3 ms·

Thank you for responding in detail. I need to think over what you've written to grok the finer points, but here's one I can talk to: "Why not replace (insert h

by sounds 13y ago

Thank you for responding in detail. I need to think over what you've written to grok the finer points, but here's one I can talk to: "Why not replace (insert hugely established system) with (completely new system)"? It's not a total rip-out-and-replace. Bitcoin might be the grease that enables the seriously broken parts of our struggling world economy to slip through the entrenched tax collectors and let the actual consumers reward the actual producers. It fills the niche of Community Currencies without the balkanization. One thing that the huge, established system misunderstands about the new entrant is where the most effective inroads will happen: The lower class. Someone already richly rewarded by the establishment is not going to be very interested in Bitcoin (other than as a toy). But someone in a nation outside the US and Western Europe? Bitcoin gives them first-world tools that completely bypass their local currency. It sounds like the classic innovator's dilemma. Suddenly trade barriers are being circumvented. Chinese currency can escape currency controls. Micropayments and small businesses have an option. I'm not convinced Bitcoin is that thing, but I'm certain the established system will fail to adapt. Develop a game plan for what that will look like and where you want to be when it happens. In thinking along those lines, I see that you're working with ISO–and in my mind, that's not where you want to be! :)

gamblor956 13y ago
Bitcoin might be the grease that enables the seriously broken parts of our struggling world economy to slip through the entrenched tax collectors and let the actual consumers reward the actual producers. Bitcoin requires middleman, just like credit card processors. It also is significantly easier to trace than current financial systems, which don't assign digital fingerprints to units of currency. Bitcoin isn't going to let the world economy "slip through the entranched tax collectors." Bitcoin is a tax collector's wet dream. I've met with quite a few Treasury lawyers who work in their policy office. They're so giddy about the prospects of actually being able to trace income from start to finish, including across borders, that they've formed an internal task force to see what they can do about spurring adoption of Bitcoin or other similar digital currencies. Bitcoin gives them first-world tools that completely bypass their local currency. In many nations, you can already do that. In the US, businesses must be willing to accept USD for their services/products but they are free to also accept any other currency they wish. At the end of the day (or more accurately, their fiscal year), their books (and taxes) must be converted to USD for determining their taxes.
- etherael 13y ago
  > Bitcoin requires middleman, just like credit card processors No it doesn't? Your address exists as a private key, no external middlemen play a part in the maintenance of that unless you want them to. > It also is significantly easier to trace than current financial systems No it isn't. Even if you're talking the base bitcoin without extensions like zerocoin, it is still effectively as hard to trace as it is to decrypt a widely distributed shared encrypted wikileaks file, for example. If someone slips up and a key becomes available to allow decryption, it can be done, otherwise no dice. Compare with OP's statements about full visibility into 100% of SWIFT transfers. And if you add coming enhancements like Zerocoin? No, it's just nowhere near as easy letalone significantly easier. > which don't assign digital fingerprints to units of currency Serial numbers are quite common on physical fiat currency. Electronic transfers are done via SWIFT or interbank transfer networks which have the aforementioned 100% visibility. > that they've formed an internal task force to see what they can do about spurring adoption of Bitcoin or other similar digital currencies. The church was one of the foremost patrons of science at its peak, that they didn't understand the final implications of those developments would prove fatal to their foundations doesn't change that fact. So it is with states and bitcoin, although from what I've seen, and I look very closely indeed, the sentiment from the state has primarily been fear and trepidation. And they are right to fear, it could and hopefully will kill them.
  - rakoo 13y ago
    > > It also is significantly easier to trace than current financial systems > No it isn't. He's talking about following a bitcoin's life from wallet to wallet, not about impersonating a wallet. The whole bitcoin principle is that exchanges are made in clear between wallets and shared to all peers, so yes, it _is_ traceable, like nothing before. Now, the game is to know who is behind a wallet. And if you didn't use some anonymity method, your name will not be a secret to anyone looking for it.
- jnbiche 13y ago
  >In the US, businesses must be willing to accept USD for their services/products... Not according to the U.S. Treasury: There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy[1]. >I've met with quite a few Treasury lawyers who work in their policy office...spurring adoption... Well, they're taking a big risk, since Bitcoin can be easily upgraded to fully anonymous with a protocol upgrade using existing technology (Zerocoin) [2]. I think it's wise to wait until Bitcoin is more entrenched before implementing the extension, but there's no huge technological barrier preventing Bitcoin from being fully anonymous. Besides, it's not like the current system isn't fully tracked by the Treasury department. They already have access to everyone's transactions (via Swift, etc). The hard part is figuring out which transactions to investigate, and Bitcoin won't make that any easier. 1. http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/... 2. http://zerocoin.org/ http://zerocoin.org/

by sounds 13y ago

gamblor956 13y ago

Bitcoin might be the grease that enables the seriously broken parts of our struggling world economy to slip through the entrenched tax collectors and let the actual consumers reward the actual producers. Bitcoin requires middleman, just like credit card processors. It also is significantly easier to trace than current financial systems, which don't assign digital fingerprints to units of currency. Bitcoin isn't going to let the world economy "slip through the entranched tax collectors." Bitcoin is a tax collector's wet dream. I've met with quite a few Treasury lawyers who work in their policy office. They're so giddy about the prospects of actually being able to trace income from start to finish, including across borders, that they've formed an internal task force to see what they can do about spurring adoption of Bitcoin or other similar digital currencies. Bitcoin gives them first-world tools that completely bypass their local currency. In many nations, you can already do that. In the US, businesses must be willing to accept USD for their services/products but they are free to also accept any other currency they wish. At the end of the day (or more accurately, their fiscal year), their books (and taxes) must be converted to USD for determining their taxes.

etherael 13y ago
> Bitcoin requires middleman, just like credit card processors No it doesn't? Your address exists as a private key, no external middlemen play a part in the maintenance of that unless you want them to. > It also is significantly easier to trace than current financial systems No it isn't. Even if you're talking the base bitcoin without extensions like zerocoin, it is still effectively as hard to trace as it is to decrypt a widely distributed shared encrypted wikileaks file, for example. If someone slips up and a key becomes available to allow decryption, it can be done, otherwise no dice. Compare with OP's statements about full visibility into 100% of SWIFT transfers. And if you add coming enhancements like Zerocoin? No, it's just nowhere near as easy letalone significantly easier. > which don't assign digital fingerprints to units of currency Serial numbers are quite common on physical fiat currency. Electronic transfers are done via SWIFT or interbank transfer networks which have the aforementioned 100% visibility. > that they've formed an internal task force to see what they can do about spurring adoption of Bitcoin or other similar digital currencies. The church was one of the foremost patrons of science at its peak, that they didn't understand the final implications of those developments would prove fatal to their foundations doesn't change that fact. So it is with states and bitcoin, although from what I've seen, and I look very closely indeed, the sentiment from the state has primarily been fear and trepidation. And they are right to fear, it could and hopefully will kill them.
- rakoo 13y ago
  > > It also is significantly easier to trace than current financial systems > No it isn't. He's talking about following a bitcoin's life from wallet to wallet, not about impersonating a wallet. The whole bitcoin principle is that exchanges are made in clear between wallets and shared to all peers, so yes, it _is_ traceable, like nothing before. Now, the game is to know who is behind a wallet. And if you didn't use some anonymity method, your name will not be a secret to anyone looking for it.
jnbiche 13y ago
>In the US, businesses must be willing to accept USD for their services/products... Not according to the U.S. Treasury: There is, however, no Federal statute mandating that a private business, a person or an organization must accept currency or coins as for payment for goods and/or services. Private businesses are free to develop their own policies on whether or not to accept cash unless there is a State law which says otherwise. For example, a bus line may prohibit payment of fares in pennies or dollar bills. In addition, movie theaters, convenience stores and gas stations may refuse to accept large denomination currency (usually notes above $20) as a matter of policy[1]. >I've met with quite a few Treasury lawyers who work in their policy office...spurring adoption... Well, they're taking a big risk, since Bitcoin can be easily upgraded to fully anonymous with a protocol upgrade using existing technology (Zerocoin) [2]. I think it's wise to wait until Bitcoin is more entrenched before implementing the extension, but there's no huge technological barrier preventing Bitcoin from being fully anonymous. Besides, it's not like the current system isn't fully tracked by the Treasury department. They already have access to everyone's transactions (via Swift, etc). The hard part is figuring out which transactions to investigate, and Bitcoin won't make that any easier. 1. http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/legal-tender.aspx http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/faqs/Currency/Pages/... 2. http://zerocoin.org/ http://zerocoin.org/