10 ms·

Sen. Manchin demands complete US ban on Bitcoin

118 points by declan 13y ago

waterlesscloud 13y ago
His letter requesting the ban. http://www.manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=237cbd66-6a26-4870-9bcb-20177ae902b0 http://www.manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-release...
- itsboring 13y ago
  He's "weary" of the use of bitcoin? If an elected congressperson is going for a publicity stunt, they should at least have someone proof their letters before looking like a doofus...
  - fexl 13y ago
    Yeah, should be "leery", as in "The clear ends of FRNs for either transacting in illegal goods and services or speculative gambling make me leery of its use."
    - Crito 13y ago
      He was probably going for the word "wary", instead of "weary".
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
- josu 13y ago
  Pure gold > As of December 2013, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) shows 1.3% inflation, while a recent media report indicated Bitcoin CPI has 98% deflation. In other words, spending Bitcoin now will cost you many orders of wealth in the future. This flaw makes Bitcoin’s value to the U.S. economy suspect, if not outright detrimental.
  - wyager 13y ago
    "If we don't ban deflationary assets, people won't be forced to use our shitty inflationary assets!"
lelandbatey 13y ago
Sounds a like any other prohibition. Bitcoin seems like the tech equivalent of alcohol: easy to get involved with, really hard to keep track of/stop.
- Crito 13y ago
  Even worse than an alcohol ban, as alcohol has a conspicuous 'meat space' presence and people who have recently participated in alcohol related activities are often rather easy to pick out. His demands that regulators prevent Americans from being left 'holding the ball' if/when bitcoin collapses could reasonably be interpreted as a call for a ban on merely possessing bitcoins (not just transfering/selling/mining). If that were to happen (which is unlikely, but seems to be what this asshat wants), having a brainwallet could be considered a "thoughcrime" in the literal, non-hyperbolic sense.
  - haakon 13y ago
    It gets absurd. "Owning bitcoin" is just linguistic sugar for having knowledge of a private key that corresponds to a public key that hashes to a bitcoin address that holds bitcoin. It's just a 256-bit number. In essense, every single private key represented on the blockchain becomes an illegal number (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number), and not just illegal to publish, but illegal to store and even illegal to think about (aka know about).
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
pfraze 13y ago
Democratic senator seeks to boost his visibility by taking an exaggerated stance on new and uncertain technologies.
- MrZongle2 13y ago
  He's desperately trying to pander to his constituents and stay in the news. This is merely his latest stunt. Edit: not up for re-election.
  - declan 13y ago
    No, Sen. Manchin is not up for re-election in this election cycle. His term expires in January 2017, with an election in November 2016: http://www.periodicalpress.senate.gov/reelection-2016/ http://www.periodicalpress.senate.gov/reelection-2016/ Of course he's up for re-election in the sense that all congresscritters are up for re-election unless they declare otherwise. And I don't think anyone on HN would dispute "pandering" and "staying in the news!"
    - MrZongle2 13y ago
      My bad. Edited post. Still a panderer, like most of his ilk.
    - rat87 13y ago
      To whom is he pandering to?
      - torbjorn 13y ago
        The "silent majority".
  - kyleblarson 13y ago
    I would bet that the constituents of a West Virginia senator generally don't care about alternative currencies. They are more worried about the coal industry.
- deleted 13y ago
Cless 13y ago
Probably worth mentioning that Manchin is one of the most conservative Democratic senators before people start flaming him as a liberal bent on destroying freedom.
- crusso 13y ago
  The labels aren't nearly as important as understanding that he is part of a power structure that is bent on preventing any sort of challenge to the government's monopoly on currency regulation.
- NateDad 13y ago
  I was pretty sure that's what the W.V. after his name meant.
- javert 13y ago
  So he's conservative AND a Democrat? Wow, I guess he combines the worst of both sides.
- declan 13y ago
  Note that Chuck Schumer, who National Journal says* was the most liberal senator in 2013 (well, it was a three-way tie) also has signed letters with Manchin to DOJ complaining that Bitcoin is "untraceable" and demanding a crackdown on Silk Road. Can the most liberal senator be flamed as one? Or is that label never to be used in polite discourse? :) * http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictures-video/the-15-most-liberal-senators-20140206 http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictures-video/the-15-most-li...
  - mayneack 13y ago
    "Most liberal" is hard to define. I prefer DW-Nominate score which ranks Schumer as the 20th most liberal and Manchin as the 53rd. http://voteview.org/dwnominate.asp http://voteview.org/dwnominate.asp http://voteview.org/SENATE_SORT112.HTM http://voteview.org/SENATE_SORT112.HTM
- Udo 13y ago
  Asking as a non-American, why would someone characterized as "liberal" do this? It seems to me like this is a very thoroughly conservative move and well in line with conservative and reactionary thinking. Or have the definitions of the words liberal and conservative been swapped recently? A lot of the comments in this thread indicate that this may indeed be the case.
pyalot2 13y ago
Best of luck with that stunt.
panarky 13y ago
Do you suppose the good Senator from West Virginia and member of the Senate banking committee got some help drafting that letter?
- zvanness 13y ago
  Spot on, I wonder if he's acting as a proxy on behalf of some bankers or his good friend Jay Rockefeller
adamnemecek 13y ago
The gov't: one of the few places where 'disruptive' implies 'bad'.
- mindrag 13y ago
  Hmm. I think it's far from the only place. You might want to check a dictionary.
- TallGuyShort 13y ago
  Also, in wireless communication, classroom behavior, etc... Hearing disruptive as a good thing in startup-land always confuses me.
- hendzen 13y ago
  I'm pretty sure tech is the only subculture in which 'disruptive' implies 'good'.
mercurialshark 13y ago
It might be a stunt, but sophisticated investors that aren't tech savvy are scared to death of this pandering. Furthermore, it justifies so many people's public position on bitcoin. After all, if you say it enough it must be true. How do I start a petition for his resignation - at least from the Senate banking committee? As far as stunts go, this one at least serves a meaningful cause.
- mercurialshark 13y ago
  Here we are, please sign and fight back! http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/we-demand-sen-manchins-immediate-resignation http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/we-demand-sen-manchins-im...
  - tsax 13y ago
    +1 gold.
  - declan 13y ago
    Tweeted! https://twitter.com/declanm/status/438796925844717568 https://twitter.com/declanm/status/438796925844717568
    - mercurialshark 13y ago
      Sweet, thanks.
- mercurialshark 13y ago
  Reddit love: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1z0x3n/we_demand_sen_manchins_immediate_resignation_from/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1z0x3n/we_demand_se...
iterationx 13y ago
Online gambling is banned in the US. Would a Bitcoin ban really be out of character?
- declan 13y ago
  Actually, no. More like an attempt is inevitable.
rayiner 13y ago
I think the idea of banning it is stupid, but its interesting to read his letter. He doesn't seem to really be confused about what Bitcoin is or how it works, contrary to the common trope that the government only wants to ban things because it doesn't understand them.
jmtame 13y ago
Just as a thought experiment: how would the US gov actually go about making it illegal to use Bitcoin, or "ban" it? You obviously can't shut down the protocol itself. Maybe you go after the exchanges and treat them as if they're the drug dealers, if you were to "treat Bitcoin as a crime" (and by that I mean making exchanges or possessing a wallet). Any other ways hypothetically speaking?
- kybernetikos 13y ago
  My 'suggestion' - the prostitution route: make the purchasing of bitcoin illegal, and make soliciting for such a sale illegal too.
  - VMG 13y ago
    People will use dogecoin then, so the law will probably refer to "cryptocurrency". Which will not be easy to define and will probably get other centralized currency schemes in trouble as well.
minimax 13y ago
This is a quote from the Manchin letter: The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee issued a report just this month stating, “There is widespread concern about the Bitcoin system’s possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation.” This is the (slightly expanded) quote from that report† (which is actually kind of interesting -- it's a survey of bitcoin regulation (or lack thereof) in a bunch of different countries). There is widespread concern about the Bitcoin system’s possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation. Overall, the findings of this report reveal that the debate over how to deal with this new virtual currency is still in its infancy. So, by omitting that sentence he totally misrepresents the position of the report authors. I generally think bitcoin is overhyped by most of its proponents, but this is a really silly response. †http://www.loc.gov/law/help/bitcoin-survey/2014-010233%20Compiled%20Report_.pdf http://www.loc.gov/law/help/bitcoin-survey/2014-010233%20Com...
- JoeAltmaier 13y ago
  The lack of regulation is worrying. That exchange that just flamed out is an example of what the entire financial system would be with no oversight.
  - jamoes 13y ago
    Yes exactly. The exchange that just flamed out was incredibly poorly run, and deserved to go out of business. Now there is space in the market for more competent companies to take over the market share. I'd love to see the entire financial system operate under a meritocracy such as this.
    - Tloewald 13y ago
      > I'd love to see the entire financial system operate under a meritocracy such as this. You might think you would, but I suspect you would not.
      - 13y ago
Canada 13y ago
Ridiculous. The total value of all bitcoins at their peak price is not enough to harm the US economy. And if the non - inflationary constraints of the system are really so fatal then why bother calling for a ban?
panarky 13y ago
The very fact that powerful people and corporations want to kill Bitcoin in the cradle is reason enough for me to support it. Thank you, Senator Manchin, for reminding the world that this is a political struggle, not a get-rich-quick scheme.
- higherpurpose 13y ago
  I agree. It was already pretty obvious that Bitcoin and other such crypto-currencies are disruptive to central banks. But now the world's 3 largest powers wanting to ban it, is very similar to how the largest incumbents react to disruption - they try to fight against it as long as possible instead of adopting it. And they lose everytime.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >But now the world's 3 largest powers wanting to ban it, is very similar to how the largest incumbents react to disruption - they try to fight against it as long as possible instead of adopting it. And they lose everytime. Actually they've managed to suppress tons of things. In fact, there are tons of disruptions that never made it. Except if, in hindsight, one calls disruption only the things that actually won in the end (in which case it's a tautology -- of course all disruption wins in the end, if disruption is only what wins in the end). So the "they lose everytime" is a little too optimistic.
  - pdkl95 13y ago
    A tsunami is highly disruptive to central banks as well; it can happen with no warning, and it usually causes so many simultaneous insurance payouts that the entire financial industry is impacted. So banks should adopt the resulting floods? If we're talking dubious similarities in behavior, I will point out that the people passionately supporting Bitcon seem to have a very cult-like behavior, where they defend the cause even to the point of justifying away its obvious flaws. As a True Believer, they fail to see how absurd their justifications have become.
- pdkl95 13y ago
  "They very fact that powerful, rich fat-cats want to eradicate disease[1] and provide eduction[2] is reason enough for me to support spreading disease and remaining ignorant." While a lot of people repeat the proverb that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", extrapolation like that is not deduction and can often be incorrect. A better phrase may be "the enemy of my enemy is a possible ally". Unfortunately, the fact that those who currently abuse our economy want to kill Bitcoin doesn't remove Bitcoin's deflationary[3] nature. Support by certain enemies doesn't necessarily make this a political struggle, either. [1] Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, many others [2] Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, many others [3] I suggest that anybody wishing to demonstrate their ignorance of basic economics by asserting that deflation is "good", should instead spend their time contacting a organization like those in [2], who may be able to provide financial assistance, because something must be limiting their assess to a freshman-level macroeconomics class.
srl 13y ago
The important thing here is to remember that anybody who disagrees with you is a fascist, out to destroy America and freedom. There's no possibility that this is a well-intentioned effort, rather than bank-funded malice. Furthermore, it's all the other party's fault. This guy's actually a closet republican / a perfect example of how extreme liberal democrats have become. waterlesscloud posted a link to the letter. Read it, then (if you have a real opinion past "government = evil" or some equally inane platitude) contact your senator. Some thoughts on the content (from someone not particularly optimistic about bitcoin, but somewhat more optimistic about cryptocurrencies in general): Manchin does not actually explain how the use of bitcoin harms anyone who does not deliberately buy-in. The theory that it harms the economy in general simply by being volatile strikes me as silly, given that it represents a vanishingly small fraction of our economy (which, as I understand it, is part of the reason it's so volatile, meaning that as its share increases, volatility goes down).
- Crito 13y ago
  How this isn't working for me: "I disagree with or dislike this man." therefore "He must be trying to take freedoms from me." How this is working for me: "He is trying to take freedoms from me." therefore "I disagree with and dislike this man" (To prevent any speculation, I do not currently own any Bitcoin, nor have I ever owned any Bitcoin. I was however once tipped 10 doge on reddit for a rather clever dick joke... I do not have any sort of financial bone in this matter.)
  - MWil 13y ago
    so close to another dick joke
- Zigurd 13y ago
  Very few politicians have a firsthand understanding of issues like this. You don't have to attribute "fascism" to them to wonder who actually drafted the talking points embodied in that letter.
  - rayiner 13y ago
andrewfong 13y ago
In other news, Hollywood would still like for the Internet to be banned because it facilitates piracy.
ck2 13y ago
I going to assume anyone in power who wants to outright ban or heavily regulate crypto-currency is in the pocket of big banks. Doesn't really fit for west virginia but they also have their share of turmoil with massively unsafe mining yet peak corporate profits.
- mdemare 13y ago
  Isn't it obvious? West-Virginia's well-funded coal mining lobby doesn't like the competition from Bitcoin mining and moves one of their pawns to block it.
acd 13y ago
The Federal reserve was created by senator Aldrich who's daughter was married to the banker Rockefeller. The Federal reserve is privately owned by the member banks themselves among others JP Morgan, City bank. 97% percent of the money in circulation is debt. 1971 Nixon decoupled the Dollar from the Gold standard, essentially creating a FIAT currency. During the 1990s Allan Greenspan chairman of the Federal reserve set the capital requirements for new loans to near zero in an effort to let the market regulate itself. With no Gold standard to limit the amount of debt it grows exponentially. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Federal_Reserve_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Federal_Reserve... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abby_Aldrich_Rockefeller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abby_Aldrich_Rockefeller You can see the decoupling here GDP vs median income http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/09/03/slow-income-growth-for-middle-america/ http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/09/03/slow-income-growth-for-m... Graph showing the middle classes loosing to the debt system http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/03/09/the-best-inequality-graph/ http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/03/09/the-best-inequality-grap... An Investment Manager's View on the Top 1% http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manager.html http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manage... Hitting peak debt 2008 http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/010814_0559_Secularstag4.png http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2014/0...
- kaonashi 13y ago
  Pretty much everything here is wrong. The Fed is every bit a government agency as NASA.
  - acd 13y ago
    Well here is the shareholder list http://oneradionetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/FrbNY_owners2.pdf http://oneradionetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/FrbNY_owners2....
    - tsiki 13y ago
      That's a regional Federal Reserve Bank, not "the Fed". Also, you leave out that those share holders get at most 6% annual return for their investment, since it's capped by law.
bendoernberg 13y ago
For anyone who is wondering, I have heard from ABC and Forbes reporters that at least as of now, this ban would not apply to Dogecoin.
- declan 13y ago
  But what's their source? Do they have that on-the-record from the good Sen. Manchin himself, or just an unnamed source speculating? Or their own speculation?
  - declan 13y ago
    Update: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/senator-joe-manchin-bitcoin-litecoin-dogecoin-ban/ http://www.dailydot.com/politics/senator-joe-manchin-bitcoin... Manchin would have similar complaints about any such anonymous form of online payment. "It's the anonymous, unregulated nature of it," that Manchin finds a problem, the staffer said.
philrapo 13y ago
I love his conflicting concerns: "I am most concerned that as Bitcoin is inevitably banned in other countries, Americans will be left holding the bag on a valueless currency" Then later in the letter: "[Deflation] makes Bitcoin's value to the US economy suspect, if not outright detrimental". So.. he's concerned that bitcoin is either extremely inflationary (going to zero) or extremely deflationary. But he's not sure which.
natural219 13y ago
Good. Honestly, in the eyes of the USFG, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are like a ticking time bomb. The longer it takes them to act, the value of BTC increases, and it becomes increasingly hard to do anything about it from a federal level since more and more people have real assets invested in these currencies. The interesting bit is that the most cited complaint against BTC in the popular media is its use as a facilitator of illicit goods, which, due to bitcoin's design, is actually impossible to enforce. If you're already buying drugs and what else online, another law saying you can't use bitcoins aren't going to stop you (other than making it harder by shutting down popular services like Coinbase). The superficial reason for banning bitcoin (reducing illicit transactions) will likely fail completely. Furthermore, even if all governments ban bitcoins, as long as people have access to encrypted storage / networking, it's unlikely that the value of BTC would drop to zero. It's still a pretty efficient way to handle illegal transactions.
- superuser2 13y ago
  You can't stop existing Bitcoin users from trading amongst themselves, but it can be made very impractical to acquire Bitcoin with money. The government can easily isolate Bitcoin exchanges (and any other entity it chooses) from the USD banking infrastructure. Put them on the OFAC list (or similar) and they won't be able to get bank accounts, accept wire/ACH transfers, work with credit cards, or use any other money transmitting service. Transfers of paper cash in person would be the only option, and a campaign of well-publicized Bitcoin-for-cash sting operations could easily make this too risky for most people. ASICs are, well, application-specific. It's not exactly easy to fabricate hardware in secret, and there are no excuses to hide behind when you've got a warehouse full of Bitcoin mining rigs.
protomyth 13y ago
Strange, he's on the banking committee but not much banking money: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00032838 https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N000...
joewrong 13y ago
Dear Secretary Lew, Chairwoman Yellen, Commissioner Curry, Acting Chairman Wetjen, Chairman Gruenberg, Chairwoman White: I write today to express my concerns about the US Dollar. This cash currency is currently unregulated and has allowed users to participate in illicit activity, while also being highly unstable and disruptive to our economy. For the reasons outlined below, I urge regulators to take appropriate action to limit the abilities of this highly unstable currency. By way of background, the US Dollar is a crypto-currency that has gained notoriety in recent months due to its rising exchange value and relation to illegal transactions. Each the US Dollar is defined by a public address and a private key, thus the US Dollar is not only a token of value but also a method for transferring that value. It also means that the US Dollar provides a unique digital fingerprint, which allows for anonymous and irreversible transactions. The very features that make the US Dollar attractive to some also attract criminals who are able to disguise their actions from law enforcement. Due to the US Dollar's anonymity, the cash market has been extremely susceptible to hackers and scam artists stealing millions from the US Dollars users. Anonymity combined with the US Dollar's ability to finalize transactions quickly, makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to reverse fraudulent transactions. The US Dollar has also become a haven for individuals to buy black market items. Individuals are able to anonymously purchase items such as drugs and weapons illegally. I have already written to regulators once on the now-closed Silkroad, which operated for years in supplying drugs and other black market items to criminals, thanks in large part to the creation of the US Dollar. That is why more than a handful of countries, and their banking systems, have cautioned against the use of the US Dollar. Indeed, it has been banned in two different countries--Thailand and China--and South Korea stated that it will not recognize the US Dollar as a legitimate currency. Several other countries, including the European Union, have issued warnings to the US Dollar users as their respective governments consider options for regulating or banning its use entirely. While it is disappointing that the world leader and epicenter of the banking industry will only follow suit instead of making policy, it is high time that the United States heed our allies' warnings. I am most concerned that as the US Dollar is inevitably banned in other countries, Americans will be left holding the bag on a valueless currency. Our foreign counterparts have already understood the wide range of problems even with the US Dollar's legitimate uses - from its significant price fluctuations to its deflationary nature. Just last week, the US Dollar prices plunged after the currency's major exchange, Mt. Gox, experienced technical issues. Two days ago, this exchange took its website down and is no longer even accessible. This was not a unique event; news of plummeting or skyrocketing the US Dollar prices is almost a weekly occurrence. In addition, its deflationary trends ensure that only speculators, such as so-called "the US Dollar miners," will benefit from possessing the cash currency. There is no doubt average American consumers stand to lose by transacting in the US Dollar. As of December 2013, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) shows 1. % inflation, while a recent media report indicated the US Dollar CPI has 98% deflation. In other words, spending the US Dollar now will cost you many orders of wealth in the future. This flaw makes the US Dollar's value to the U.S. economy suspect, if not outright detrimental. The clear ends of the US Dollar for either transacting in illegal goods and services or speculative gambling make me weary of its use. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee issued a report just this month stating, "There is widespread concern about the the US Dollar system's possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation. Before the U.S. gets too far behind the curve on this important topic, I urge the regulators to work together, act quickly, and prohibit this dangerous currency from harming hard-working Americans. Sincerely, U.S. Joe Manchin III United States Senator
Duhveed 13y ago
You really can't blame him for trying. If crypto-currencies supplant state-based currencies, especially if one were to crop up that would be less traceable than bitcoin, whole swaths of governments around the world find themselves increasingly irrelevant and, quite probably, powerless to make themselves more relevant. And if government can't figure out how much a person makes or what he's worth, I'm pretty sure that leads to something way less dreamy and awesome than it sounds...because, if not, I think they would've covered such a thing in my public school education.
ricardonunez 13y ago
This is the type of people that keep countries from innovation. I don't have bitcoins, but for what I know the Bitcoin value isn't high enough to cause problems to the U.S. economy.
Aqueous 13y ago
I suspect a few in the BitCoin/tech community will lobby Manchin or other members of Congress the other way. There is enough financial interest in BitCoin now that it won't be easily outlawed. Either way, Congress can't ban BitCoin but they can ban BitCoin exchanges and BitCoin payment processors. Good luck with that.
IanDrake 13y ago
>Indeed, it has been banned in two different countries--Thailand and China I'm so glad our representatives are looking at China for a model of how things should be. Hey, China is doing it, it must be OK. You can make all sorts of arguments about banning BC, but don't use the fact that it's banned in oppressive countries as one of them and then expect me to respect your opinion.
- higherpurpose 13y ago
  US has been doing that a lot lately. It's like they are envious on the Chinese government's power over its people. Anyway, it's not banned in Thailand anymore, so US is just copying China and Russia now. Great role models there. http://www.techinasia.com/bank-thailand-countrys-top-bitcoin-exchange-resume-operations/ http://www.techinasia.com/bank-thailand-countrys-top-bitcoin...
- hackerboos 13y ago
  I believe it wasn't actually banned in Thailand. http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/marketing/395952/bitcoins-back-in-the-thai-marketplace http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/marketing/395952/bitcoin...
  - drcode 13y ago
    Nor china http://www.coindesk.com/btc-china-lowers-trading-fees-01/ http://www.coindesk.com/btc-china-lowers-trading-fees-01/
- VMG 13y ago
  He's later referring to them as "allies". I hoped this is satire for a moment.
  - steffenfrost 13y ago
    Good point! You are not allowed to use twitter, facebook, and youtube in China either. So, just as our "allies", lets ban twitter, facebook, and youtube. http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/ http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/
becauseInternet 13y ago
Serious problems with the following sentence: It also means that Bitcoin provides a unique digital fingerprint, which allows for anonymous and irreversible transactions. ... unique digital fingerprint >> anonymous and irreversible transactions So, Mr. Senator, what your telling me is that unique, readily identifiable, globally visible objects represent the very apparatus that prevents identification? How, precisely does that work?
- 0din 13y ago
  Because fingerprints have neve been used to identify anybody, and are also totally anonymous! That's why the police never use them to solve crimes, of course.
hughdbrown 13y ago
I find it incredible that the justification for action should be "a complete prohibition was appropriate because Thailand, China, and South Korea have already enacted severe restrictions or bans of their own." The American government has a document that outlines when it should take action and on what grounds. And that document makes no mention of consulting other countries or deferring to their sensibilities. It is outrageous that a senator thinks that that would be a valid starting point.
rrrx3 13y ago
o lawd
pmorici 13y ago
Dumb move on his part, he better hope the price tanks before he is up for reelection again or he is going to be sorry he alienated so many wealthy potential contributors.
coldtea 13y ago
>A US senator is asking the federal government to take this remarkable step: completely ban Bitcoin. Well, not that remarkable. Tons of countries (including the US) have banned alternative currencies in the past (and present). Essentially, a government can ban whatever it likes, even essential freedoms enjoyed by everybdy for millenia (like drinking alcohol during the prohibition).
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  > Tons of countries (including the US) have banned alternative currencies in the past (and present). In the US, its worth noting, this is an express (in Article I of the Constitution) power of the Federal government.
smtddr 13y ago
This just tells me that some very importand and/or well-connected people lost significantly because of MtGox. At this rate, maybe this prediction[1] will actually come to pass. 1. http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-2013-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-...
michaelwww 13y ago
Sen. Manchin's main constituent is the coal industry. Crypto-currency mining uses a fair amount of electricity. I'd guess most cryto-currency enthusiasts are also "green" enthusiasts. Manchin may want to stop this: "SolarCoin debuted last month and builds on the same technology as Bitcoin" http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/21/3282131/solar-coin-global-currency/# http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/21/3282131/solar-co...
fexl 13y ago
He wants to ban the use of a public ledger with private and public keys.
dbbolton 13y ago
As a native West Virginian, I can tell you what will happen if you call his office. In about 4-6 months, you'll get this letter: https://gist.github.com/dbb/5810717 https://gist.github.com/dbb/5810717
dbbolton 13y ago
Some rather humorous responses on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Sen_JoeManchin/status/438762073527705600 https://twitter.com/Sen_JoeManchin/status/438762073527705600
scottcanoni 13y ago
Oh no, a letter has been sent!

118 points by declan 13y ago

His letter requesting the ban. http://www.manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=237cbd66-6a26-4870-9bcb-20177ae902b0 http://www.manchin.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-release...

itsboring 13y ago
He's "weary" of the use of bitcoin? If an elected congressperson is going for a publicity stunt, they should at least have someone proof their letters before looking like a doofus...
- fexl 13y ago
  Yeah, should be "leery", as in "The clear ends of FRNs for either transacting in illegal goods and services or speculative gambling make me leery of its use."
  - Crito 13y ago
    He was probably going for the word "wary", instead of "weary".
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
josu 13y ago
Pure gold > As of December 2013, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) shows 1.3% inflation, while a recent media report indicated Bitcoin CPI has 98% deflation. In other words, spending Bitcoin now will cost you many orders of wealth in the future. This flaw makes Bitcoin’s value to the U.S. economy suspect, if not outright detrimental.
- wyager 13y ago
  "If we don't ban deflationary assets, people won't be forced to use our shitty inflationary assets!"

lelandbatey 13y ago

Sounds a like any other prohibition. Bitcoin seems like the tech equivalent of alcohol: easy to get involved with, really hard to keep track of/stop.

Crito 13y ago
Even worse than an alcohol ban, as alcohol has a conspicuous 'meat space' presence and people who have recently participated in alcohol related activities are often rather easy to pick out. His demands that regulators prevent Americans from being left 'holding the ball' if/when bitcoin collapses could reasonably be interpreted as a call for a ban on merely possessing bitcoins (not just transfering/selling/mining). If that were to happen (which is unlikely, but seems to be what this asshat wants), having a brainwallet could be considered a "thoughcrime" in the literal, non-hyperbolic sense.
- haakon 13y ago
  It gets absurd. "Owning bitcoin" is just linguistic sugar for having knowledge of a private key that corresponds to a public key that hashes to a bitcoin address that holds bitcoin. It's just a 256-bit number. In essense, every single private key represented on the blockchain becomes an illegal number (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number), and not just illegal to publish, but illegal to store and even illegal to think about (aka know about).

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

pfraze 13y ago

Democratic senator seeks to boost his visibility by taking an exaggerated stance on new and uncertain technologies.

MrZongle2 13y ago
He's desperately trying to pander to his constituents and stay in the news. This is merely his latest stunt. Edit: not up for re-election.
- declan 13y ago
  No, Sen. Manchin is not up for re-election in this election cycle. His term expires in January 2017, with an election in November 2016: http://www.periodicalpress.senate.gov/reelection-2016/ http://www.periodicalpress.senate.gov/reelection-2016/ Of course he's up for re-election in the sense that all congresscritters are up for re-election unless they declare otherwise. And I don't think anyone on HN would dispute "pandering" and "staying in the news!"
  - MrZongle2 13y ago
    My bad. Edited post. Still a panderer, like most of his ilk.
  - rat87 13y ago
    To whom is he pandering to?
    - torbjorn 13y ago
      The "silent majority".
- kyleblarson 13y ago
  I would bet that the constituents of a West Virginia senator generally don't care about alternative currencies. They are more worried about the coal industry.
deleted 13y ago

Cless 13y ago

Probably worth mentioning that Manchin is one of the most conservative Democratic senators before people start flaming him as a liberal bent on destroying freedom.

crusso 13y ago
The labels aren't nearly as important as understanding that he is part of a power structure that is bent on preventing any sort of challenge to the government's monopoly on currency regulation.
NateDad 13y ago
I was pretty sure that's what the W.V. after his name meant.
javert 13y ago
So he's conservative AND a Democrat? Wow, I guess he combines the worst of both sides.
declan 13y ago
Note that Chuck Schumer, who National Journal says* was the most liberal senator in 2013 (well, it was a three-way tie) also has signed letters with Manchin to DOJ complaining that Bitcoin is "untraceable" and demanding a crackdown on Silk Road. Can the most liberal senator be flamed as one? Or is that label never to be used in polite discourse? :) * http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictures-video/the-15-most-liberal-senators-20140206 http://www.nationaljournal.com/pictures-video/the-15-most-li...
- mayneack 13y ago
  "Most liberal" is hard to define. I prefer DW-Nominate score which ranks Schumer as the 20th most liberal and Manchin as the 53rd. http://voteview.org/dwnominate.asp http://voteview.org/dwnominate.asp http://voteview.org/SENATE_SORT112.HTM http://voteview.org/SENATE_SORT112.HTM
Udo 13y ago
Asking as a non-American, why would someone characterized as "liberal" do this? It seems to me like this is a very thoroughly conservative move and well in line with conservative and reactionary thinking. Or have the definitions of the words liberal and conservative been swapped recently? A lot of the comments in this thread indicate that this may indeed be the case.

pyalot2 13y ago

Best of luck with that stunt.

panarky 13y ago

Do you suppose the good Senator from West Virginia and member of the Senate banking committee got some help drafting that letter?

zvanness 13y ago
Spot on, I wonder if he's acting as a proxy on behalf of some bankers or his good friend Jay Rockefeller

adamnemecek 13y ago

The gov't: one of the few places where 'disruptive' implies 'bad'.

mindrag 13y ago
Hmm. I think it's far from the only place. You might want to check a dictionary.
TallGuyShort 13y ago
Also, in wireless communication, classroom behavior, etc... Hearing disruptive as a good thing in startup-land always confuses me.
hendzen 13y ago
I'm pretty sure tech is the only subculture in which 'disruptive' implies 'good'.

mercurialshark 13y ago

It might be a stunt, but sophisticated investors that aren't tech savvy are scared to death of this pandering. Furthermore, it justifies so many people's public position on bitcoin. After all, if you say it enough it must be true. How do I start a petition for his resignation - at least from the Senate banking committee? As far as stunts go, this one at least serves a meaningful cause.

mercurialshark 13y ago
Here we are, please sign and fight back! http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/we-demand-sen-manchins-immediate-resignation http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/we-demand-sen-manchins-im...
- tsax 13y ago
  +1 gold.
- declan 13y ago
  Tweeted! https://twitter.com/declanm/status/438796925844717568 https://twitter.com/declanm/status/438796925844717568
  - mercurialshark 13y ago
    Sweet, thanks.
mercurialshark 13y ago
Reddit love: http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1z0x3n/we_demand_sen_manchins_immediate_resignation_from/ http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1z0x3n/we_demand_se...

iterationx 13y ago

Online gambling is banned in the US. Would a Bitcoin ban really be out of character?

declan 13y ago
Actually, no. More like an attempt is inevitable.

rayiner 13y ago

I think the idea of banning it is stupid, but its interesting to read his letter. He doesn't seem to really be confused about what Bitcoin is or how it works, contrary to the common trope that the government only wants to ban things because it doesn't understand them.

jmtame 13y ago

Just as a thought experiment: how would the US gov actually go about making it illegal to use Bitcoin, or "ban" it? You obviously can't shut down the protocol itself. Maybe you go after the exchanges and treat them as if they're the drug dealers, if you were to "treat Bitcoin as a crime" (and by that I mean making exchanges or possessing a wallet). Any other ways hypothetically speaking?

kybernetikos 13y ago
My 'suggestion' - the prostitution route: make the purchasing of bitcoin illegal, and make soliciting for such a sale illegal too.
- VMG 13y ago
  People will use dogecoin then, so the law will probably refer to "cryptocurrency". Which will not be easy to define and will probably get other centralized currency schemes in trouble as well.

minimax 13y ago

This is a quote from the Manchin letter: The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee issued a report just this month stating, “There is widespread concern about the Bitcoin system’s possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation.” This is the (slightly expanded) quote from that report† (which is actually kind of interesting -- it's a survey of bitcoin regulation (or lack thereof) in a bunch of different countries). There is widespread concern about the Bitcoin system’s possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation. Overall, the findings of this report reveal that the debate over how to deal with this new virtual currency is still in its infancy. So, by omitting that sentence he totally misrepresents the position of the report authors. I generally think bitcoin is overhyped by most of its proponents, but this is a really silly response. †http://www.loc.gov/law/help/bitcoin-survey/2014-010233%20Compiled%20Report_.pdf http://www.loc.gov/law/help/bitcoin-survey/2014-010233%20Com...

JoeAltmaier 13y ago
The lack of regulation is worrying. That exchange that just flamed out is an example of what the entire financial system would be with no oversight.
- jamoes 13y ago
  Yes exactly. The exchange that just flamed out was incredibly poorly run, and deserved to go out of business. Now there is space in the market for more competent companies to take over the market share. I'd love to see the entire financial system operate under a meritocracy such as this.
  - Tloewald 13y ago
    > I'd love to see the entire financial system operate under a meritocracy such as this. You might think you would, but I suspect you would not.
    - 13y ago

Canada 13y ago

Ridiculous. The total value of all bitcoins at their peak price is not enough to harm the US economy. And if the non - inflationary constraints of the system are really so fatal then why bother calling for a ban?

panarky 13y ago

The very fact that powerful people and corporations want to kill Bitcoin in the cradle is reason enough for me to support it. Thank you, Senator Manchin, for reminding the world that this is a political struggle, not a get-rich-quick scheme.

higherpurpose 13y ago
I agree. It was already pretty obvious that Bitcoin and other such crypto-currencies are disruptive to central banks. But now the world's 3 largest powers wanting to ban it, is very similar to how the largest incumbents react to disruption - they try to fight against it as long as possible instead of adopting it. And they lose everytime.
- coldtea 13y ago
  >But now the world's 3 largest powers wanting to ban it, is very similar to how the largest incumbents react to disruption - they try to fight against it as long as possible instead of adopting it. And they lose everytime. Actually they've managed to suppress tons of things. In fact, there are tons of disruptions that never made it. Except if, in hindsight, one calls disruption only the things that actually won in the end (in which case it's a tautology -- of course all disruption wins in the end, if disruption is only what wins in the end). So the "they lose everytime" is a little too optimistic.
- pdkl95 13y ago
  A tsunami is highly disruptive to central banks as well; it can happen with no warning, and it usually causes so many simultaneous insurance payouts that the entire financial industry is impacted. So banks should adopt the resulting floods? If we're talking dubious similarities in behavior, I will point out that the people passionately supporting Bitcon seem to have a very cult-like behavior, where they defend the cause even to the point of justifying away its obvious flaws. As a True Believer, they fail to see how absurd their justifications have become.
pdkl95 13y ago
"They very fact that powerful, rich fat-cats want to eradicate disease[1] and provide eduction[2] is reason enough for me to support spreading disease and remaining ignorant." While a lot of people repeat the proverb that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", extrapolation like that is not deduction and can often be incorrect. A better phrase may be "the enemy of my enemy is a possible ally". Unfortunately, the fact that those who currently abuse our economy want to kill Bitcoin doesn't remove Bitcoin's deflationary[3] nature. Support by certain enemies doesn't necessarily make this a political struggle, either. [1] Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, many others [2] Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, many others [3] I suggest that anybody wishing to demonstrate their ignorance of basic economics by asserting that deflation is "good", should instead spend their time contacting a organization like those in [2], who may be able to provide financial assistance, because something must be limiting their assess to a freshman-level macroeconomics class.

srl 13y ago

The important thing here is to remember that anybody who disagrees with you is a fascist, out to destroy America and freedom. There's no possibility that this is a well-intentioned effort, rather than bank-funded malice. Furthermore, it's all the other party's fault. This guy's actually a closet republican / a perfect example of how extreme liberal democrats have become. waterlesscloud posted a link to the letter. Read it, then (if you have a real opinion past "government = evil" or some equally inane platitude) contact your senator. Some thoughts on the content (from someone not particularly optimistic about bitcoin, but somewhat more optimistic about cryptocurrencies in general): Manchin does not actually explain how the use of bitcoin harms anyone who does not deliberately buy-in. The theory that it harms the economy in general simply by being volatile strikes me as silly, given that it represents a vanishingly small fraction of our economy (which, as I understand it, is part of the reason it's so volatile, meaning that as its share increases, volatility goes down).

Crito 13y ago
How this isn't working for me: "I disagree with or dislike this man." therefore "He must be trying to take freedoms from me." How this is working for me: "He is trying to take freedoms from me." therefore "I disagree with and dislike this man" (To prevent any speculation, I do not currently own any Bitcoin, nor have I ever owned any Bitcoin. I was however once tipped 10 doge on reddit for a rather clever dick joke... I do not have any sort of financial bone in this matter.)
- MWil 13y ago
  so close to another dick joke
Zigurd 13y ago
Very few politicians have a firsthand understanding of issues like this. You don't have to attribute "fascism" to them to wonder who actually drafted the talking points embodied in that letter.
- rayiner 13y ago

andrewfong 13y ago

In other news, Hollywood would still like for the Internet to be banned because it facilitates piracy.

ck2 13y ago

I going to assume anyone in power who wants to outright ban or heavily regulate crypto-currency is in the pocket of big banks. Doesn't really fit for west virginia but they also have their share of turmoil with massively unsafe mining yet peak corporate profits.

mdemare 13y ago
Isn't it obvious? West-Virginia's well-funded coal mining lobby doesn't like the competition from Bitcoin mining and moves one of their pawns to block it.

acd 13y ago

The Federal reserve was created by senator Aldrich who's daughter was married to the banker Rockefeller. The Federal reserve is privately owned by the member banks themselves among others JP Morgan, City bank. 97% percent of the money in circulation is debt. 1971 Nixon decoupled the Dollar from the Gold standard, essentially creating a FIAT currency. During the 1990s Allan Greenspan chairman of the Federal reserve set the capital requirements for new loans to near zero in an effort to let the market regulate itself. With no Gold standard to limit the amount of debt it grows exponentially. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Federal_Reserve_System https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Federal_Reserve... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abby_Aldrich_Rockefeller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abby_Aldrich_Rockefeller You can see the decoupling here GDP vs median income http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/09/03/slow-income-growth-for-middle-america/ http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/09/03/slow-income-growth-for-m... Graph showing the middle classes loosing to the debt system http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/03/09/the-best-inequality-graph/ http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/03/09/the-best-inequality-grap... An Investment Manager's View on the Top 1% http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manager.html http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/investment_manage... Hitting peak debt 2008 http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/010814_0559_Secularstag4.png http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2014/0...

kaonashi 13y ago
Pretty much everything here is wrong. The Fed is every bit a government agency as NASA.
- acd 13y ago
  Well here is the shareholder list http://oneradionetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/FrbNY_owners2.pdf http://oneradionetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/FrbNY_owners2....
  - tsiki 13y ago
    That's a regional Federal Reserve Bank, not "the Fed". Also, you leave out that those share holders get at most 6% annual return for their investment, since it's capped by law.

bendoernberg 13y ago

For anyone who is wondering, I have heard from ABC and Forbes reporters that at least as of now, this ban would not apply to Dogecoin.

declan 13y ago
But what's their source? Do they have that on-the-record from the good Sen. Manchin himself, or just an unnamed source speculating? Or their own speculation?
- declan 13y ago
  Update: http://www.dailydot.com/politics/senator-joe-manchin-bitcoin-litecoin-dogecoin-ban/ http://www.dailydot.com/politics/senator-joe-manchin-bitcoin... Manchin would have similar complaints about any such anonymous form of online payment. "It's the anonymous, unregulated nature of it," that Manchin finds a problem, the staffer said.

philrapo 13y ago

I love his conflicting concerns: "I am most concerned that as Bitcoin is inevitably banned in other countries, Americans will be left holding the bag on a valueless currency" Then later in the letter: "[Deflation] makes Bitcoin's value to the US economy suspect, if not outright detrimental". So.. he's concerned that bitcoin is either extremely inflationary (going to zero) or extremely deflationary. But he's not sure which.

natural219 13y ago

Good. Honestly, in the eyes of the USFG, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies are like a ticking time bomb. The longer it takes them to act, the value of BTC increases, and it becomes increasingly hard to do anything about it from a federal level since more and more people have real assets invested in these currencies. The interesting bit is that the most cited complaint against BTC in the popular media is its use as a facilitator of illicit goods, which, due to bitcoin's design, is actually impossible to enforce. If you're already buying drugs and what else online, another law saying you can't use bitcoins aren't going to stop you (other than making it harder by shutting down popular services like Coinbase). The superficial reason for banning bitcoin (reducing illicit transactions) will likely fail completely. Furthermore, even if all governments ban bitcoins, as long as people have access to encrypted storage / networking, it's unlikely that the value of BTC would drop to zero. It's still a pretty efficient way to handle illegal transactions.

superuser2 13y ago
You can't stop existing Bitcoin users from trading amongst themselves, but it can be made very impractical to acquire Bitcoin with money. The government can easily isolate Bitcoin exchanges (and any other entity it chooses) from the USD banking infrastructure. Put them on the OFAC list (or similar) and they won't be able to get bank accounts, accept wire/ACH transfers, work with credit cards, or use any other money transmitting service. Transfers of paper cash in person would be the only option, and a campaign of well-publicized Bitcoin-for-cash sting operations could easily make this too risky for most people. ASICs are, well, application-specific. It's not exactly easy to fabricate hardware in secret, and there are no excuses to hide behind when you've got a warehouse full of Bitcoin mining rigs.

protomyth 13y ago

Strange, he's on the banking committee but not much banking money: https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00032838 https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N000...

joewrong 13y ago

Dear Secretary Lew, Chairwoman Yellen, Commissioner Curry, Acting Chairman Wetjen, Chairman Gruenberg, Chairwoman White: I write today to express my concerns about the US Dollar. This cash currency is currently unregulated and has allowed users to participate in illicit activity, while also being highly unstable and disruptive to our economy. For the reasons outlined below, I urge regulators to take appropriate action to limit the abilities of this highly unstable currency. By way of background, the US Dollar is a crypto-currency that has gained notoriety in recent months due to its rising exchange value and relation to illegal transactions. Each the US Dollar is defined by a public address and a private key, thus the US Dollar is not only a token of value but also a method for transferring that value. It also means that the US Dollar provides a unique digital fingerprint, which allows for anonymous and irreversible transactions. The very features that make the US Dollar attractive to some also attract criminals who are able to disguise their actions from law enforcement. Due to the US Dollar's anonymity, the cash market has been extremely susceptible to hackers and scam artists stealing millions from the US Dollars users. Anonymity combined with the US Dollar's ability to finalize transactions quickly, makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to reverse fraudulent transactions. The US Dollar has also become a haven for individuals to buy black market items. Individuals are able to anonymously purchase items such as drugs and weapons illegally. I have already written to regulators once on the now-closed Silkroad, which operated for years in supplying drugs and other black market items to criminals, thanks in large part to the creation of the US Dollar. That is why more than a handful of countries, and their banking systems, have cautioned against the use of the US Dollar. Indeed, it has been banned in two different countries--Thailand and China--and South Korea stated that it will not recognize the US Dollar as a legitimate currency. Several other countries, including the European Union, have issued warnings to the US Dollar users as their respective governments consider options for regulating or banning its use entirely. While it is disappointing that the world leader and epicenter of the banking industry will only follow suit instead of making policy, it is high time that the United States heed our allies' warnings. I am most concerned that as the US Dollar is inevitably banned in other countries, Americans will be left holding the bag on a valueless currency. Our foreign counterparts have already understood the wide range of problems even with the US Dollar's legitimate uses - from its significant price fluctuations to its deflationary nature. Just last week, the US Dollar prices plunged after the currency's major exchange, Mt. Gox, experienced technical issues. Two days ago, this exchange took its website down and is no longer even accessible. This was not a unique event; news of plummeting or skyrocketing the US Dollar prices is almost a weekly occurrence. In addition, its deflationary trends ensure that only speculators, such as so-called "the US Dollar miners," will benefit from possessing the cash currency. There is no doubt average American consumers stand to lose by transacting in the US Dollar. As of December 2013, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) shows 1. % inflation, while a recent media report indicated the US Dollar CPI has 98% deflation. In other words, spending the US Dollar now will cost you many orders of wealth in the future. This flaw makes the US Dollar's value to the U.S. economy suspect, if not outright detrimental. The clear ends of the US Dollar for either transacting in illegal goods and services or speculative gambling make me weary of its use. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee issued a report just this month stating, "There is widespread concern about the the US Dollar system's possible impact on national currencies, its potential for criminal misuse, and the implications of its use for taxation. Before the U.S. gets too far behind the curve on this important topic, I urge the regulators to work together, act quickly, and prohibit this dangerous currency from harming hard-working Americans. Sincerely, U.S. Joe Manchin III United States Senator

Duhveed 13y ago

You really can't blame him for trying. If crypto-currencies supplant state-based currencies, especially if one were to crop up that would be less traceable than bitcoin, whole swaths of governments around the world find themselves increasingly irrelevant and, quite probably, powerless to make themselves more relevant. And if government can't figure out how much a person makes or what he's worth, I'm pretty sure that leads to something way less dreamy and awesome than it sounds...because, if not, I think they would've covered such a thing in my public school education.

ricardonunez 13y ago

This is the type of people that keep countries from innovation. I don't have bitcoins, but for what I know the Bitcoin value isn't high enough to cause problems to the U.S. economy.

Aqueous 13y ago

I suspect a few in the BitCoin/tech community will lobby Manchin or other members of Congress the other way. There is enough financial interest in BitCoin now that it won't be easily outlawed. Either way, Congress can't ban BitCoin but they can ban BitCoin exchanges and BitCoin payment processors. Good luck with that.

IanDrake 13y ago

>Indeed, it has been banned in two different countries--Thailand and China I'm so glad our representatives are looking at China for a model of how things should be. Hey, China is doing it, it must be OK. You can make all sorts of arguments about banning BC, but don't use the fact that it's banned in oppressive countries as one of them and then expect me to respect your opinion.

higherpurpose 13y ago
US has been doing that a lot lately. It's like they are envious on the Chinese government's power over its people. Anyway, it's not banned in Thailand anymore, so US is just copying China and Russia now. Great role models there. http://www.techinasia.com/bank-thailand-countrys-top-bitcoin-exchange-resume-operations/ http://www.techinasia.com/bank-thailand-countrys-top-bitcoin...
hackerboos 13y ago
I believe it wasn't actually banned in Thailand. http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/marketing/395952/bitcoins-back-in-the-thai-marketplace http://www.bangkokpost.com/business/marketing/395952/bitcoin...
- drcode 13y ago
  Nor china http://www.coindesk.com/btc-china-lowers-trading-fees-01/ http://www.coindesk.com/btc-china-lowers-trading-fees-01/
VMG 13y ago
He's later referring to them as "allies". I hoped this is satire for a moment.
- steffenfrost 13y ago
  Good point! You are not allowed to use twitter, facebook, and youtube in China either. So, just as our "allies", lets ban twitter, facebook, and youtube. http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/ http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/

becauseInternet 13y ago

Serious problems with the following sentence: It also means that Bitcoin provides a unique digital fingerprint, which allows for anonymous and irreversible transactions. ... unique digital fingerprint >> anonymous and irreversible transactions So, Mr. Senator, what your telling me is that unique, readily identifiable, globally visible objects represent the very apparatus that prevents identification? How, precisely does that work?

0din 13y ago
Because fingerprints have neve been used to identify anybody, and are also totally anonymous! That's why the police never use them to solve crimes, of course.

hughdbrown 13y ago

I find it incredible that the justification for action should be "a complete prohibition was appropriate because Thailand, China, and South Korea have already enacted severe restrictions or bans of their own." The American government has a document that outlines when it should take action and on what grounds. And that document makes no mention of consulting other countries or deferring to their sensibilities. It is outrageous that a senator thinks that that would be a valid starting point.

rrrx3 13y ago

o lawd

pmorici 13y ago

Dumb move on his part, he better hope the price tanks before he is up for reelection again or he is going to be sorry he alienated so many wealthy potential contributors.

coldtea 13y ago

>A US senator is asking the federal government to take this remarkable step: completely ban Bitcoin. Well, not that remarkable. Tons of countries (including the US) have banned alternative currencies in the past (and present). Essentially, a government can ban whatever it likes, even essential freedoms enjoyed by everybdy for millenia (like drinking alcohol during the prohibition).

dragonwriter 13y ago
> Tons of countries (including the US) have banned alternative currencies in the past (and present). In the US, its worth noting, this is an express (in Article I of the Constitution) power of the Federal government.

smtddr 13y ago

This just tells me that some very importand and/or well-connected people lost significantly because of MtGox. At this rate, maybe this prediction[1] will actually come to pass. 1. http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-2013-12 http://www.businessinsider.com/williams-bitcoin-meltdown-10-...

michaelwww 13y ago

Sen. Manchin's main constituent is the coal industry. Crypto-currency mining uses a fair amount of electricity. I'd guess most cryto-currency enthusiasts are also "green" enthusiasts. Manchin may want to stop this: "SolarCoin debuted last month and builds on the same technology as Bitcoin" http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/21/3282131/solar-coin-global-currency/# http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/02/21/3282131/solar-co...

fexl 13y ago

He wants to ban the use of a public ledger with private and public keys.

dbbolton 13y ago

As a native West Virginian, I can tell you what will happen if you call his office. In about 4-6 months, you'll get this letter: https://gist.github.com/dbb/5810717 https://gist.github.com/dbb/5810717

dbbolton 13y ago

Some rather humorous responses on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Sen_JoeManchin/status/438762073527705600 https://twitter.com/Sen_JoeManchin/status/438762073527705600

scottcanoni 13y ago

Oh no, a letter has been sent!