5 ms·

The initial purpose of Bitcoin according to its creator was to abolish central banks. The fact that the state uses force to collect taxes in fiat currency means

by sprash 7y ago

The initial purpose of Bitcoin according to its creator was to abolish central banks. The fact that the state uses force to collect taxes in fiat currency means that you have no chance to escape fiat, this new regulation makes sure of that. It means nothing more than Bitcoin has utterly failed in its mission.

green1 7y ago
Did the creator himself seriously think Bitcoin would be the end of banks?
- fixf 7y ago
  No, it's much more likely that BTC was a state funded vehicle for surveillance. Take that with a grain of salt, I could be totally wrong.
- yohannparis 7y ago
  Be careful, because banks and central banks are not the same things.
  - green1 7y ago
    I'm just wondering if people who claimed to believe Bitcoin would end the banking system came up with that amongst themselves or were basing it on something "Satoshi" had said. I had the impression Satoshi was relatively matter of fact about Bitcoin, but I haven't read much of his/her/their own words.
    - tekproxy 7y ago
      Read the white paper.
reportgunner 7y ago
I think that abolish is a bit strong to say here. For sure he wanted to give us an alternative to not need a bank rather than destroying them.
yohannparis 7y ago
You are confusing the right to legally sell and trade cryptocurrency in Germany and the control of it. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will not be regulated by the Deutsche Bundesbank (Germany Central Bank).
- squiggleblaz 7y ago
  Yes, but a person who exchanges using cryptocurrency has to pay taxes in euros to the German government, so you cannot escape. Every transaction in Germany binds you to the central bank. This is also true of exchanging five eggs for some butter, so anyone who thought a new currency would somehow exempt them from tax laws (and the currency in which the tax is denominated) was always foolish.
  - C14L 7y ago
    Yes. But this is only the start of the journey. Maybe in a decade or three, it will be possible to pay taxes in a cryptocurrenty too. For now, we should be careful and observe as the technology evolves and the impact of cryptocurrencies on markets and society increases.
stale2002 7y ago
First of all, the purpose of Bitcoin had more to do with creating a censorship resistant method of transferring money, and much less to do with central banks. And for the purpose of sending censorship resistant transactions, it works pretty well. Bitcoin transactions are basically never censored, where as other types of transactions (such as bank, credit card, and PayPal, ect) often are censored. Seems like it has worked out quite well.
- sprash 7y ago
  It is imposible to anonymously buy or sell bitcoin now. If you buy Bitcoins and send them to "censored" people you will be caught immediately and possibly punished. "Tainted" bitcoins will be traced and will be unusable in Germany. This new law will also make sure that "censored" persons can not convert bitcoin to fiat. For them bitcoin will be worthless because they have to pay their taxes in fiat. If this is a blueprint for what is coming in the rest of the world, bitcoin is over. It is now worth less than Gold, because Gold can not be traced.
  - stale2002 7y ago
    > and send them to "censored" people you will be caught immediately and possibly punished. Nope! There are many people that are censored which have broken no laws, have not been charged with any crimes, and yet the banking system tries to block their payments anyway. By making the transaction on the blockchain, PayPal, who whoever, can't just decide, on a whim to block your transactions arbitrarily, even though no law has been broken. An example that comes to mind is WikiLeaks. There was a time when donations to WikiLeaks were blocked, through the credit card system, even though they were not charged with any crimes. Yet the Bitcoin transactions succeeded, and nobody was sent to jail for donating to WikiLeaks. Financial censorship is something that is often done even though people have broken no laws, and the act of the financial censorship itself is actually the illegal action. This has nothing to do with people breaking laws. The most common financial censorship is done, arbitrarily, to people who have not broken any laws, have not been charged with any crime, and who will never been able to defend themselves in a court. Stopping this kind of financial censorship, is extremely valuable.
tekproxy 7y ago
It'll compete with the failed central banks first, and considering the technology is young and shit right now, it's doing pretty good in places like Venezuela.

by sprash 7y ago

green1 7y ago

Did the creator himself seriously think Bitcoin would be the end of banks?

fixf 7y ago
No, it's much more likely that BTC was a state funded vehicle for surveillance. Take that with a grain of salt, I could be totally wrong.
yohannparis 7y ago
Be careful, because banks and central banks are not the same things.
- green1 7y ago
  I'm just wondering if people who claimed to believe Bitcoin would end the banking system came up with that amongst themselves or were basing it on something "Satoshi" had said. I had the impression Satoshi was relatively matter of fact about Bitcoin, but I haven't read much of his/her/their own words.
  - tekproxy 7y ago
    Read the white paper.

reportgunner 7y ago

I think that abolish is a bit strong to say here. For sure he wanted to give us an alternative to not need a bank rather than destroying them.

yohannparis 7y ago

You are confusing the right to legally sell and trade cryptocurrency in Germany and the control of it. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies will not be regulated by the Deutsche Bundesbank (Germany Central Bank).

squiggleblaz 7y ago
Yes, but a person who exchanges using cryptocurrency has to pay taxes in euros to the German government, so you cannot escape. Every transaction in Germany binds you to the central bank. This is also true of exchanging five eggs for some butter, so anyone who thought a new currency would somehow exempt them from tax laws (and the currency in which the tax is denominated) was always foolish.
- C14L 7y ago
  Yes. But this is only the start of the journey. Maybe in a decade or three, it will be possible to pay taxes in a cryptocurrenty too. For now, we should be careful and observe as the technology evolves and the impact of cryptocurrencies on markets and society increases.

stale2002 7y ago

First of all, the purpose of Bitcoin had more to do with creating a censorship resistant method of transferring money, and much less to do with central banks. And for the purpose of sending censorship resistant transactions, it works pretty well. Bitcoin transactions are basically never censored, where as other types of transactions (such as bank, credit card, and PayPal, ect) often are censored. Seems like it has worked out quite well.

sprash 7y ago
It is imposible to anonymously buy or sell bitcoin now. If you buy Bitcoins and send them to "censored" people you will be caught immediately and possibly punished. "Tainted" bitcoins will be traced and will be unusable in Germany. This new law will also make sure that "censored" persons can not convert bitcoin to fiat. For them bitcoin will be worthless because they have to pay their taxes in fiat. If this is a blueprint for what is coming in the rest of the world, bitcoin is over. It is now worth less than Gold, because Gold can not be traced.
- stale2002 7y ago
  > and send them to "censored" people you will be caught immediately and possibly punished. Nope! There are many people that are censored which have broken no laws, have not been charged with any crimes, and yet the banking system tries to block their payments anyway. By making the transaction on the blockchain, PayPal, who whoever, can't just decide, on a whim to block your transactions arbitrarily, even though no law has been broken. An example that comes to mind is WikiLeaks. There was a time when donations to WikiLeaks were blocked, through the credit card system, even though they were not charged with any crimes. Yet the Bitcoin transactions succeeded, and nobody was sent to jail for donating to WikiLeaks. Financial censorship is something that is often done even though people have broken no laws, and the act of the financial censorship itself is actually the illegal action. This has nothing to do with people breaking laws. The most common financial censorship is done, arbitrarily, to people who have not broken any laws, have not been charged with any crime, and who will never been able to defend themselves in a court. Stopping this kind of financial censorship, is extremely valuable.

tekproxy 7y ago

It'll compete with the failed central banks first, and considering the technology is young and shit right now, it's doing pretty good in places like Venezuela.