15 ms·

New EU Proposals Seek to End Anonymous Bitcoin Trading

88 points by 3eto 10y ago

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
the_mitsuhiko 10y ago
I welcome this. It's ridiculous that we have strict regulation on other monetary instruments but for some reason not for crypto currencies.
- simonswords82 10y ago
  The only reason the EU haven't already got regulation in place is because BTC popped up out of nowhere in a relatively short space of time and regulation takes time to implement. That to one side - why do you want strict regulation on cryptos? What are your concerns?
- simbalion 10y ago
  I understood bitcoin exists mostly to deny governments and corporations the type of control that this article describes. Precisely what gives the EU any authority to regulate a global currency they do not own and cannot control?
batrat 10y ago
I am still trying to find legitimate reason why someone will want anonymous pay. Bitcoin is almost always associated with underground markets, ransomware, money laundering, etc. Can someone tell me a legitimate reason why I need anonymous cryptocurrency? Or what is used for?
- adrianN 10y ago
  For the same reason you don't want pervasive surveillance on the streets.
  - DKnoll3 10y ago
    Some people DO want that. Or, at least, the consent is manufactured. You know - for your safety.
    - adrianN 10y ago
      And some people are against anonymous crypto-currencies, you know, for safety.
      - DKnoll3 10y ago
        What does that even mean? Replace anonymous crypto-currencies with cash, and realize how ridiculous you sound.
        venomsnake 10y ago
        I think that AdrianN was mocking the people spreading bitcoin FUD while pushing their own agendas.
        adrianN 10y ago
        I don't know, I have a feeling that there is a definite push towards banning cash. In Germany for example they plan to ban paying in cash for things over 5000€.
        DKnoll3 10y ago
        And you think this will make people safer?
        adrianN 10y ago
        No, I think it's completely ridiculous.
- jswny 10y ago
  It is very useful when a seller has to sell directly to other users. If the seller can obtain the cryptocurrency from the user, said seller knows that he/she has the funds and that they can never be taken away. Then the seller can confidently provide the user with whatever product or service was requested. In contrast, if the seller used PayPal, the user can easily chargeback and get his/her money back after the seller has provided the product or service. Services like PayPal are seriously unreliable and become an extreme burden for some sellers who deal with intangible goods especially. TLDR: Bitcoin makes it easy for sellers to obtain payment without the fear of PayPal account freezes or chargebacks.
  - jdc0589 10y ago
    this is all accurate, but does not address the part about why its so important that it be anonymous.
    - yarrel 10y ago
      "If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear."
    - feklar 10y ago
      The same reason why GNU Taler is anonymous https://taler.net/ https://taler.net/ The EU can still suck taxes from the transactions of Taler but at least they have no idea what you bought. Why should the payment middleman have a complete itemized dossier of your personal purchasing history just you and the merchant should share the details of the purchase beyond the total amount paid.
      - fdsaaf 10y ago
        > Why should.... merchant [] share the details of the purchase beyond the total amount paid Because the government has a legitimate interest in taxing different goods at different rates.
        JoshTriplett 10y ago
- 27182818284 10y ago
  that's a good question. I guess essentially anything that you'd do for privacy reasons with cash, but online. There are a lot of things a person might want private, but aren't illegal. E.g., an affair, weird fetish. Who knows.
- yarrel 10y ago
  It's used for the same things as that much more widely exploited anonymous currency, cash. If you've ever bought gum without using a credit card you're associated with underground markets, ransoms, money laundering, etc. The assumption that anonymity is inherently an indicator of criminality is toxic to an open society.
  - alkonaut 10y ago
    I'm not so much worried about criminality apart from tax evasion - I pay 50-70% taxes including payroll and VAT but I don't mind doing so, because I trust everyone else does too. The moment I suspect there is a group of people that get paid and purchase goods outside the tax system I have lost that trust. Full transparency in my opinion is the lesser evil. Completely anonymous currency and transactions solves a problem but creates a bigger one.
- UVB-76 10y ago
  Privacy?
- jlg23 10y ago
  Because my government does not need to know that I bought Mao's Little Red Book, Hitler's Mein Kampf and a few Marvel comics. Because police does not need to know that I pay for and run an anonymizer. Because my bank does not need to know that I bought a butt-plug. Because I don't want my house raided just because I bought potting soil from a gardener that was later busted for growing weed.
  - batrat 10y ago
    Fair enough. But you use your own address and name to deliver stuff from the internet. Where is the anonymity in that? Or i am missing something? Also... you get your cash from CC and transfer it to BTC, you pay someone else, you encourage money laundering because that seller doesn't have to pay any tax for that. For me the most important factor is where the cash is going. IF we all switch to bitcoin and government can't keep track of the money, big criminals, bit corps will never pay any taxes, and how we are going to have free schools, free medical care, police, etc? Am I over thinking this? Privacy is important but either we have to find a way to change the economy as it is, or regulate BTC properly. Just because someone has a fetish and wants to keep it "anonymous" is not enough for me.
    - ultramancool 10y ago
      > Fair enough. But you use your own address and name to deliver stuff from the internet. Where is the anonymity in that? Or i am missing something? Yes you are, you're missing the addition of a trusted party. I may trust someone I'm trading with to keep me anonymous, mail my order out, etc. But what if I do not trust my bank to destroy the transaction and keep me anonymous if someone comes looking later. You trust the first out of necessity, but you only trust the second out of convenience. This of course only applies to physical products as electronic products can be delivered completely anonymously.
    - patrickaljord 10y ago
      > will never pay any taxes > and how we are going to have free schools, free medical care, police, etc? Am I over thinking this? Well it isn't free if you have to pay for it. Here in France we pay 80% taxes and then we like to brag about having free school, free healthcare etc. It's not free if 80% of your hard earned money goes to these institutions and the bureaucracies that manage them. Worst thing is that we still need a private insurance on top of that because our welfare system is going broke and can't even pay for anything despite the 80% taxation. So yeah, it is not free after all, it is even super expensive. Here is the thing that people do not understand: quality healthcare or quality education are expensive, there is no way around that, no magic welfare taxes will fix it. Whether private or public, it will cost you an arm and a leg. Only thing that could fix it would be innovation but unfortunately these sectors are highly regulated and this is a barrier to innovation so things will progress very slowly.
- nicolas_t 10y ago
  Some governments are more restrictive than others in term of censorship and what people are allowed to see or say on Internet. I see the value of allowing anonymous bitcoin in that it allows people to get access to VPN or other methods of going around censorship in a way that cannot easily be traced back by their government. But this is the eternal debate about free speech, what's illegal in a certain country might not be illegal in other countries and is not necessarily unethical.
- dsfyu404ed 10y ago
  Every time you conduct a transaction with a normal card you're taking the risk that sometime in the future whoever you did business with may have their transaction history on pastebin. I'm sure you can think of plenty of situations where that wouldn't be a good thing.
- lettergram 10y ago
  Yes, here are four reasons that only took a minute of contemplation: (1) Because not all masters are benevolent (2) Because it removes the possibility of charge backs (3) Because not everyone enjoys being monitored by companies and/or governments (foreign or otherwise) (4) Underground markets are only "underground" because of laws. If a society outlaws birth control and abortions, but a women wants an abortion she probably wants an alternative (I.e. something an underground market with provide). An anonymous crypocurrancy (or cash) is the easiest way to do this. If it's not a crypocurrancy or cash, they can always trade goods. So in all honesty, there's no way to stop it. There may even be other reasons, but it seems pretty obvious it can inherently good to have.
  - retube 10y ago
    > Because not everyone enjoys being monitored by companies and/or governments (foreign or otherwise) So the solution to that is publishing all your transactions to a public ledger? (yes I know there are "tumblers" etc, but these come with operational and practical issues)
    - davidfrankl 10y ago
      That's beside the point. The parent was simply asking what use exists for an anonymous currency.
    - woodman 10y ago
      Keep in mind the amount of monetization that occurs around purchase data in the present system. The ease with which you can associate transactions to real identities isn't even comparable.
      - threeseed 10y ago
        What monetisation ? The bank isn't authorised to provide that information to third parties.
        woodman 10y ago
- venomsnake 10y ago
  If you can't think of anything legal but not wanting that thing to be associated with you, you are probably trolling. Being able to host web pages for a causes you believe in, but getting fired for them if your names pops up (lets call it the Internet Mob Protection).
- yarou 10y ago
  Replace "anonymous pay" with cash, then you'll find your reasons.
- fdsaaf 10y ago
  If you define legitimacy so that it perfectly coincides with the law, there is little legitimate reason to use Bitcoin. But do you really think the law has always been just?
- MichaelBurge 10y ago
  If you're a business that's commonly listed on 'prohibited businesses' lists[1], you might want it. That phrase sounds nefarious, but as an example porn sites are often prohibited. People might want to buy porn anonymously. If you need to send a bunch of money to someone in the Philippines, your only easy choice is an expensive wire transfer through Western Union or similar. My bank will do it for a small fixed-fee, but only because I've had an account with them for almost a decade. You don't need a verified history and strong identity to use bitcoin. If you don't give out your personal information when buying something, then when their site later gets hacked by the Chinese your name and address won't be sold on underground trading sites. That is, even if you trust the government and banks with your personal information, you don't necessarily trust every little ecommerce site. [1] https://stripe.com/us/prohibited-businesses https://stripe.com/us/prohibited-businesses
- ThomPete 10y ago
  As an example. Information you want to be available to ex. researchers but not possible to identify.
- csense 10y ago
  It's none of the government's business what I spend my money on. If you go to a clinic specializing in mental health, cancer, abortion, or substance abuse, your medical treatment is nobody's business but you and your doctor's. You ate at restaurants and bought gas at gas stations along a multi-state route leading to a city where there's a big protest about race relations, or income equality, or a convention where a controversial politician is going to be nominated. The government, or particular people inside it, might care -- and not in a way that's good for you or for the democratic process. Your aggregate purchase history reveals a great deal about your personality, relationships, political activism, physical/mental state, sexual activity and many other aspects of your life.
- no1youknowz 10y ago
  Go look at OpenBazaar. [1] Bitcoin is the primary source of payment. It's starting to grow, there are listings of physical goods, electronic goods and now even rental listings, they are calling it OBNB lol. I'm sure as time goes on, more and more types of listings will emerge. People are finally coming around to the idea that middlemen don't have to tell you what you can and can't do. I cannot wait until things like TOR and Integrated wallets are included. Version 2 of OB is soon and there is a hangout on the 7th [2]. One last thing. Sure there may eventually be "bad" listings and also customers may not be fully protected. But with everything in life. Caveat Emptor. [1] - http://openbazaar.org http://openbazaar.org [2] - https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/4qmsan/openbazaar_20_global_hangout_july_7th/?st=iq9pnozi&sh=e9c329ea https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/4qmsan/openbaza...
  - anonymousDan 10y ago
    This is pretty cool in theory. Especially if the fees charged to sellers are much lower I could see it getting some adoption.
- DKnoll3 10y ago
  Because being able to call someone a terrorist (or a hacker, in 5-10 years time) as a reason to turn off their credit card when it's the only method of payment left will be a dystopian nightmare.
  - threeseed 10y ago
    But this is a contrived and frankly ridiculous premise. Situations like this are why we have an independent judicial system. And even if we didn't who is thinking that credit cards are the only way to buy things ?
    - unabridged 10y ago
      >But this is a contrived and frankly ridiculous premise. Tell this to the legal porn producers (or legal marijuana sellers/producers) who get their accounts frozen and shut out of the banking system. http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a24813/porn-star-bank-account-case/ http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a24813/porn-star-b...
    - DKnoll3 10y ago
      Yeah, tell that to the guy who wrote "ISIS beer fund" on his PayPal transfer to his mate that we have an "independent judicial system". No - we have an outsourced judicial system, where Facebook and Google will spy on you more than the USGov, the bank will control your money more than the Government, and the insurance company will have you in an autonomous car faster than a mandate will. That's modern neoliberalism.
- swiley 10y ago
  My reason is that I'm quite tired of paperwork and suspicion from payment processors when doing totally mundane things (like buying a PDA manufacturered by a small European company). The more of these laws that exist the more shit I have to do as a law abiding citizen. I use bitcoin because I like just not caring.
- pipio21 10y ago
  The legitimate reason is not having a big brother control everything you do. They should access this information only when there is a valid reason, not by default. To preserve your possessions against confiscation when power abuses the people. One of my family members lived and worked in Cuba before Fidel Castro got into power. He had a house and a three people company. He actually supported Fidel because he talked a lot about democracy and himself(Castro) not being communist. Once Fidel got into power, he established himself as a dictator, killing anybody on their own side that was against a new dictatorship, like Cienfuegos. Fidel nationalized everything. My family member and his family leaved the country with money from my family overseas. All his possessions were stolen by Castro. The people in power should not have the power to easily confiscate your wealth. Today with negative interest rates, those in power are stealing from the people, but only a little. Central banks want to ban cash so they can steal 20 to 30 per cent of every single deposit as the system is totally bankrupted. With physical cash, gold confiscation, they have a harder time. Some people will not be happy to give the police their hard earned money.
fdsaaf 10y ago
This proposal is moot. Whether or not it's a good idea, the EU is technically unable to effectively regulate bitcoin. Sure, you can place rules on exchanges, but since anyone with bitcoin can send it to any other person, identified only by one of an infinite number of wallet IDs, the EU will never be able to stop peer-to-peer bitcoin sales.
- exelius 10y ago
  While true, no company would offer bitcoin transactions without tracking for fear of asset seizure. Governments still have power in the physical world. So if you want Bitcoin (or any cryptocurrency) to have wide legitimate adoption, you have to play by the rules. Governments basically exist for the purpose of enacting economic regulation; so to pretend they don't have a right to do so is a little silly.
  - ultramancool 10y ago
    > no company would offer bitcoin transactions without tracking for fear of asset seizure. No company within the EU perhaps, but that doesn't mean you can't just send the money to a russian exchange like BTC-e who really doesn't care what the source is and accepts things like webmoney, libertyreserve, etc. Which are trivial to get into if you know what you're doing.
    - exelius 10y ago
      > things like webmoney, libertyreserve, etc. Which are trivial to get into if you know what you're doing. And have very few protections for consumers, and the percentage of the population that "know what [they]'re doing" is actually pretty low. So yeah, if you're into criminal activity it's still pretty easy to do. But it also means it's easier for law enforcement to watch those avenues of access to catch criminal activity in the act.
      - ultramancool 10y ago
        Bitcoin has literally zero protections for consumers, so if you're trying to buy bitcoin, you're basically already on that boat.
lukasm 10y ago
Wonder how long it will take before they realize that current tax system won't last in the long run. Right now only rich have the resources to offshore the profits, but technology will drive the cost down.
- ryanlol 10y ago
  > Right now only rich have the resources to offshore the profits Where are you getting this from? You don't have to be particularly wealthy to offshore your income.
- matt4077 10y ago
  They've done a pretty good job of closing offshore havens.
  - threeseed 10y ago
    And they don't even need to close them. They can just request that data be shared with other countries for the purpose of identifying tax avoidance. This idea that the future will consist of everyone using tax havens is ridiculous. Most ordinary people are scared of the taxation impacts of using them (and rightly so).
- riffraff 10y ago
  it appears to me that the current tax system is actually getting better at getting hands on offshore profits. I.e. the success of the OECD "grey list" thing, the amendment of banking secrecy laws in Switzerland and the closing of at least some tax loopholes like the one Apple used to use in Eire.
benten10 10y ago
Having read all the comments below, it appears to me that people most fervently pro-bitcoin are the kind of people who convince people towards the other directions with their arguments. Whatever merits cryptocurrency might have, "we need no goddamn taxes or governmetn" is likely NOT bound to convince people FOR bitcoin etc.
teslaberry 10y ago
central banks really don't care about anonymous bitcoin trading. the question is whether or not you can trade bitcoin for another major currency. i mean, reagan outlawed unregulated private barter clubs in the 80's so the IRS and TREASURY CARES but the private central banks don't really care because they remain firmly in control. how so? consider what happens when a central bank prohibits money services to bitcoin. Let's take the EU. Once the eu closes the gates for the euro, it is because the euro is going to be debased rapidly, which means, this is a signal that people will sell euro for dollar, gold, swiss franc, krona, and possibly some of it going to bitcoin in a one time push out of euro. however, rest assured, 'closing of the gates' is bad for bitcoin so long as bitcoin remains a speculative asset unlike gold or the dollar. eventually the federal reserve will close dollar-bitcoin money service. and that is the REAL x factor. the presumption that global coordinated debasement is good for bitcoin may be true, but only in an environment where one can readily convert bitoin and currencies legally back and forth or easily in large volume (miami cash or euro 500 notes). once this window closes, BITCOIN BECOMES LIKE THE RUSSIAN RUBLE ; a very weak currency that no one wants to store value in because it is isolated and cannot easily be used to purchase assets around the globe. that bitcoin is not subject to rapid debasement remains a HUGE bonus on its side for SURVIVAL AT A BASEMENT PRICE. it DOES NOT guarantee the price will go up indefinitely. bitcoins single largest risk to price drop remains the ECB, BOE, and FED coordinating an end to bitcoin-(major currency) money service
youngButEager 10y ago
Good. Bitcoin has been around for YEARS. It is not going to gain broad acceptance. Bitcoin right now is like the stock market before the Securities and Exchange Commission was created in 1934, due to the fallout from all the fraud that led to the Great Depression. A regulated currency market has both pros and cons; no question about it. But consider this: - A decree comes down: "From this point forward, bitcoin users can no longer use any other currency. All transactions, savings accounts, etc. will have to be bitcoin-based." Assume, hypothetically, that this could be enforced. Would you agree to stop using any non-bitcoin store of value? If you say "no, I'd still want to be able to use non-bitcoin currencies" .....then you need to take a look at that. Because it proves that bitcoin fails to perform some type of monetary function for you.

88 points by 3eto 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

I welcome this. It's ridiculous that we have strict regulation on other monetary instruments but for some reason not for crypto currencies.

simonswords82 10y ago
The only reason the EU haven't already got regulation in place is because BTC popped up out of nowhere in a relatively short space of time and regulation takes time to implement. That to one side - why do you want strict regulation on cryptos? What are your concerns?
simbalion 10y ago
I understood bitcoin exists mostly to deny governments and corporations the type of control that this article describes. Precisely what gives the EU any authority to regulate a global currency they do not own and cannot control?

batrat 10y ago

I am still trying to find legitimate reason why someone will want anonymous pay. Bitcoin is almost always associated with underground markets, ransomware, money laundering, etc. Can someone tell me a legitimate reason why I need anonymous cryptocurrency? Or what is used for?

adrianN 10y ago
For the same reason you don't want pervasive surveillance on the streets.
- DKnoll3 10y ago
  Some people DO want that. Or, at least, the consent is manufactured. You know - for your safety.
  - adrianN 10y ago
    And some people are against anonymous crypto-currencies, you know, for safety.
    - DKnoll3 10y ago
      What does that even mean? Replace anonymous crypto-currencies with cash, and realize how ridiculous you sound.
      - venomsnake 10y ago
        I think that AdrianN was mocking the people spreading bitcoin FUD while pushing their own agendas.
      - adrianN 10y ago
        I don't know, I have a feeling that there is a definite push towards banning cash. In Germany for example they plan to ban paying in cash for things over 5000€.
        DKnoll3 10y ago
        And you think this will make people safer?
        adrianN 10y ago
        No, I think it's completely ridiculous.
jswny 10y ago
It is very useful when a seller has to sell directly to other users. If the seller can obtain the cryptocurrency from the user, said seller knows that he/she has the funds and that they can never be taken away. Then the seller can confidently provide the user with whatever product or service was requested. In contrast, if the seller used PayPal, the user can easily chargeback and get his/her money back after the seller has provided the product or service. Services like PayPal are seriously unreliable and become an extreme burden for some sellers who deal with intangible goods especially. TLDR: Bitcoin makes it easy for sellers to obtain payment without the fear of PayPal account freezes or chargebacks.
- jdc0589 10y ago
  this is all accurate, but does not address the part about why its so important that it be anonymous.
  - yarrel 10y ago
    "If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear."
  - feklar 10y ago
    The same reason why GNU Taler is anonymous https://taler.net/ https://taler.net/ The EU can still suck taxes from the transactions of Taler but at least they have no idea what you bought. Why should the payment middleman have a complete itemized dossier of your personal purchasing history just you and the merchant should share the details of the purchase beyond the total amount paid.
    - fdsaaf 10y ago
      > Why should.... merchant [] share the details of the purchase beyond the total amount paid Because the government has a legitimate interest in taxing different goods at different rates.
      - JoshTriplett 10y ago
27182818284 10y ago
that's a good question. I guess essentially anything that you'd do for privacy reasons with cash, but online. There are a lot of things a person might want private, but aren't illegal. E.g., an affair, weird fetish. Who knows.
yarrel 10y ago
It's used for the same things as that much more widely exploited anonymous currency, cash. If you've ever bought gum without using a credit card you're associated with underground markets, ransoms, money laundering, etc. The assumption that anonymity is inherently an indicator of criminality is toxic to an open society.
- alkonaut 10y ago
  I'm not so much worried about criminality apart from tax evasion - I pay 50-70% taxes including payroll and VAT but I don't mind doing so, because I trust everyone else does too. The moment I suspect there is a group of people that get paid and purchase goods outside the tax system I have lost that trust. Full transparency in my opinion is the lesser evil. Completely anonymous currency and transactions solves a problem but creates a bigger one.
UVB-76 10y ago
Privacy?
jlg23 10y ago
Because my government does not need to know that I bought Mao's Little Red Book, Hitler's Mein Kampf and a few Marvel comics. Because police does not need to know that I pay for and run an anonymizer. Because my bank does not need to know that I bought a butt-plug. Because I don't want my house raided just because I bought potting soil from a gardener that was later busted for growing weed.
- batrat 10y ago
  Fair enough. But you use your own address and name to deliver stuff from the internet. Where is the anonymity in that? Or i am missing something? Also... you get your cash from CC and transfer it to BTC, you pay someone else, you encourage money laundering because that seller doesn't have to pay any tax for that. For me the most important factor is where the cash is going. IF we all switch to bitcoin and government can't keep track of the money, big criminals, bit corps will never pay any taxes, and how we are going to have free schools, free medical care, police, etc? Am I over thinking this? Privacy is important but either we have to find a way to change the economy as it is, or regulate BTC properly. Just because someone has a fetish and wants to keep it "anonymous" is not enough for me.
  - ultramancool 10y ago
    > Fair enough. But you use your own address and name to deliver stuff from the internet. Where is the anonymity in that? Or i am missing something? Yes you are, you're missing the addition of a trusted party. I may trust someone I'm trading with to keep me anonymous, mail my order out, etc. But what if I do not trust my bank to destroy the transaction and keep me anonymous if someone comes looking later. You trust the first out of necessity, but you only trust the second out of convenience. This of course only applies to physical products as electronic products can be delivered completely anonymously.
  - patrickaljord 10y ago
    > will never pay any taxes > and how we are going to have free schools, free medical care, police, etc? Am I over thinking this? Well it isn't free if you have to pay for it. Here in France we pay 80% taxes and then we like to brag about having free school, free healthcare etc. It's not free if 80% of your hard earned money goes to these institutions and the bureaucracies that manage them. Worst thing is that we still need a private insurance on top of that because our welfare system is going broke and can't even pay for anything despite the 80% taxation. So yeah, it is not free after all, it is even super expensive. Here is the thing that people do not understand: quality healthcare or quality education are expensive, there is no way around that, no magic welfare taxes will fix it. Whether private or public, it will cost you an arm and a leg. Only thing that could fix it would be innovation but unfortunately these sectors are highly regulated and this is a barrier to innovation so things will progress very slowly.
nicolas_t 10y ago
Some governments are more restrictive than others in term of censorship and what people are allowed to see or say on Internet. I see the value of allowing anonymous bitcoin in that it allows people to get access to VPN or other methods of going around censorship in a way that cannot easily be traced back by their government. But this is the eternal debate about free speech, what's illegal in a certain country might not be illegal in other countries and is not necessarily unethical.
dsfyu404ed 10y ago
Every time you conduct a transaction with a normal card you're taking the risk that sometime in the future whoever you did business with may have their transaction history on pastebin. I'm sure you can think of plenty of situations where that wouldn't be a good thing.
lettergram 10y ago
Yes, here are four reasons that only took a minute of contemplation: (1) Because not all masters are benevolent (2) Because it removes the possibility of charge backs (3) Because not everyone enjoys being monitored by companies and/or governments (foreign or otherwise) (4) Underground markets are only "underground" because of laws. If a society outlaws birth control and abortions, but a women wants an abortion she probably wants an alternative (I.e. something an underground market with provide). An anonymous crypocurrancy (or cash) is the easiest way to do this. If it's not a crypocurrancy or cash, they can always trade goods. So in all honesty, there's no way to stop it. There may even be other reasons, but it seems pretty obvious it can inherently good to have.
- retube 10y ago
  > Because not everyone enjoys being monitored by companies and/or governments (foreign or otherwise) So the solution to that is publishing all your transactions to a public ledger? (yes I know there are "tumblers" etc, but these come with operational and practical issues)
  - davidfrankl 10y ago
    That's beside the point. The parent was simply asking what use exists for an anonymous currency.
  - woodman 10y ago
    Keep in mind the amount of monetization that occurs around purchase data in the present system. The ease with which you can associate transactions to real identities isn't even comparable.
    - threeseed 10y ago
      What monetisation ? The bank isn't authorised to provide that information to third parties.
      - woodman 10y ago
venomsnake 10y ago
If you can't think of anything legal but not wanting that thing to be associated with you, you are probably trolling. Being able to host web pages for a causes you believe in, but getting fired for them if your names pops up (lets call it the Internet Mob Protection).
yarou 10y ago
Replace "anonymous pay" with cash, then you'll find your reasons.
fdsaaf 10y ago
If you define legitimacy so that it perfectly coincides with the law, there is little legitimate reason to use Bitcoin. But do you really think the law has always been just?
MichaelBurge 10y ago
If you're a business that's commonly listed on 'prohibited businesses' lists[1], you might want it. That phrase sounds nefarious, but as an example porn sites are often prohibited. People might want to buy porn anonymously. If you need to send a bunch of money to someone in the Philippines, your only easy choice is an expensive wire transfer through Western Union or similar. My bank will do it for a small fixed-fee, but only because I've had an account with them for almost a decade. You don't need a verified history and strong identity to use bitcoin. If you don't give out your personal information when buying something, then when their site later gets hacked by the Chinese your name and address won't be sold on underground trading sites. That is, even if you trust the government and banks with your personal information, you don't necessarily trust every little ecommerce site. [1] https://stripe.com/us/prohibited-businesses https://stripe.com/us/prohibited-businesses
ThomPete 10y ago
As an example. Information you want to be available to ex. researchers but not possible to identify.
csense 10y ago
It's none of the government's business what I spend my money on. If you go to a clinic specializing in mental health, cancer, abortion, or substance abuse, your medical treatment is nobody's business but you and your doctor's. You ate at restaurants and bought gas at gas stations along a multi-state route leading to a city where there's a big protest about race relations, or income equality, or a convention where a controversial politician is going to be nominated. The government, or particular people inside it, might care -- and not in a way that's good for you or for the democratic process. Your aggregate purchase history reveals a great deal about your personality, relationships, political activism, physical/mental state, sexual activity and many other aspects of your life.
no1youknowz 10y ago
Go look at OpenBazaar. [1] Bitcoin is the primary source of payment. It's starting to grow, there are listings of physical goods, electronic goods and now even rental listings, they are calling it OBNB lol. I'm sure as time goes on, more and more types of listings will emerge. People are finally coming around to the idea that middlemen don't have to tell you what you can and can't do. I cannot wait until things like TOR and Integrated wallets are included. Version 2 of OB is soon and there is a hangout on the 7th [2]. One last thing. Sure there may eventually be "bad" listings and also customers may not be fully protected. But with everything in life. Caveat Emptor. [1] - http://openbazaar.org http://openbazaar.org [2] - https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/4qmsan/openbazaar_20_global_hangout_july_7th/?st=iq9pnozi&sh=e9c329ea https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/4qmsan/openbaza...
- anonymousDan 10y ago
  This is pretty cool in theory. Especially if the fees charged to sellers are much lower I could see it getting some adoption.
DKnoll3 10y ago
Because being able to call someone a terrorist (or a hacker, in 5-10 years time) as a reason to turn off their credit card when it's the only method of payment left will be a dystopian nightmare.
- threeseed 10y ago
  But this is a contrived and frankly ridiculous premise. Situations like this are why we have an independent judicial system. And even if we didn't who is thinking that credit cards are the only way to buy things ?
  - unabridged 10y ago
    >But this is a contrived and frankly ridiculous premise. Tell this to the legal porn producers (or legal marijuana sellers/producers) who get their accounts frozen and shut out of the banking system. http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a24813/porn-star-bank-account-case/ http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a24813/porn-star-b...
  - DKnoll3 10y ago
    Yeah, tell that to the guy who wrote "ISIS beer fund" on his PayPal transfer to his mate that we have an "independent judicial system". No - we have an outsourced judicial system, where Facebook and Google will spy on you more than the USGov, the bank will control your money more than the Government, and the insurance company will have you in an autonomous car faster than a mandate will. That's modern neoliberalism.
swiley 10y ago
My reason is that I'm quite tired of paperwork and suspicion from payment processors when doing totally mundane things (like buying a PDA manufacturered by a small European company). The more of these laws that exist the more shit I have to do as a law abiding citizen. I use bitcoin because I like just not caring.
pipio21 10y ago
The legitimate reason is not having a big brother control everything you do. They should access this information only when there is a valid reason, not by default. To preserve your possessions against confiscation when power abuses the people. One of my family members lived and worked in Cuba before Fidel Castro got into power. He had a house and a three people company. He actually supported Fidel because he talked a lot about democracy and himself(Castro) not being communist. Once Fidel got into power, he established himself as a dictator, killing anybody on their own side that was against a new dictatorship, like Cienfuegos. Fidel nationalized everything. My family member and his family leaved the country with money from my family overseas. All his possessions were stolen by Castro. The people in power should not have the power to easily confiscate your wealth. Today with negative interest rates, those in power are stealing from the people, but only a little. Central banks want to ban cash so they can steal 20 to 30 per cent of every single deposit as the system is totally bankrupted. With physical cash, gold confiscation, they have a harder time. Some people will not be happy to give the police their hard earned money.

fdsaaf 10y ago

This proposal is moot. Whether or not it's a good idea, the EU is technically unable to effectively regulate bitcoin. Sure, you can place rules on exchanges, but since anyone with bitcoin can send it to any other person, identified only by one of an infinite number of wallet IDs, the EU will never be able to stop peer-to-peer bitcoin sales.

exelius 10y ago
While true, no company would offer bitcoin transactions without tracking for fear of asset seizure. Governments still have power in the physical world. So if you want Bitcoin (or any cryptocurrency) to have wide legitimate adoption, you have to play by the rules. Governments basically exist for the purpose of enacting economic regulation; so to pretend they don't have a right to do so is a little silly.
- ultramancool 10y ago
  > no company would offer bitcoin transactions without tracking for fear of asset seizure. No company within the EU perhaps, but that doesn't mean you can't just send the money to a russian exchange like BTC-e who really doesn't care what the source is and accepts things like webmoney, libertyreserve, etc. Which are trivial to get into if you know what you're doing.
  - exelius 10y ago
    > things like webmoney, libertyreserve, etc. Which are trivial to get into if you know what you're doing. And have very few protections for consumers, and the percentage of the population that "know what [they]'re doing" is actually pretty low. So yeah, if you're into criminal activity it's still pretty easy to do. But it also means it's easier for law enforcement to watch those avenues of access to catch criminal activity in the act.
    - ultramancool 10y ago
      Bitcoin has literally zero protections for consumers, so if you're trying to buy bitcoin, you're basically already on that boat.

lukasm 10y ago

Wonder how long it will take before they realize that current tax system won't last in the long run. Right now only rich have the resources to offshore the profits, but technology will drive the cost down.

ryanlol 10y ago
> Right now only rich have the resources to offshore the profits Where are you getting this from? You don't have to be particularly wealthy to offshore your income.
matt4077 10y ago
They've done a pretty good job of closing offshore havens.
- threeseed 10y ago
  And they don't even need to close them. They can just request that data be shared with other countries for the purpose of identifying tax avoidance. This idea that the future will consist of everyone using tax havens is ridiculous. Most ordinary people are scared of the taxation impacts of using them (and rightly so).
riffraff 10y ago
it appears to me that the current tax system is actually getting better at getting hands on offshore profits. I.e. the success of the OECD "grey list" thing, the amendment of banking secrecy laws in Switzerland and the closing of at least some tax loopholes like the one Apple used to use in Eire.

benten10 10y ago

Having read all the comments below, it appears to me that people most fervently pro-bitcoin are the kind of people who convince people towards the other directions with their arguments. Whatever merits cryptocurrency might have, "we need no goddamn taxes or governmetn" is likely NOT bound to convince people FOR bitcoin etc.

teslaberry 10y ago

central banks really don't care about anonymous bitcoin trading. the question is whether or not you can trade bitcoin for another major currency. i mean, reagan outlawed unregulated private barter clubs in the 80's so the IRS and TREASURY CARES but the private central banks don't really care because they remain firmly in control. how so? consider what happens when a central bank prohibits money services to bitcoin. Let's take the EU. Once the eu closes the gates for the euro, it is because the euro is going to be debased rapidly, which means, this is a signal that people will sell euro for dollar, gold, swiss franc, krona, and possibly some of it going to bitcoin in a one time push out of euro. however, rest assured, 'closing of the gates' is bad for bitcoin so long as bitcoin remains a speculative asset unlike gold or the dollar. eventually the federal reserve will close dollar-bitcoin money service. and that is the REAL x factor. the presumption that global coordinated debasement is good for bitcoin may be true, but only in an environment where one can readily convert bitoin and currencies legally back and forth or easily in large volume (miami cash or euro 500 notes). once this window closes, BITCOIN BECOMES LIKE THE RUSSIAN RUBLE ; a very weak currency that no one wants to store value in because it is isolated and cannot easily be used to purchase assets around the globe. that bitcoin is not subject to rapid debasement remains a HUGE bonus on its side for SURVIVAL AT A BASEMENT PRICE. it DOES NOT guarantee the price will go up indefinitely. bitcoins single largest risk to price drop remains the ECB, BOE, and FED coordinating an end to bitcoin-(major currency) money service

youngButEager 10y ago

Good. Bitcoin has been around for YEARS. It is not going to gain broad acceptance. Bitcoin right now is like the stock market before the Securities and Exchange Commission was created in 1934, due to the fallout from all the fraud that led to the Great Depression. A regulated currency market has both pros and cons; no question about it. But consider this: - A decree comes down: "From this point forward, bitcoin users can no longer use any other currency. All transactions, savings accounts, etc. will have to be bitcoin-based." Assume, hypothetically, that this could be enforced. Would you agree to stop using any non-bitcoin store of value? If you say "no, I'd still want to be able to use non-bitcoin currencies" .....then you need to take a look at that. Because it proves that bitcoin fails to perform some type of monetary function for you.