Janet Yellen suggests 'curtailing' cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin(markets.businessinsider.com)
markets.businessinsider.com
Janet Yellen suggests 'curtailing' cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin
https://markets.businessinsider.com/currencies/news/bitcoin-price-cryptocurrency-should-be-curtailed-terrorism-concerns-yellen-2021-1-1029985692
116 comments
Is this Germany's 2nd largest stock exchange, or is it their 2nd largest stock exchange located in Stuttgart?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%C3%B6rse_Stuttgart
What would you call it as?
What would you call it as?
What you said wasn't incorrect, just slightly ambiguous.
To be less ambiguous, I'd just say "the second largest exchange in Germany" and ditch Stuttgart.
To be less ambiguous, I'd just say "the second largest exchange in Germany" and ditch Stuttgart.
Do they allow you to do real onchain transactions with your coins? I cannot find anything about it in their FAQ.
There is no easy way to stop the Bitcoin network so if they really wanted to kill Bitcoin they would make it illegal to exchange Bitcoin. But then people would exchange it and just not report it anywhere, and they’d lose tax revenue.
I don’t think there is much they can do, except shut down companies like coinbase. That would also just lose them tax revenue.
I don’t think there is much they can do, except shut down companies like coinbase. That would also just lose them tax revenue.
I agree. Some would even take it further and argue that there is _no_ way to stop the Bitcoin network. The technology is like, as Nick Bostrom puts it, one of those balls that humanity pulls out of the urn of invention which once pulled the ball can never go back in [1]. Let's just hope that Bitcoin is not one of those bad balls but rather one that pushes humanity forward. Perhaps, Bitcoin is the [2] "sly roundabout way introduce [good money] that [governments] can't stop [2]."
1: https://www.wired.com/story/technology-could-end-humanity-ho... 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYhEDxFwFRU
1: https://www.wired.com/story/technology-could-end-humanity-ho... 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYhEDxFwFRU
The Pandora's Box of cryptocurrency has been opened and nothing the world's governments do can stop it... Though some will surely try at the ISP level at least.
Its totally absurd to think there is _no_ way to stop it.
All it takes is money. There may be no legal ground for a state to do this but technically it sure is possible.
There is also no need to ever attack the network itself. All that matters is the price. By buying BTC and creating a bubble a state could crash the price so dramatically that it would be very unlikely to recover. Imagine if the price would just go up from no on until lets say 1 million USD per BTC that's +3000% maybe over the span of 1 or 2 years.
Then sell and let it crash probably -99.9%
I'd still be worth 1k USD but at the same time no one but the original crypt anarchist would care anymore.
Would that cost a shitload of money? yes millions, but technically a state could print that money so it doesn't really matter something like tether could do this basically for free. Also since they know when they let it crash they can recover a huge chuck of what they put in simply by shorting the top.
Way simpler and cheaper than building mining farms that would be worthless after successfully destroying BTC.
Remember the goal would not be to technically turn it off just render it irrelevant. Thats what people got wrong. They think the state would want to shut it down but putting it back to where it was 10 years ago would totally be sufficient.
I think you’re quite misinformed.
This would take many many many billions, not “many millions” as you said.
The daily trading volume for bitcoin is $64 billion.
Buying “many millions” worth of bitcoin would not achieve what you’re proposing.
This would take many many many billions, not “many millions” as you said.
The daily trading volume for bitcoin is $64 billion.
Buying “many millions” worth of bitcoin would not achieve what you’re proposing.
How is the volume relevant? It has no effect in this scenario. You need to buy a significant amount of the BTC in circulation to reduce the supply. You buy a certain percentage of BTCs it doesn't matter how many billions in volume there is. Buying so much will raise the price which in turn will raise the demand and the bubble starts. Every time the bubble is about to pop you need to buy again to repeat the process. It gets more expensive every time but at the same time the amount of BTC in circulation gets smaller and so the amount the attacker has can move and manipulate the market more. The is no need to go strait up the attacker can temporary crash the market by selling some and bet on falling prices. Then buy back more with the profit. A state with a money printer can not loose and can manipulate however much they want.
>Buying “many millions” worth of bitcoin would not achieve what you’re proposing.
IIRC in 2019 "someone" supposed bough BTCs for about 100 million USD in a short time frame and it raised the price by several %. Its not the 100million that moves the market so much is the demand it creates when people see the price going up. No need to buy the bubble just manipulate the market into creating one.
Also 100 million may sound like a lot of money but for a large state this isn't especially if its printed anyway. And they can recover most by betting on falling prices when they let the bubble burst. The people who exits before the bust are the only people who actually have to be "paid" (they made profit) by the an attack. While those who stay in or join will lose everything in the end and cover most of the cost of the attack. Remember after the attack BTC would be almost worthless and the attacker would have sold it all while betting on lower prices. All the people who get liquidated indirectly payed for the attack. Everyone who holds BTC an bought it higher than the end price indirectly helped create the bubble.
You'd definitely need lots of money to do this but that doesn't mean it costs a lot in the end. Most of it is a zero sum game.
>Buying “many millions” worth of bitcoin would not achieve what you’re proposing.
IIRC in 2019 "someone" supposed bough BTCs for about 100 million USD in a short time frame and it raised the price by several %. Its not the 100million that moves the market so much is the demand it creates when people see the price going up. No need to buy the bubble just manipulate the market into creating one.
Also 100 million may sound like a lot of money but for a large state this isn't especially if its printed anyway. And they can recover most by betting on falling prices when they let the bubble burst. The people who exits before the bust are the only people who actually have to be "paid" (they made profit) by the an attack. While those who stay in or join will lose everything in the end and cover most of the cost of the attack. Remember after the attack BTC would be almost worthless and the attacker would have sold it all while betting on lower prices. All the people who get liquidated indirectly payed for the attack. Everyone who holds BTC an bought it higher than the end price indirectly helped create the bubble.
You'd definitely need lots of money to do this but that doesn't mean it costs a lot in the end. Most of it is a zero sum game.
> I don’t think there is much they can do, except shut down companies like coinbase.
This is exactly what they would do. They would make it illegal to operate an exchange and go after foreign exchanges with threats against the banks that serviced them. At some you need to get your money into the banking system as government backed currency for it to be generally useful, and they could at least force that to be a multi-step, onerous, and less anonymous process (eg get crypto --> buy physical goods with crypto from the few people that accept cryto for payment --> sell physical goods to get actual money).
This is exactly what they would do. They would make it illegal to operate an exchange and go after foreign exchanges with threats against the banks that serviced them. At some you need to get your money into the banking system as government backed currency for it to be generally useful, and they could at least force that to be a multi-step, onerous, and less anonymous process (eg get crypto --> buy physical goods with crypto from the few people that accept cryto for payment --> sell physical goods to get actual money).
> At some you need to get your money into the banking system as government backed currency for it to be useful
At some point this will not be true. See Weimar, Venezuela, etc...
At some point this will not be true. See Weimar, Venezuela, etc...
Excuse me Mr. Smith, where did that 50k that just appeared in your bank account came from?
Where are you sending your money to?
The IRS at el. will be all over this in no time.
There is going to be an terrorist attack made using BTC as funds - a new patriot act and suddenly touching crypto makes you a suspected terrorist.
The IRS at el. will be all over this in no time.
There is going to be an terrorist attack made using BTC as funds - a new patriot act and suddenly touching crypto makes you a suspected terrorist.
Yes I agree with you.
IRS audits aren't the only concern. US banks are also required to submit a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) when they see evidence of money laundering. Don't tell the small fish to break those laws, the consequences can be severe.
https://www.occ.treas.gov/topics/supervision-and-examination...
https://www.occ.treas.gov/topics/supervision-and-examination...
That’s a great point.
If you don't report your crypto exchanges because crypto is outlawed, it becomes a tax crime (The People vs Al Capone) [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Capone#Tax_evasion
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Capone#Tax_evasion
Yes, that was implied, but there is no easy way of finding out who is committing that crime, at large or small scales.
I have no doubt the IRS can pay technologists to implement such chain surveillance, in concert with other government agencies also interested in such data feeds. Money talks (no pun intended).
If I were to see such an RFP, I'd bid on it myself.
If I were to see such an RFP, I'd bid on it myself.
The IRS, in terms of of maximizing their tax collection, would almost certainly be better off using that money on (admittedly expensive) enforcement action against those who use traditional tax avoidance techniques. As you say, money talks.
I'm sure they could watch a few known wallets but how do they watch everyone globally while identifying and connecting Americans? Now throw in different kind of coins and what you are assuming is possible is not possible.
https://www.chainalysis.com/ is a company who has demonstrated such analysis is possible. Nation states have effectively unlimited resources. Any crypto exchange in a country with a financial regulatory system can and likely will be required to report transaction data.
>Nation states have effectively unlimited resources.
I hope you realize this is utter nonsense.
I hope you realize this is utter nonsense.
[deleted]
I had a look at the website. They are looking at a limited number of accounts and trying to go deep connecting real world data for high profile cases.
Scaling that to every taxpayer or even every taxpayer in the largest apartment in Boise would be impossible using the same techniques.
Scaling that to every taxpayer or even every taxpayer in the largest apartment in Boise would be impossible using the same techniques.
[deleted]
> There is no easy way to stop the Bitcoin network so if they really wanted to kill Bitcoin
I think you underestimate how much pressure the US government can put and how centralized the web is.
If:
No legitimate business will accept Bitcoin.
Twitter, Facebook, Reddit ban all mentions or advocacy of Bitcoin
All public Bitcoin exchanges are shut down.
This would severely curtail Bitcoin and likely actually cause a drop in value.
Yes it is probably impossible to ever get rid of something, but for the government, reducing something to a fringe can be beneficial and is definitely something they can do.
I think you underestimate how much pressure the US government can put and how centralized the web is.
If:
No legitimate business will accept Bitcoin.
Twitter, Facebook, Reddit ban all mentions or advocacy of Bitcoin
All public Bitcoin exchanges are shut down.
This would severely curtail Bitcoin and likely actually cause a drop in value.
Yes it is probably impossible to ever get rid of something, but for the government, reducing something to a fringe can be beneficial and is definitely something they can do.
The majority of illegal actors would still use Bitcoin in that scenario. The long term value of Bitcoin is irrelevant to them, Bitcoin just needs to keep a rough short term value and not be forgeable to be usable for illegal purposes.
You hurt the traders and actually make the network super cheap and fast that it can be used to buy drugs again.
It was never fast and never will be. Block time is 10min since ever.
Confirmations can take a day.. 10 minutes would be like an etransfer.
Confirmation isn't defined you can wait however many blocks you want to be added after the block with your Tx. The chance of your Tx being changed/removed gets smaller and smaller but there is no end.
This also never chanced so its irrelevant Bitcoin is still as slow as on day one, if you wait for the same number of blocks before you consider it "final".
This also never chanced so its irrelevant Bitcoin is still as slow as on day one, if you wait for the same number of blocks before you consider it "final".
:)
You could ban companies from interacting with crypto currencies, which would kill off the entire ecosystem, and make them unusable for the majority of people and purposes.
I addressed this in my OP. It would kill off the legal ecosystem that earn them tax revenue but would have little effect on the illegal ecosystem they intend to stop.
is people using bitcoin for legal purchases in any significant way?
All the crypto traders using legit tax-conforming platforms like coinbase, likely hundreds of thousands of people.
I mean, for buying stuff. And by stuff, I don't mean other cryptocurrencies.
Why does buying stuff matter? Relatively very few if any buy stuff with gold.
What stops somebody from interacting with a foreign company that exchanges crypto and $LOCAL currency?
Sure, the entire ecosystem would take a hit, but also note that many US companies have actually bought Crypto, people recently bought crypto on margin, and, those who still own crypto, can exchange it outside $COUNTRY, and convert currencies.
Sure, the entire ecosystem would take a hit, but also note that many US companies have actually bought Crypto, people recently bought crypto on margin, and, those who still own crypto, can exchange it outside $COUNTRY, and convert currencies.
> There is no easy way to stop the Bitcoin network so if they really wanted to kill Bitcoin they would make it illegal to exchange Bitcoin. But then people would exchange it and just not report it anywhere, and they’d lose tax revenue.
But that would be good enough to kill it for almost all purposes. Unlike illicit drugs, there's very little natural demand for Bitcoin to motivate people to risk it if it were illegal, which cuts it off from deriving value from the legit economy. It's also not very stealthy, so it would not be very desirable for the illicit economy, either [1]. A network that only has die-hard ideological cryptocurrency dead-enders on it is dead for all practical purposes.
[1] Right now, it has some marginal use at the interface between the legit and illicit economies (e.g. dark net markets), but if it itself became illicit, I think that would stop.
But that would be good enough to kill it for almost all purposes. Unlike illicit drugs, there's very little natural demand for Bitcoin to motivate people to risk it if it were illegal, which cuts it off from deriving value from the legit economy. It's also not very stealthy, so it would not be very desirable for the illicit economy, either [1]. A network that only has die-hard ideological cryptocurrency dead-enders on it is dead for all practical purposes.
[1] Right now, it has some marginal use at the interface between the legit and illicit economies (e.g. dark net markets), but if it itself became illicit, I think that would stop.
All they need to do is make it illegal to complete an enforceable contract with crypto. In other words, you can sit and stare at your coinbase account all day, but you can't ever legally get hard currency to spend it, and you can never pay for services or products with it. All of this is trivial for world governments.
And the underground economy is a rounding error, if BTC is relegated to the dark web, it will lose 99% of its value.
And the underground economy is a rounding error, if BTC is relegated to the dark web, it will lose 99% of its value.
Some people would - but many wouldn't, bitcoins outsized value is almost entirely due to speculators who wouldn't otherwise invest in it if transacting it was illegal.
Force ISPs to ban known miners in China. Block port 8333. Run an ip blacklist of all miners. The government can do plenty.
I'm curious where the data shows that Bitcoin is used "mainly" for illicit transactions. [1]
[1]: https://markets.chainalysis.com/?range=30&asset=BTC#risk-ill...
[1]: https://markets.chainalysis.com/?range=30&asset=BTC#risk-ill...
Agree.
There are two 800lb gorillas in the room though
1. Tether manipulation of Bitcoin https://coinlib.io/coin/BTC/Bitcoin refer to the Money flow diagram. There are plenty of other HN stories on the Tether situation
2. How long will the US dollar remain as the world's reserve currency? For context, https://www.principles.com/the-changing-world-order/ This is probably a big reason for this announcement.
There are two 800lb gorillas in the room though
1. Tether manipulation of Bitcoin https://coinlib.io/coin/BTC/Bitcoin refer to the Money flow diagram. There are plenty of other HN stories on the Tether situation
2. How long will the US dollar remain as the world's reserve currency? For context, https://www.principles.com/the-changing-world-order/ This is probably a big reason for this announcement.
Even then this is a strawman, the main use for BTC is not transactions, it is the store of value in front of inflation. Suppose 90% of users saved in BTC and only cashed out once a year, and 10% are frequently using drug dealers (pun intended) that would be a low number of legitimate transactions but BTC itself would be legitimately helping a lot of people.
The main use is speculation not a store of value.
If BTC would counter inflation and keep its value (equal purchase power) even with high volatility no one would care about it. It would still be worth single digit dollar or more likely it would have died a few years after it went online.
People buy BTC because they want to sell for significant more to a later time.
Agreed. This is still a strawman even if the majority of on chain transactions were one hop associated to verified addresses from darknet markets.
Another punny point: drug dealers that are following the Ten Crack Commandments[0] shouldn't be frequent users.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Crack_Commandments#:~:text....
Another punny point: drug dealers that are following the Ten Crack Commandments[0] shouldn't be frequent users.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten_Crack_Commandments#:~:text....
Does the site you linked purport to have total awareness of all illicit wallets on the blockchain?
Chainalysis does have a superior brand recognition for this kind of analysis work, and have been used while conducting criminal investigations, e.g.
But, no, they don't. They qualify it here as "Known illicit BTC".
But, no, they don't. They qualify it here as "Known illicit BTC".
I was assuming the US/EU governments did not care much about money laundering through cryptos, cause it was mostly Chinese money leaving China and getting funneled into the West.
So has the flow of Chinese money stopped?
> Chinese money leaving China and getting funneled into the West.
Not that I don't believe you, because that looks very plausible to me, but do you happen to have any source/article on that would go into more details?
Not that I don't believe you, because that looks very plausible to me, but do you happen to have any source/article on that would go into more details?
There is a lot of collaborative evidence:
https://news.bitcoin.com/65-of-global-bitcoin-hashrate-conce...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerhuang/2021/12/29/the-chine...
And more direct proof:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/How-illegal-online-...
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ed-arrests-cryptocurr...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bryanrich/2019/05/14/bitcoin-is...
--------
From what I understand, there's two reasons Bitcoin money is popular in China. 1. Corrupt oligarchs with access to subsidized electricity can setup mining farms and basically print money. 2. Corrupt oligarchs with their money stuck in China can setup clandestine mining farms, and thereby exchange their yuans -> electricity/equipment -> BTC -> Vancouver/Sydney/London/...etc apartments.
https://news.bitcoin.com/65-of-global-bitcoin-hashrate-conce...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rogerhuang/2021/12/29/the-chine...
And more direct proof:
https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Caixin/How-illegal-online-...
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ed-arrests-cryptocurr...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bryanrich/2019/05/14/bitcoin-is...
--------
From what I understand, there's two reasons Bitcoin money is popular in China. 1. Corrupt oligarchs with access to subsidized electricity can setup mining farms and basically print money. 2. Corrupt oligarchs with their money stuck in China can setup clandestine mining farms, and thereby exchange their yuans -> electricity/equipment -> BTC -> Vancouver/Sydney/London/...etc apartments.
Here's a report that found $50B in crypto moved out of China: https://cnb.cx/34htT7O
https://news.bitcoin.com/crypto-facilitates-money-transfer-f...
I don't know if there are any good analyses of the volume of this trade, but the general assumption is that it's huge, the reason being that it's a relatively easy way around government restrictions.
I don't know if there are any good analyses of the volume of this trade, but the general assumption is that it's huge, the reason being that it's a relatively easy way around government restrictions.
The US is about to embark on a substantial weakening of the dollar even more dramatic than 2020. They're preemptively heading off the tech elites who think they're immune to it because of their alternative "currency". I mean, storming the Capitol will be punished with scorn, but storming the Federal Reserve earns you a death sentence. That makes sense - the Federal Reserve is the real center of American power.
This excuse seems flimsy to me.
A better reason for change: How about the fact that the Bitcoin network is currently estimated to use over 7 nuclear plants worth of electricity and that a single transaction uses like 6 households of daily electricity? The carbon footprint of Bitcoin is something like the city of Las Vegas. Can we fix that?
A better reason for change: How about the fact that the Bitcoin network is currently estimated to use over 7 nuclear plants worth of electricity and that a single transaction uses like 6 households of daily electricity? The carbon footprint of Bitcoin is something like the city of Las Vegas. Can we fix that?
How does the carbon footprint compare to fiat networks like SWIFT for example ?
Proof-of-stake consensus is one answer to this. It’s what the Ethereum network is implementing.
> Janet Yellen on Tuesday suggested lawmakers "curtail" the use of Bitcoin amid terrorism concerns.
HAHAHA. That's where I ended the reading, as I know the pattern. Its just virtue signaling of finance world and politics. They are preping for taking control over the crypto sector. As it is actually starting to threat whole financial system, since companies are starting to put more faith in BTC as value store.
That is actually scary concept for government... well central bank and fed actually, since those guys know whats going on.
Anyhow the same people will be later saying 'free market this' 'free market that' on the next issue. Even though its absolutely contradictory.
HAHAHA. That's where I ended the reading, as I know the pattern. Its just virtue signaling of finance world and politics. They are preping for taking control over the crypto sector. As it is actually starting to threat whole financial system, since companies are starting to put more faith in BTC as value store.
That is actually scary concept for government... well central bank and fed actually, since those guys know whats going on.
Anyhow the same people will be later saying 'free market this' 'free market that' on the next issue. Even though its absolutely contradictory.
In 2007 the federal reserve estimated that 60% of all US bank notes were being held and traded overseas, almost always in violation of some local money laundering law. What happens to those dollars if people start laundering with a different currency?
https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/central-banker/sprin...
https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/central-banker/sprin...
There is already a vast shadow economy up and running in Asia, Europe and North America where crypto is king. That trade is not going back to the Dollar.
>"Cryptocurrencies are a particular concern. I think many are used - at least in a transaction sense - mainly for illicit financing.
>"And I think we really need to examine ways in which we can curtail their use and make sure that money laundering doesn't occur through those channels."
Yuck, as much as I hate this argument, which is basically just the "think of the children" argument restated, I'm rather convinced that Yellen's point is true.
There are no legitimate uses for bitcoin that I can think of, other than:
- An instrument for speculative investing
- Sending money to dissidents in other countries
Neither of these seem like high-priority use cases that will suffer unduly from more regulation. By contrast the primary use case for bitcoin seems to be riding the speculation bubble, followed by buying stolen accounts/credit cards/identities and illegal drugs.
>"And I think we really need to examine ways in which we can curtail their use and make sure that money laundering doesn't occur through those channels."
Yuck, as much as I hate this argument, which is basically just the "think of the children" argument restated, I'm rather convinced that Yellen's point is true.
There are no legitimate uses for bitcoin that I can think of, other than:
- An instrument for speculative investing
- Sending money to dissidents in other countries
Neither of these seem like high-priority use cases that will suffer unduly from more regulation. By contrast the primary use case for bitcoin seems to be riding the speculation bubble, followed by buying stolen accounts/credit cards/identities and illegal drugs.
Not having your savings blown away by indiscriminate money printing, UBI or whatever inflationary scheme awaits us is a pretty good legitimate use.
Both statements hold some truth. It’s a shame when a failing financial system pushes ordinary law-abiding citizens into financial alignment with their enemies. History is full of these situations.
Buying drugs, paying ransom to hackers, paying for vpn services, and paying for pirate sites.
Also I guess making simple transactions complicated for cool nerd points.
Also I guess making simple transactions complicated for cool nerd points.
P2P value transfer?
Hedge against inflation?
There are others as well...
>By contrast the primary use case for bitcoin seems to be riding the speculation bubble, followed by buying stolen accounts/credit cards/identities and illegal drugs.
Do you have any evidence of how prevalent this is on the network?
There are others as well...
>By contrast the primary use case for bitcoin seems to be riding the speculation bubble, followed by buying stolen accounts/credit cards/identities and illegal drugs.
Do you have any evidence of how prevalent this is on the network?
Alex Gladstein, Chief Strategy Officer of the Human Rights Foundation, someone who spends a lot of time and energy trying to help people in economically repressed circumstances, clearly disagrees with your assessment:
https://time.com/5486673/bitcoin-venezuela-authoritarian/
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1340836877595594752.html
https://time.com/5486673/bitcoin-venezuela-authoritarian/
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1340836877595594752.html
Not sure there's a lot of light between
> Sending money to dissidents in other countries
and the uses that Gladstein mentions. So I wouldn't say that he "clearly disagrees".
> Sending money to dissidents in other countries
and the uses that Gladstein mentions. So I wouldn't say that he "clearly disagrees".
Bitcoin isn't the only game in town. You can do more with something like Ethereum or Stellar. Unlike cash, it's also much easier to track the flows of crypto.
The real is issue is how long will the US dollar retain its status as the reserve currency? and what will take its place?
Facebook is trying really hard with Diem
The real is issue is how long will the US dollar retain its status as the reserve currency? and what will take its place?
Facebook is trying really hard with Diem
One of the memes in the Bitcoin community is that of Bitcoin eventually becoming a better store of value. One can argue that most people prefer their savings not be inflated away [1].
1: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUUR0000SA0R
1: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUUR0000SA0R
It does act as a secure, transferable store of value. In the event that you have to flee your home country or its financial system is compromised you could go anywhere and retain some portion of your personal wealth.
It’s not so much Bitcoin going up as the US dollar going down. An unprecedented fifth of all US dollars were printed just last year.
As predicted just two days ago[1], Bitcoin (and decentralisation in general) will be attacked under the guise of it being a vessel for circumvention of financial establishment right-wing censorship. "We must regulate it to prevent fundraising for another insurrection".
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25815634
As predicted just two days ago[1], Bitcoin (and decentralisation in general) will be attacked under the guise of it being a vessel for circumvention of financial establishment right-wing censorship. "We must regulate it to prevent fundraising for another insurrection".
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25815634
I agree with your suggestion of general inflation - everything from corn to oil is inflating....but crypto is in a class all its own and is basically digital tulips (except tulips have greater intrinsic value).
As future devaluations for the dollar are basically guaranteed, it makes sense for the Treasury and Fed to nullify any alternatives that would interfere with their policies. No one who really matters has their net worth tied up in crypto (yet) - the entire market can be vaporized with no meaningful political fallout. The government cannot abide some future where Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk or Goldman Sachs has a majority of their assets outside of fiat currency - this would represent an existential threat to the model of governance.
As future devaluations for the dollar are basically guaranteed, it makes sense for the Treasury and Fed to nullify any alternatives that would interfere with their policies. No one who really matters has their net worth tied up in crypto (yet) - the entire market can be vaporized with no meaningful political fallout. The government cannot abide some future where Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk or Goldman Sachs has a majority of their assets outside of fiat currency - this would represent an existential threat to the model of governance.
The Bitcoin market cap is currently $653B. It's larger than all but 15 fiat currencies[1].
[1] https://fiatmarketcap.com/
[1] https://fiatmarketcap.com/
Might as well shut down Deutsche Bank while you're at it.
A lot of large media outlets reported that Deutsche would stop lending to Trump, but left out how bad it is if even Deutsche won't lend to you.
A lot of large media outlets reported that Deutsche would stop lending to Trump, but left out how bad it is if even Deutsche won't lend to you.
we will need to fight to keep our crypto money alive.... these communist suckers will try fuck everything to control us... be prepared!
I'm interested on what needs to happen to ensure its future availability/viability, do you have any pointers?
Imagine reading the parent comment and thinking yeah this guy makes sense. Dafuq is wrong with HN readers??
just...copy and paste... :) I will not waist no more time with this biden shit...
If you honestly think Biden or any US Democrat is a communist you should get your head checked or start taking your medication again. You don't have a clue about politics or economics.
:D :D :D :D :D
what a waste, around your waist!
Just wait and see american.... look into venezuela... is there a good future for crypto in USA??? I think no, United States ==== Venezuela soon!!! Good luck!
Meshnets. Meshnets everywhere.
I foresee more and more government intervention trying to prevent people from using cryptocurrencies. I mean, the most common use case for a cryptocurrency like Monero is to dodge government taxes and make illegal transactions.
God bless the developers and cryptographers who are continuing on the good fight. And good luck to them too, because as their technology gains influence and threatens to usurp todays power, they will face resistance. Maybe the original authors of the protocols saw this coming, which is why they used fake identities like Satoshi Nakamoto, or Nicolas van Saberhagen.
I'm less worried about it becoming illegal (what are you going to do, ban math?), and more worried about the networks themselves getting compromised.
God bless the developers and cryptographers who are continuing on the good fight. And good luck to them too, because as their technology gains influence and threatens to usurp todays power, they will face resistance. Maybe the original authors of the protocols saw this coming, which is why they used fake identities like Satoshi Nakamoto, or Nicolas van Saberhagen.
I'm less worried about it becoming illegal (what are you going to do, ban math?), and more worried about the networks themselves getting compromised.
I don't see this as prevention. I see a desire to prevent tax avoidance/evasion.
They have already began preventing tax evasion using know your customer regulations & blockchain analysis, but this is not possible with protocols which obfuscate wallet addresses, their contents & transactions with cool cryptographic tricks like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_signature
>but this is not possible with protocols which obfuscate wallet addresses, their contents & transactions with cool cryptographic tricks like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_signature
Fancy cryptographic techniques won't do much good here. You can already do much of the same thing with cash, which is also untraceable. What the government ended up doing is essentially saying that any cash transaction over a certain amount is considered suspect until proven otherwise. For instance, a bank isn't going to allow you to deposit $50k in hundred dollar bills.
Fancy cryptographic techniques won't do much good here. You can already do much of the same thing with cash, which is also untraceable. What the government ended up doing is essentially saying that any cash transaction over a certain amount is considered suspect until proven otherwise. For instance, a bank isn't going to allow you to deposit $50k in hundred dollar bills.
These two sentences seem....contradictory? You said it's not prevention then said it's prevention.
Let me clarify. The goal is not to prevent crypto usage, but to appropriately tax it so people don't use it to dodge taxes.
> what are you going to do, ban math?
Hold their beer!
The Indiana Pi Bill shows that even math is not off the table for ambitious legislatures.
Hold their beer!
The Indiana Pi Bill shows that even math is not off the table for ambitious legislatures.
This is just the beginning, and every major government in the world will be on board. In the end, fiat currencies are the foundation and core of every industrialized nation. There can be no alternatives. There's just no way bitcoin will be allowed to become an accepted medium for exchange. Janet Yellen is trying to provide early warning, although I doubt many will bother acting on it.
edit: welcome bitcoin bagholders/downvoters!
edit: welcome bitcoin bagholders/downvoters!
This was always going to be the outcome of attempting to subvert governments, central banks, and other interconnected institutions with technology.
Laws versus tech, the law almost always wins (one of the few scenarios I'm familiar with where tech "won" was the reversal of PGP being treated as an export restricted munition [1] [2]). Tech is just a tool, and the arguments for crypto currencies compared to traditional fiat digitally represented (Central Bank Digital Currencies aka CBDCs [3]) just aren't that compelling (especially with countries, 54 so far more on the way, continuing to roll out instant payment networks [4]). This emboldens the very real observation Ms Yellen makes that crypto exists to obfuscate the transfer and storage of value against the intent of government financial regulation.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...
[2] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/55023/what-was-...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank_digital_currency
[4] https://empower1.fisglobal.com/rs/650-KGE-239/images/Report_...
Laws versus tech, the law almost always wins (one of the few scenarios I'm familiar with where tech "won" was the reversal of PGP being treated as an export restricted munition [1] [2]). Tech is just a tool, and the arguments for crypto currencies compared to traditional fiat digitally represented (Central Bank Digital Currencies aka CBDCs [3]) just aren't that compelling (especially with countries, 54 so far more on the way, continuing to roll out instant payment networks [4]). This emboldens the very real observation Ms Yellen makes that crypto exists to obfuscate the transfer and storage of value against the intent of government financial regulation.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...
[2] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/55023/what-was-...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank_digital_currency
[4] https://empower1.fisglobal.com/rs/650-KGE-239/images/Report_...
...except the horse has left the barn and Bitcoin has already infiltrated the highest levels of business, finance and government. Even the IRS recognizes it.
What seems more likely is KYC regulation for transactions and SEC review for ICOs. If this happens, Bitcoin will skyrocket in value as it crosses into the mainstream.
(disclosure: minor HODLer since 2013)
What seems more likely is KYC regulation for transactions and SEC review for ICOs. If this happens, Bitcoin will skyrocket in value as it crosses into the mainstream.
(disclosure: minor HODLer since 2013)
> every major government in the world will be on board
I can see a strong argument for governments to be intrinsically against something that takes away their own power. On the other hand, if that thing takes away the power of their rivals more, there's no reason for them to see it as a net win and act accordingly.
I can see a strong argument for governments to be intrinsically against something that takes away their own power. On the other hand, if that thing takes away the power of their rivals more, there's no reason for them to see it as a net win and act accordingly.
This was always the major existential risk of all of these currencies. It always felt like the cryptoheads viewed currency economics through an academic perspective instead of a practical one. While fiat currency is about money, at the macro level its much more about cultural and political control. Yes, it would be ideal if we decentralized and things were more transparent, but to get there you are literally going to war with every major military in the world by asking them "hey guys, hand over that control/influence." It seems like an uphill battle and one that doesn't truly start until they begin to be seen as a threat.
Good luck fighters...
Good luck fighters...
Yes, we will need to fight to keep our crypto money alive.... these communist suckers will try fuck everything to control us... be prepared!
>these communist suckers will try fuck everything to control us
Yeah Janet Yellen the famous Marxist... wtf??
Yeah Janet Yellen the famous Marxist... wtf??
I mean the smarter ones usually hide it...
Thats the dumbest thing I've ever heard. So you are admitting you have no idea at all that she's actually a "Marxist" and that it's just a catch all term used by American morons for people they don't like?
Not only that, but crypto users would eventually end up resolving disputes through the legal system, both because they must and because there is no practical alternative. So you come to depend on the system you are trying to undermine.
If you want to set up your own currency, you also need to set up a legal system to resolve disputes, a law enforcement system to enforce judgements, and a military to ultimately defend all these other systems.
Crypto seemed like it had to reinvent the wheel of the financial system, with all its pitfalls. Turns out the rabbit hole is much deeper than that.
If you want to set up your own currency, you also need to set up a legal system to resolve disputes, a law enforcement system to enforce judgements, and a military to ultimately defend all these other systems.
Crypto seemed like it had to reinvent the wheel of the financial system, with all its pitfalls. Turns out the rabbit hole is much deeper than that.
They seem to tolerate gold, and its price is more stable and it's easier to use as a currency than any cryptocurrency.
Because governments own gold.
There are a whole bunch of restrictions on moving gold across borders, and it's generally impractical to transact in gold for small transactions. You would have to not only carry the gold with you in useful increments, but also the appropriate assays to prove its value (which means you can't subdivide gold on the spot to make change).
That makes gold less useful as a currency than cocaine, ammunition or ram sticks.
That makes gold less useful as a currency than cocaine, ammunition or ram sticks.
Don't underestimate the power of incumbency. Gold has been something used as an exchange commodity far before currency. Its also impractical at scale so much less a threat to the general system.
https://www.bsdex.de/de/