Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Winklevoss Twins Plan Regulated Bitcoin Exchange

Posted by timothy on from the trust-us-there-are-two-of-us dept.

itwbennett writes They of the square jaws and famous dispute with Mark Zuckerberg over the origins of Facebook, are also believed to be among the largest holders of Bitcoin in the world. Now they want to launch a regulated Bitcoin exchange—named Gemini, of course. To bolster confidence, they said they have formed a relationship with a chartered bank in the state of New York. "This means that your money will never leave the country," the twins wrote in a blog post. "It also means that U.S. dollars on Gemini will be eligible for FDIC insurance and held by a U.S.-regulated bank.

80 comments

  1. so many problems with this idea by ihtoit · · Score: 4, Insightful

    not least of which, allowing an organisation that is answerable to none but the United States Supreme Court to regulate a virtual currency that is in direct competition with its own pet, the Almighty Dollar.

    --
    Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    1. Re:so many problems with this idea by Baron_Yam · · Score: 3, Insightful

      >a virtual currency that is in direct competition with its own pet, the Almighty Dollar.

      This is what Bitcoin proponents would have you believe, but there is no competition at present, and the flaws inherent in the protocol mean there never will be.

      Perhaps some other future crypto will be a competitor, but all Bitcoin does is spawn scams or payment gateways that evolve into PayPal equivalents (once they're big enough they cut Bitcoin out of the loop).

    2. Re:so many problems with this idea by beheaderaswp · · Score: 3, Informative

      not least of which, allowing an organisation that is answerable to none but the United States Supreme Court to regulate a virtual currency that is in direct competition with its own pet, the Almighty Dollar.

      Right... because allowing a random guy in Asia to regulate the exchange worked out great?

      --
      Another consultant who stuck it out.

      "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
    3. Re:so many problems with this idea by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      as opposed to a random guy in the United States? Or Europe?

      Here's a completely crazy idea: how about we let the user community regulate it?

      It worked for a bloody long time to pretty much fix the value of salt against any other given commodity.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
    4. Re:so many problems with this idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      but all Bitcoin does is spawn scams or payment gateways that evolve into PayPal equivalents (once they're big enough they cut Bitcoin out of the loop).

      Example of a gateway which spawned from Bitcoin and no longer supports Bitcoin?

    5. Re:so many problems with this idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how about we let the user community regulate it?

      What does that even mean in the context of running a money exchange? Mob rule? Laissez-faire style survival of the fittest?

    6. Re:so many problems with this idea by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      allowing an organisation that is answerable to none but the United States Supreme Court to regulate a virtual currency that is in direct competition with its own pet, the Almighty Dollar.

      As I've said many times before - so long as you follow a few very simple rules and you pay your taxes in dollars, the US Goverment doesn't care if you conduct your daily business in dollars, Bitcoins, or jars of pickled hamster poop. They whole idea of "competition" has been created out of whole cloth by the Bitcoin Tinfoil Hat Society. It's an ego trip thing, if you're being persecuted, you're obviously Important and Sticking It To The Man. That The Man has pretty consistently ignored them is nothing short of infuriating to these small minded ignoramuses. (Going after criminals who use Bitcoin is *not* the same thing as going after Bitcoin, no matter what said Tinfoil Society tries to tell you.)

    7. Re:so many problems with this idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gold standard worked well until quite recently. Regulation has always been the problem so the idea of regulating BTC will kill it. Maybe that is the idea.

    8. Re:so many problems with this idea by Canth7 · · Score: 1

      >a virtual currency that is in direct competition with its own pet, the Almighty Dollar.

      This is what Bitcoin proponents would have you believe, but there is no competition at present, and the flaws inherent in the protocol mean there never will be.

      Perhaps some other future crypto will be a competitor, but all Bitcoin does is spawn scams or payment gateways that evolve into PayPal equivalents (once they're big enough they cut Bitcoin out of the loop).

      Bitcoin might be flawed or it might just be that it doesn't fit into a box and therefore most people, including Slashdotters reject it out of hand. What do you think about the $400m+ of venture capital invested in Bitcoin infrastructure in the last 18 months? Obviously not all investors share your convictions about the flaws.

  2. BTC Insured? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To be taken seriously, their BTC assets will need to be insured against theft. I doubt it will be.

    1. Re: BTC Insured? by guruevi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The insurance is the least of their problems. For a good fee anything is insurable. The problem lies in the replacement. Banks/Feds/Insurance when losing money just replace the number in their databases or print the money, no insurance company nor bank nor the Feds actually has a reserve of cash to cover all their accounts in case of a massive hack that empties all their accounts. Not as easily done with cryptocurrency, once it is gone you can only replace it with more cryptocurrency. So you actually need to stash or be able to lend the insured amount instead of just relying on someone to bail you out with fake money.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    2. Re: BTC Insured? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2

      Your lack of understanding about what goes on in financial institutions is disturbingly terrifying.

    3. Re: BTC Insured? by Time_Ngler · · Score: 2

      The lack of "understanding" of some poster on slashdot is so terrifying as to leave you mentally disturbed? Holy shit, how do you get out of bed in the morning?

    4. Re: BTC Insured? by guruevi · · Score: 0

      Please correct me then. After a bank robbery, the notes' serials get marked in a database and when they go out of rotation they are destroyed, the bank gets a new bag of notes and the FDIC assures that whatever happens your money is recovered - through another bank if necessary.

      The entire economy is not backed by bullion in a bank's vault, 'losses' in the digital side are simply recovered by rolling back statements. If your account gets hacked and the money is transferred within the country, it can simply be recovered by transferring the money back because all the accounts fall under the same 'governance', even internationally there are some agreements for returning stolen money. If a 'mule' is used, the mule's balance is going to go negative and thus someone, somewhere will be indebted to the banks (whether it is the victim, a mule, the insurance company or the criminal). When insurance companies have to recover the money, they will either get it from the feds or lend the money somewhere (depending on the type of insurance and your jurisdiction - eg. in Europe, a lot of the insurance pools are backed by the government which makes the actual payments)

      Cryptocurrency cannot be recovered or re-issued like bank notes can. You cannot have a negative amount of cryptocurrency because it is decentralized and supposedly anonymous. There is no governing agency or international agreement on recovering stolen cryptocurrency, no agency can just issue more currency and subsequently recover it at a later time. There is also a limited supply of them and creating them is costly so it is not feasible to simply have a stash somewhere just for insurance purposes because you would only accelerate the devaluation and instability of the system (if someone holds like 1/3 of a cryptocurrency they can technically 'cheat' the entire system)

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    5. Re: BTC Insured? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You think banks keep a record of the serial number of every single note? You think there's a magical system somewhere of checking notes as they pass through POS terminals, ATM's, etc.? A bank gets robbed, and the serial numbers are NOT marked in a database unless the bank has recorded them, which I extremely seriously doubt they do, especially since of the millions or billions of dollars in a bank, the notes are mostly in denominations of $100 or LESS. You think there's an up-to-date moment to moment list of every $1, $2, (yep, they still have them,) $5, $10, $20, $50, $100, $500 (do they still have them?), and $1000 note in any given bank's possession?!? What about coinage? Do they record the nonexistent serial numbers of coins? I understand banks carry a fair amount of coinage...

      Anywho, as for the idea of logging bitcoins into a bank, I'm no fan of Bitcon, (as I think of it,) but seems to me that letting a bank keep tabs on them, control (and report) their movements kinda defeats the purpose of their existing. Why would ANYONE use this, again?

    6. Re: BTC Insured? by gumbi+west · · Score: 1

      The thing is that you are guessing about how it might work, not actually knowing how it does work.

      If your account gets hacked and the money is transferred within the country, it can simply be recovered by transferring the money back because all the accounts fall under the same 'governance', even internationally there are some agreements for returning stolen money.

      On the startup podcast, one of their investors accidentally wired the money to the wrong account and they only got most (about 2/3) of their money back because the other side had withdrawn another portion. The bank and police offered no assistance in getting back the rest.

    7. Re: BTC Insured? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work in a bank, and I can assure you we record each and every serial number of every bill that ever moves through our hands. Not only is it bank policy, but there are federal regulations about when and how serial numbers are recorded.

      Want to know how we do it? We use a machine. It's called a bill counter, and it runs on electricity and this magic thing called a microchip. It uses eleven different and instantaneous tests to determine if a bill is counterfeit. Then it logs the amount, serial number, and (if we have it) the use/origin of the bill. All cash deposited during the day is run through these money counters, multiple times, each night. Our ATM has a bill counter too. And if the local grocery store collects bills with a POS machine, and deposits them in our bank...guess what? We just logged the serials for the grocery store, and they didn't have to do anything!

      You'd think that on Slashdot, technically-minded people would have thought of using a computer to automate something, as op. Or at least google something, before you spout off about how it can't be done and you're so sure of that fact.

  3. Regulated Is Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why dont they create a regulated crowdfunding website? Full transparency and accountability so we dont get the type of people who ask $40k for a guitar FX box, mismanages the money, fails their Kickstarter, makes a donation to Feminist Frequency and possibly (partially) refunded (some of the) backers. Need to stop these fuckers who use backers money to fund their lifestyle, fuck up their project, says oops and then start all over again.

  4. What about the block chain size? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've tried to use BTC recently. I think it's an interesting concept, but the block chain is goddamn awful to deal with as a normal user. It's fucking massive. We're talking about many gigabytes of data to download. BTC becomes a lot less convenient to me if I have to wait a day or more to fetch the block chain data just to begin using it! I know there are services out there that can help alleviate some of these problems, but that just defeats the whole purpose of BTC. Not having to depend on third parties is one of its most significant benefits, so giving that up just to make it usable is totally self defeating. Why would I want to use a third party service just to make BTC practical when the main reason for me using BTC is so that I can deal with it independently without having to deal with third party services?!

    1. Re:What about the block chain size? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you say there's "no need to reply on a third party", but then suggest using third party services? Huh?

      Any user should be able to install the Bitcoin software, and then be able to transact instantaneously. Anything less than that, including using some third party service, is totally unacceptable.

    2. Re:What about the block chain size? by tepples · · Score: 1

      Any user should be able to install the Bitcoin software, and then be able to transact instantaneously.

      How? Without third parties, you won't have any BTC to spend.

    3. Re:What about the block chain size? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come on, tepples. Think this through.

      Who is the "first party"? The person sending (or receiving) the Bitcoin transaction.

      Who is the "second party"? The person receiving (or sending) the Bitcoin transaction from (or to) the first party.

      Who is the "third party"? Any other participant(s) involved with this transaction.

      The whole point of Bitcoin is that there shouldn't have to be a third party directly involved merely for the first party to make a Bitcoin transaction with the second party.

  5. seizure-ready by mabu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It also means when the time comes for the traditional banking institutions to lobby the authorities to seize all the assets of this "illegal currency", they can easily do so.

    1. Re:seizure-ready by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      seizure in the usa is already way out of control

      the recent federal review of asset seizure laws is welcome, but weak:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      worrying about banks seizing funds is the least of your problems

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  6. So like regular money by istartedi · · Score: 0

    So like regular money, only fun. But wait... nothing in the park accepts Itchy and Scratchy money...

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
  7. Tech world by amightywind · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Are there 2 people who have less to offer the tech world than the Winklevi?

    --
    an ill wind that blows no good
    1. Re:Tech world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i wanna hear about a normal joe who makes something cool. i dont want to know what these rich bed buddy brother fags are onto next.

  8. Nobody should trust these scammers by gavron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who would trust them?

    First this: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/ed...
    (bitcoin trust)

    Then this: http://www.investopedia.com/ar...
    (bitcoin payment system)

    Now this thing... ("regulated" exchange that can't leave the US for an international virtual decentralized currency...)

    Perhaps they just didn't get that memo about their relevance having tanked somewhere after they wanted to
    renege on their FB settlement and go for a do-over uh-gain:
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...

    Their fifteen minutes of fame is up. The harder they try and bring themselves
    into relevance the funnier it gets. The bell has rung. Time to get off the stage little boys.

    E

    1. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 2

      Oh come on. They're going to be regulated by the ultra-strict US banking regulations. Those poor bankers can't get away with ANYTHING.

    2. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by alphatel · · Score: 1

      They should have just called their new product "Facecoin"

      --
      When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
    3. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

      They should have just called their new product "Facecoin"

      Otherwise known as "money shot" - or so I've heard.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    4. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by GerryGilmore · · Score: 0

      Or, better yet, "money snot" because it i"s not money"....

    5. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 1

      Naaa...that should have called it "Facepalm"
      Which is what the rest of us are doing.

    6. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by spire3661 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Thats the thing. They could go on and just be happy successful businessmen, but noooo they have to be known....

      --
      Good-bye
    7. Re:Nobody should trust these scammers by alphatel · · Score: 1

      This major change in the investment possibilities has sent shockwaves through the BTC community. The price change in the past month has been so dramatic as to herald a new world order for those who depend on it for their fidelity and fu...

      Oh wait, I was looking at an oil chart. n/m

      --
      When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
  9. why do we need this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, right, we don't.

  10. Your money will never leave which country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As a citizen of an european state, having a guarantee that my money will never leave the US is a problem, not a feature.

    1. Re:Your money will never leave which country? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a citizen of an european vassal state, having a guarantee that my money will never leave the US is a problem, not a feature.

      FTFY. Also, as it's a digital currency, you'll never actually see it if it can't leave the US since for it to appear on a computer screen in Europe, it first has to LEAVE THE US.

  11. Scooped by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/01/23/us-usa-bitcoin-idUSKBN0KW0BN20150123

    Truly.

  12. This means you'll get sued by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    by the bros. Winklevoss and their white shoe law firm.

    Disclaimer: j/k guys!! Humor and satire!!!!

  13. Time to stop using bitcoin by phazemstr · · Score: 0

    All of its advantages over other currencies are gone anyway.

    --
    Nothing to see.
    1. Re:Time to stop using bitcoin by ArcadeMan · · Score: 0

      Dogecoin to the moon!

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    2. Re:Time to stop using bitcoin by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      I don't know which dumbass keeps modding me "overrated"... don't you know that people with an excellent karma automatically post with a score of 2?

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
    3. Re:Time to stop using bitcoin by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

      Shit. I wish I had mod points today. I'd mod you "overrated" just for fun :)

    4. Re:Time to stop using bitcoin by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      I don't mind if I get an "overrated" to cancel the moderation made by someone else, but my baseline "2" is neutral and doesn't have any significance (insightful or whatever).

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  14. $5000 Too Late by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Failed exchanges like Localtill and Mt Gox have already destroyed faith in the BC exchange process and everything BC related. By thieving from their investors, the BC market has been doomed.

    1. Re:$5000 Too Late by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      the New York Stock Exchange seems to be doing well, even on the back of all that banking fraud that you seeem to have slept through.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  15. A currency exchange designed by TWO guys by jpellino · · Score: 1

    who could not manage to outmaneuver ONE Zuckerberg? What could possibly go wrong?

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    1. Re:A currency exchange designed by TWO guys by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      call it zuckerbucks

      it's for zuckers

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  16. Those links are intriguing as are by jpellino · · Score: 2

    their "about" page - which actually has a pic of an astronaut on fire strolling through NYC as their (inspiration?), or their "portfolio" page which lists all of their ventures, none of which are everyday brands. I would expect a less-off-putting / more reassuring "about" page and a more familiar set of ventures.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
  17. CRASH!!! by gophther · · Score: 0

    Well now your $1,000,000 in bitcoin you bought is suddenly worth 12 cents, but no worry, you've got FDIC!

    1. Re:CRASH!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FDIC protects against loss, not change in valuation. Only for the first $250,000. https://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/information/fdiciorn.html

  18. So the twins want to open an exchange ... by timholman · · Score: 0

    Now all the Winklevoss twins need to do is find is a reason for the average American consumer to buy BTC and use them, instead of using credit cards and debit cards that are protected from fraud and loss by federal law. Bitcoin may be a great deal for businesses, but it is a terrible deal for consumers, and without people on both sides of the economic equation it is slowly dying (witness the long slow decline in price, and the fact that a few hundred thousand people at most possess all the BTC in circulation).

    That's the crux of the problem, and the one that no one has figured out yet, beyond yelling "Those evil bankers and politicians are robbing you with fiat money!" Right, so I'll pay my percentage to the twins, instead of my local bank? That's like choosing to be eaten by jackals instead of wolves.

    1. Re:So the twins want to open an exchange ... by Time_Ngler · · Score: 2

      A long time ago, gold was only used to make jewelry and trinkets, and few people had use for it. But it was rare, so demand always outstripped supply which meant the price stayed relatively high. It was also lightweight, durable, easy split, and comparatively easy to distinguish the real thing versus fakes. It was around the best store of value available in the day. So eventually people who had no need for it's original uses as jewelry, used it as such. This increased the amount of value a piece of gold could have, which in turn, increased its demand. Eventually this feedback loop slowed and came into equilabrium and this is how gold became so valuable today.

      Sure there are crashes and bubbles but the price of gold always is a premium over its use as a trade good, because it also is a convienent store of value.

      BTC also is useful to a small group of people, where bureaucratic red tape, high fees, and/or lack of trust makes trading with traditional currencies less convienent. And it too is useful as a store of value. You can hold 0.0001 as easily as 1 million BTC. You can transfer it quick and easily to anyone. You can even plausibly deny you own it. This gives it the status of best store of value for some use cases, today. So, I believe, eventually it, too, will go through same feedback loop that gold did.

    2. Re: So the twins want to open an exchange ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except you can clone it into an instant competitor and the ming speculators will follow you screams like gold prospectors

    3. Re: So the twins want to open an exchange ... by Time_Ngler · · Score: 2

      But what about first mover advantage? The stability and security of bitcoin is far ahead of all the other crypto currencies.

    4. Re: So the twins want to open an exchange ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bitcoin has the "first mover advantage" in currencies in the same way Esperanto has the first mover advantage in languages.
      It's larger than some of the other esoteric alternatives, but not large enough that anyone but crazies give a shit.

      If push came to shove, a corporation like IBM or Apple could easily position their own alternative, not to mention the combined might of the US financial sector.
      Push won't come to shove though because the technology and economy behind Bitcoin is mostly shite.

    5. Re: So the twins want to open an exchange ... by Canth7 · · Score: 1

      Except you can clone it into an instant competitor and the ming speculators will follow you screams like gold prospectors

      Sure, lots of me-too clones have cropped up - however, the vast majority of investors/users aren't fooled. Alt-coins make up less than 10% of the market, all combined. Clearly first mover has a ton of advantage in terms of adoption, investment and developer time.

  19. The "anything but PayPal" crowd by tepples · · Score: 1

    Bitcoin [spawns] payment gateways that evolve into PayPal equivalents (once they're big enough they cut Bitcoin out of the loop).

    But the important part of these is that they cut PayPal out of the loop. I imagine that a lot of BTC adopters got burned by some policy ruling by PayPal.

    1. Re:The "anything but PayPal" crowd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually PayPal is adopting Bitcoin, so apparently we live in crazy town now.

  20. Pump and dump by roman_mir · · Score: 1

    So what they want to do is pump the value of BTC up so they can dump their 'largest holding of bitcoin'.

    --
    You can't handle the truth.
    1. Re:Pump and dump by ArcadeMan · · Score: 0

      I heard they want to exchange their Bitcoins for Dogecoins.

      Dogecoins to the moon!

      --
      Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
  21. What would it take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...to never see or hear the Winkie twins, again? Can we set up a Gofundme account, calling it "Go fucking away!"? Either one would be one of the most annoying people extant. Together, they are like digitally amplified versions of the demonic Grady twins. Yuck!

  22. bitcoin is circling the drain, but.... by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If the Winkletwins want to hype it up long enough so that I can dispose of the last of my BTC stash while 1BTC is still over US$200, I'm game.

    Having bitcoins kept in a US bank seems to defeat the purpose of bitcoin, but it it helps me with my previous point, then by golly, full speed ahead.

    1. Re:bitcoin is circling the drain, but.... by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      If the Winkletwins want to hype it up long enough so that I can dispose of the last of my BTC stash while 1BTC is still over US$200, I'm game.

      Having bitcoins kept in a US bank seems to defeat the purpose of bitcoin, but it it helps me with my previous point, then by golly, full speed ahead.

      And that's the entire point.

      The WInklevoss bought BTC when it was probably $500 or higher - and supposedly they own around 10% of all BTC.

      And now that the price crashed from $1300 each to $250 or so, well, damn, they lost a lot of money.

      The whole point of the regulated exchange is supposedly to keep the price up and give it more legitimacy - I'm sure they saw that BTC was used for Silk Road and other illicit transactions and when Silk Road got busted, well, the fact its value was propped up by illegal activities hurt them. So they want to transform it into a legitimate business whose value is driven by "legitimate" economic activity over say, criminal activity.

    2. Re:bitcoin is circling the drain, but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Winklevii, it is generally accepted, purchased their bitcoin around the $0-10 range.

  23. Knock off the bullshit ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 0

    ... the whole point of BTC was to "Silk Road" stuff.

    I said at the outset that BTC would die a painful death the minute it grew an appendage that touched any real currency.

    That has already happened and now they want to tie it to a goddam legitimate bank and guarantee it?

    Why in Sam Hill would anyone want to use Monopoly play money as a transient carrier for real money?

    Dude ... the emperor ain't got no clothes.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    1. Re:Knock off the bullshit ... by ihtoit · · Score: 1

      define "real money"?

      The US Dollar is backed against itself. It is a fiat, or debt currency.
      As is Sterling (which used to be backed by the Gold Standard, then it was the Silver Standard, now it's backed by guarantee of the Treasury which means about as much as... well, not a lot, actually).
      As is the Euro.

      The last time any Western economy had a real currency was 1914 when the Bradbury was issued. This was backed by the authority of the Crown, hence everything owned by the Crown, and was initially intended solely to prevent a run on Sterling and enable the purchase of war materials. It was replaced by the Bank of England fiat note in 1928.

      --
      Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
  24. I sense a shitstorm approaching by slashmydots · · Score: 1

    Oh yes, let's take a complete circus run by lunatics (the bitcoin network) and attach it to a regulated exchange. How are they going to prove the bitcoins added to the exchange were obtained legally? Anyone thinking of FDIC "loss" fraud will be occurring daily? Then how do you prove your customers are actually in the US? Then how do you report on profit from investment without proving or disproving that offsetting losses were incurred at a different exchange? This is such an unbelievably stupid and impossible idea, I can't even believe they're thinking of it.

  25. Twins? by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

    They are both actually the same person.

  26. It's unconstitutional by SeatcheInpericulisau · · Score: 0

    Article 1 Only Congress is allowed to produce any currency, whether it be sticks, stones or electronic currency. Congress elected to use the Federal Reserve Bank as the entity that CONGRESS authorizes to "print" money. Only the monies produced under the authority of Congress can be backed by the Reserve and guaranteed to follow FDIC regulation. Section 8: Congress To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures Section. 10. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. I will, under no circumstance allow those two spoiled rich-boys de-stablize our monetary system with their idiot schemes. Yea you two doofuses, if it smells like PONZI, it's PONZI. So, kiss off.

    1. Re:It's unconstitutional by SeatcheInpericulisau · · Score: 1

      Don't even think of considering bit coin as a commodity.

      First off, the name, "Coin" is used in the name "Bit Coin" to refer to some form of currency, and is treated as such, thus it is a form of currency.

      Secondly, bit-coin doesn't fit the common definitions of commodity:
      noun a raw material or primary agricultural product that can be bought and sold, such as copper or coffee.
      Another definition of commodity is: an article of trade or commerce, especially a product as distinguished from a service.

      Bit-coin is not a tangible item or article. It is a measure of value in an electronic form, produced by an UNAUTHORIZED entity. In my opinion, anyone who deals with bit-coin should be prosecuted and jailed.

    2. Re:It's unconstitutional by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Congress doesn't create money anymore and they haven't for a very long time. The Federal Reserve, in an amazingly unfamous coup, overthrew the federal government by usurping one of government's most important powers. Now the Fed creates money in violation of the Us constitution,

    3. Re:It's unconstitutional by Canth7 · · Score: 1

      Wow - just because it has "Coin" in the name hasn't stopped the CFTC from calling it a commodity. Somehow, I think their opinion matters more than yours does. And seriously, anyone that thinks that someone who deals in tokens produced by unauthorized entities should be jailed just doesn't understand math. Every self-signed certificate is an "unauthorized" item. Anyone that works with prime numbers creates "unauthorized" work. The same holds true for digital works of art. Troll harder, moron.

  27. Blockchain on capped Internet by tepples · · Score: 1

    By this definition, your Internet service provider is a third party. If the blockchain is really several gigabytes, that can be more than a month of the typical data quota on cellular Internet, satellite Internet, or Iowa DSL, all of which are billed by the bit.

  28. Gemini Exchange by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, Gemini Exchange is already an SEC regulated exchange fro the trading of listed options, a subsidiary of the International Securities Exchange, which is owned by Deutsche Borse. So the Winklevi will need a different name.

  29. Winklevoss Twins win again with this one by bcoinbilly · · Score: 1

    A great move for the Winklevoss Twins. This gives bitcoin some much needed credibility.