue that rather than straight out banning the crypto, it could be so strongly regulated, that you would not be able to convert it to real-world assets without a proper paperwork and tracking.

USD banknotes work the same way. Facilitating black markets but you can't really easily get that money into light without rising suspicion. I am not sure how it works but i am pretty sure you can't just walk into a bank and deposit a million dollars just like that.

on the other hand, i am sure that there will be countries banning crypto completely - there are many countries in the world. USA? not sure which way they will decide to go.

[ArticMine]

In the United States and in Canada there are requirements that one report cash or bearer instrument transactions over a certain size and in certain circumstances but they are not illegal. In certain parts of the EU there are restrictions on merchants accepting cash for transactions over a certain amount. I also suspect that it is a matter of time before cryptocurrency regardless of how anonymous it is will be treated the same as cash is this respect.

As for cryptocurrency being made illegal in those countries with convertible widely traded currencies such as the US, EU, Canada etc the chances are very low and all indicators are against a move toward banning cryptocurrency. What we are seeing and will see is the regulation of all the intermediary players and service providers. It is for this reason that DRK has a much higher regulatory risk than XBT, or XMR, since the masternodes due to their limited number are a prime target for regulation. I would say the same for semi centralized structures such as delegated proof of stake, and currencies such as Ripple and Ethereum. In those countries with exchange controls for example Iceland, China etc., the changes are very high that cryptocurrency will be made illegal or already has.

Spending some time understanding how government regulation actually works, will go a long way to understanding  what the regulatory risks actually are. I stand by my position that a pure POW decentralized crypto-currency such as XBT or XMR has very little regulatory risk at the protocol level; furthermore there is already a fair amount of information on where the regulators actually stand. This in not the case at all with a very large proportion of the alt-coins and assets on the market today. The key thing to understand here is that any amount of centralization no matter how small will likely attract government regulation.

[bitcoin4eva]

In the United States and in Canada there are requirements that one report cash or bearer instrument transactions over a certain size and in certain circumstances but they are not illegal. In certain parts of the EU there are restrictions on merchants accepting cash for transactions over a certain amount. I also suspect that it is a matter of time before cryptocurrency regardless of how anonymous it is will be treated the same as cash is this respect.

As for cryptocurrency being made illegal in those countries with convertible widely traded currencies such as the US, EU, Canada etc the chances are very low and all indicators are against a move toward banning cryptocurrecny. What we are seeing and will see is the regulation of all the intermediary players and service providers. It is for this reason that DRK has a much higher regulatory risk than XBT, or XMR, since the masternodes due to their limited number are a prime target for regulation. I would say the same for semi centralized structures such as delegated proof of stake, and currencies such as Ripple and Ethereum. In those countries with exchange controls for example Iceland, China etc., the changes are very high that cryptocurrency will be made illegal or already has.

Spending some time understanding how government regulation actually works, will go a long way to unuderstanding  what the regulatory risks actually are. I stand by my position that a pure POW decentralized crypto-currency such as XBT or XMR has very little regulatory risk at the protocol level; furthermore there is already a fair amount of information on where the regulators actually stand. This in not the case at all with a very large proportion of the alt-coins and assets on the market today. The key thing to understand here is that any amount of centralization no matter how small will likely attract government regulation.

I really like you It would be really hard for governments to regulate Crypto users, even harder than cash payment users. All kinds of credit cards are easy to follow but they have no possible way to follow every cash payment. Same goes with Crypto payments.

[ArticMine]

I think it's guaranteed that some countries (USA very likely being one of them) will make all anonymous coins illegal eventually. At that point, it's imperative that the coin can run hidden under tor/i2p or some other solution.

"Guaranteed" is a ridiculous assessment at this stage. At least try to back it up with some observable trend that is happening or at the very least why it can't go any other way in your opinion.

Just think how dangerous anonymous money can be to them compared to stuff they have already banned and it seems clear what's gonna happen. And as a cop-out/disclaimer, I said "some countries", so it's enough for my vision to come true if Vanuatu bans it.

In countries with exchange controls expect them to treat XBT or XMR the same as USD cash. In many cases this will mean either illegal or a very unfavourable exchange rate through "official" channels.

[smooth]

In certain parts of the EU there are restrictions on merchants accepting cash for transactions over a certain amount.

It was my understanding (perhaps incorrect?) that these laws prohibited even private party cash transactions, not just merchant transactions.

Assuming correct (if not, wait a little while and it probably will be), this same law could likely apply to anonymous virtual coin transactions between private parties.

Anyway, at the moment I don't see much of a movement toward banning virtual currencies, and this is indeed somewhat surprising relative to expectations a few years ago, although I think the winds could shift on that, especially with respect to untraceable virtual currencies. Nothing is certain though.

[onemorexmr]

In certain parts of the EU there are restrictions on merchants accepting cash for transactions over a certain amount.

It was my understanding (perhaps incorrect?) that these laws prohibited even private party cash transactions, not just merchant transactions.

Assuming correct (if not, wait a little while and it probably will be), this same law could likely apply to anonymous virtual coin transactions between private parties.

in germany private cash transfer are unlimited. most private car trades are made in cash (reasoning is if the seller claims insolvency he keeps the car and the money - with cash its not possible)

BUT:
 - many companies have limits (e.g. "Deutsche Post" 2500€)
 - you have to explain yourself to your bank when depositing (i even had to explain myself once when i sold gold (directly at my bank) for just(!) 500€)

but i think you are right that cash will be more restricted.

[dreamspark]

Well someones feeling bullish again and has turned their 1 xmr/2 secs buy bot back on lol