Slashdot Mirror
US States Edge Toward Cryptocoin Regulation
SonicSpike points out an article from the Pew Charitable Trusts' Research & Analysis department on the legislation and regulation schemes emerging in at least a few states in reaction to the increasing use of digital currencies like Bitcoin. A working group called the Conference of State Bank Supervisors’ Emerging Payments Task Force has been surveying the current landscape of state rules and approaches to digital currencies, a topic on which state laws are typically silent.
In April, the task force presented a model consumer guidance to help states provide consumers with information about digital currencies. A number of states, including California, Massachusetts and Texas, have issued warnings to consumers that virtual currencies are not subject to “traditional regulation or monetary policy,” including insurance, bonding and other security measures, and that values can fluctuate dramatically. ...
The article focuses on the high-population, big-economy states of New York, California and Texas, with a touch of Kansas -- but other states are sure to follow. Whether you live in the U.S. or not, are there government regulations that you think would actually make sense for digital currencies?
perhaps they will require a licence to accept payments using them?
I think you misspelled the british 'gaol.'
You're looking for quotes? See my journal.
I imagine that the sorts of things we'd want to regulate about "digital currencies" are the same things we'd want to regulate about any foreign or domestic currency; e.g.:
- You can't use it to pay for illegal goods or services
- You can't receive it in payment for illegal goods or services
- You can't use it to hide other transactions related to illegal goods or services (i.e., money laundering)
So... can we just formally decree that cryptocoins meet the definition of a "currency", and be done with it? Otherwise I'm afraid that we'll be creating another legal (and patent) swamp where "...with Bitcoins" will become the new "...on the Internet".
Koans and fables for the software engineer
Crytocoins are designed to be de-centralized in order to not be controlled by any dominant party
I wonder how are they going to "regulate" something that is not supposed to be regulate-able ?
The NSA owns your computer, and the computer you want to trade bitcoins with*. They could enforce any regulations if they were willing to admit to this. Being a cryptocurrency rather than a physical one also means that they can vanish your money with the click of a button instead of having to personally visit you.
* Maybe I'm just paranoid, but there are so many hardware and software components, any of which could have backdoors or keyloggers installed. They could demand any domestic product secretly contain them from manufacture, and "inspect" any imports. Even easier with domestic software, or they could get a few of their agents helping to develop the software (I hear they have lots of talented folks).
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
Over half the Bitcoin exchanges have gone bust. Entire Bitcoin "stock exchanges" disappeared with the money. Bitcoin "investments" promising substantial returns each month were, of course, Ponzi schemes.
Bitcoin is a scam magnet. Irrevocable, remote, anonymous money transfers are the scammer's dream. (Yes, there are people talking about cryptographic escrow schemes so you can buy something with Bitcoins and have some recourse if it doesn't show up. So far, that hasn't reached usability.)
That's why Bitcoin needs regulation. If you're going to hold other people's money, you have to be regulated. Deal with it.
perhaps they will require a licence to accept payments using them?
Regulations? Licenses? Hmm. As it happens, we already have pertinent "regulations".
U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 10:
"No State shall ... make anything but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts"