7 ms·

A little regulation and over sight might have prevented all this. And with out it going forward all anyone can do is advise best practices, and then watch as so

A little regulation and over sight might have prevented all this. And with out it going forward all anyone can do is advise best practices, and then watch as some ignore them and also have their money stolen. Very wild west. Totally something I'll be staying well back from

mpyne 13y ago
> A little regulation and over sight might have prevented all this. Yes, but that is completely contrary to the whole reason Bitcoin exists in the first place. If you wanted a regulated currency you'd get fiat. It's wild west by definition, which is good for popcorn-muncher like me... but bad for friends of mine who have lost a significant amount of money by "experimenting" with Bitcoin. :(
- kaonashi 13y ago
  >Yes, but that is completely contrary to the whole reason Bitcoin exists in the first place. Not really. Satoichi has shied away from the political motivations of a lot of the community.
  - mpyne 13y ago
    What Satoshi does after releasing the creation has no bearing on the purpose behind creating something before they released it though. Realizing that you need to shy away from something after you do something doesn't invalidate the reasons behind why you did it.
  - gnaritas 13y ago
    Satoshi's motivations were political, his first message in the blockchain makes that clear. He hasn't shied away, he's disappeared for obvious reasons.
    - kaonashi 13y ago
      Speaking about this: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf ? He/she/they talk about a need for finical transaction capability without the need of a trusted third party, but I'm not seeing how that was in any way overtly political.
      - gnaritas 13y ago
        Because I'm not talking about that. I never referenced the bitcoin paper, reread what I said.
JHSheridan 13y ago
Just like a little regulation and oversight stopped the housing bubble, tech bubble, etc. I'm not saying this is comparable directly to those situations, but we shouldn't forget that regulated markets have crooks and cheats too.
- wpietri 13y ago
  Remind me of where somebody said that regulation would have made everything perfect? I missed that post.
hoggle 13y ago
Unfortunately things usually don't change on their own, it's actually good that this happened. The client-side key-management solutions that Andreas mentioned in the last paragraph of his statement are a testament to that. Evolution in nature is brutal, I can understand that you don't want to be part of that process.
argumentum 13y ago
It's unfortunate that many people lost money (and some might have lost a lot), but if the ecosystem can recover from this without governmental regulation (as I expect it will), we have the first evidence (ever) that there is no need for a central authority to conduct oversight and ensure a robust currency. It looks likely that the free market, which includes the self-regulating actions by Coinbase, Blockchain and others (as well as customer reactions), will punish the bad actors and reward "good" (well managed) companies. It will also create better consumers, who will now be more diligent in evaluating relevant services before they sign up. You write that you'll be staying away for now, that is your right as a potential participant in the market. We are already seeing the major players (like Coinbase) react to your sentiment by increasing transparency to bolster confidence in their services. 1. This is what we want. 2. When have you seen the existing financial system react so rapidly and thoroughly to the many flaws and disasters incumbent within? Yes, "a little regulation and oversight might have prevented all this", but it also might have prevented crypto currency from being able to prove its value (or fail to) in the free market.
- aggronn 13y ago
  > we have the first evidence (ever) that there is no need for a central authority to conduct oversight and ensure a robust currency. No one has ever doubted that this was possible. 'Robust' currency has existed without a central monetary authority in the past (for millenia!). The reason the Fed exists is because its believe that it takes an existing 'robust' currency and makes it better.
  - argumentum 13y ago
    ""The Federal Reserve System (also known as the Federal Reserve, and informally as the Fed) is the central banking system of the United States. It was created on December 23, 1913, with the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act, largely in response to a series of financial panics, particularly a severe panic in 1907"" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The common argument is that the modern, global economy is too complex to govern itself, and prone to disasters.
gnaritas 13y ago
> A little regulation and over sight might have prevented all this. A little regulation and over sight would have prevented the industry from even existing.
agorabinary 13y ago
Like regulation and oversight prevented (insert: preserved, perpetuated, safeguarded) Madoff?

mpyne 13y ago

> A little regulation and over sight might have prevented all this. Yes, but that is completely contrary to the whole reason Bitcoin exists in the first place. If you wanted a regulated currency you'd get fiat. It's wild west by definition, which is good for popcorn-muncher like me... but bad for friends of mine who have lost a significant amount of money by "experimenting" with Bitcoin. :(

kaonashi 13y ago
>Yes, but that is completely contrary to the whole reason Bitcoin exists in the first place. Not really. Satoichi has shied away from the political motivations of a lot of the community.
- mpyne 13y ago
  What Satoshi does after releasing the creation has no bearing on the purpose behind creating something before they released it though. Realizing that you need to shy away from something after you do something doesn't invalidate the reasons behind why you did it.
- gnaritas 13y ago
  Satoshi's motivations were political, his first message in the blockchain makes that clear. He hasn't shied away, he's disappeared for obvious reasons.
  - kaonashi 13y ago
    Speaking about this: https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf ? He/she/they talk about a need for finical transaction capability without the need of a trusted third party, but I'm not seeing how that was in any way overtly political.
    - gnaritas 13y ago
      Because I'm not talking about that. I never referenced the bitcoin paper, reread what I said.

JHSheridan 13y ago

Just like a little regulation and oversight stopped the housing bubble, tech bubble, etc. I'm not saying this is comparable directly to those situations, but we shouldn't forget that regulated markets have crooks and cheats too.

wpietri 13y ago
Remind me of where somebody said that regulation would have made everything perfect? I missed that post.

hoggle 13y ago

Unfortunately things usually don't change on their own, it's actually good that this happened. The client-side key-management solutions that Andreas mentioned in the last paragraph of his statement are a testament to that. Evolution in nature is brutal, I can understand that you don't want to be part of that process.

argumentum 13y ago

It's unfortunate that many people lost money (and some might have lost a lot), but if the ecosystem can recover from this without governmental regulation (as I expect it will), we have the first evidence (ever) that there is no need for a central authority to conduct oversight and ensure a robust currency. It looks likely that the free market, which includes the self-regulating actions by Coinbase, Blockchain and others (as well as customer reactions), will punish the bad actors and reward "good" (well managed) companies. It will also create better consumers, who will now be more diligent in evaluating relevant services before they sign up. You write that you'll be staying away for now, that is your right as a potential participant in the market. We are already seeing the major players (like Coinbase) react to your sentiment by increasing transparency to bolster confidence in their services. 1. This is what we want. 2. When have you seen the existing financial system react so rapidly and thoroughly to the many flaws and disasters incumbent within? Yes, "a little regulation and oversight might have prevented all this", but it also might have prevented crypto currency from being able to prove its value (or fail to) in the free market.

aggronn 13y ago
> we have the first evidence (ever) that there is no need for a central authority to conduct oversight and ensure a robust currency. No one has ever doubted that this was possible. 'Robust' currency has existed without a central monetary authority in the past (for millenia!). The reason the Fed exists is because its believe that it takes an existing 'robust' currency and makes it better.
- argumentum 13y ago
  ""The Federal Reserve System (also known as the Federal Reserve, and informally as the Fed) is the central banking system of the United States. It was created on December 23, 1913, with the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act, largely in response to a series of financial panics, particularly a severe panic in 1907"" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_System The common argument is that the modern, global economy is too complex to govern itself, and prone to disasters.

gnaritas 13y ago

> A little regulation and over sight might have prevented all this. A little regulation and over sight would have prevented the industry from even existing.

agorabinary 13y ago

Like regulation and oversight prevented (insert: preserved, perpetuated, safeguarded) Madoff?