3 ms·
> But when you have two funding systems, where one is completely open, and the other requires certain guarantees (identity, legal responsibility), the first is
by ckastner 9y ago
> But when you have two funding systems, where one is completely open, and the other requires certain guarantees (identity, legal responsibility), the first is always going to be full of scammers.
Exactly. It always cracks me up when people tout the completely deregulated nature of cryptocurrencies as a good thing.
- drdeca 9y ago> It always cracks me up when people tout the completely deregulated nature of cryptocurrencies as a good thing. Well, I'll acknowledge that there are real downsides, but I think it might be feasible to (over time) build opt-in layers on top of the existing layers which serve some of the same purposes as some regulations and handle some of those issues. States are good and important and all, but if we can build something that makes some of the roles of the state unnecessary/redundant, that would be cool I think. I don't know, maybe this is largely an aesthetic preference?
- ckastner 9y agoJust to be clear: I wasn't making an argument in favor of states, merely in favor of a regulating body. Some industries already self-regulate precisely to preempt regulation by a government agency, as in: "we're well-behaved amongst the rules we made for ourselves, so please don't step in and start making rules we cannot control".