Slashdot Mirror
Australia Joins China and Japan in Trying To Regulate Digital Currency Exchanges (cnbc.com)
Following moves by China and Japan to regulate digital currencies, Australia is attempting to crackdown on money laundering and terrorism financing with plans to regulate bitcoin exchanges. From a report: "The threat of serious financial crime is constantly evolving, as new technologies emerge and criminals seek to nefariously exploit them. These measures ensure there is nowhere for criminals to hide," said Australia's Minister for Justice Michael Keenan in a press release. The Australian government proposed a set of reforms on Thursday which will close a gap in regulation and bring digital currency exchange providers under the remit of the Australian Transactions and Reporting Analysis Centre. These exchanges serve as marketplaces where traders can buy and sell digital currencies, such as bitcoin, using fiat currencies, such as the dollar. The reform bill is intended to strengthen the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act and increase the powers of AUSTRAC.
I get that things like digital currencies can be used to money launder and fund nefarious activity, but can anything be sacred anymore? What about the mining aspect? Is big brother going to monitor GPU usage too?
Just me
I mean sure crime and money laundering bad, absolutely, but people can simply bargain goods for a lot of that too, so there is a work around. The real issue is pure fear that they lose control of money, which they waste so much of. It's a hard stance for me personally since regulation to prevent money laundering is important (We need our paved roads, taxes pay for them, people need to be paying their taxes) but it takes the ability to manipulate money and hose everyone as easily like certain countries whose dollar dropped to near nothing.
Uplink Hosting - Web/email at an affordable price with high performance - https://uplinkhosting.ca/link.php?id=3
The first time I ever heard of 'Bitcoin', the first thing I thought was "this will be used for money laundering, hiding assets, and trafficking in contraband and for other illegal activities, guaranteed" and steered entirely clear of it. I knew that at some point governments would, one way or another, take control of it, for good or for ill.
Don't even pretend you're surprised this is happening, and don't even bother to act all righteously indignated over it, either, you're just being over-the-top disingenuous if you do.
There's no social benefit to gold, and they encourage ransomware and fraud.
Just outlaw the exchange of currency for gold mediums of exchange and it will no longer have any value as a ransomware tool.
There's no social benefit to US dollars, and they encourage ransomware and fraud.
Just outlaw the exchange of currency for US dollars mediums of exchange and it will no longer have any value as a ransomware tool.
There's no social benefit to [Insert currencey], and they encourage ransomware and fraud.
I bet you didn't think about this when you posted this. You can still get cash deposited into a bank that your government doesn't have access to, convert the cash to bonds, sell the bonds for gold, convert the gold to cash. Takes a few more steps but the end result is the same.
There's no social benefit to blockchain-based 'coins', and they encourage ransomware and fraud.
Haven't scammers used Western Union to get people to pay for ransomware exploits from people? Should we ban Western Union? How does this increase fraud? A bitcoin can be verified because of the blockchain.
I think it'd end up like this, though:
You can't coordinate every government everywhere on making it illegal to exchange currency for it.
That means an exchange could exist in a country without said legislation.
Then, the exchange just takes "Somali Buttfucks" or whatever the currency is.
Then, people in Somalia with Somali Buttfucks set up sites exchanging for dollars, and then buy the Bitcoin and (may or may not) transfer them to the person buying them.
Etc. Plenty of ways to work around an exchange ban.
Really what we are witnessing are neckbeards accidentally marketing a money laundering tool due to deep seated Ayn Rand complexes and lack of basic financial theory knowledge.
Japan recognizes Bitcoin as a legal form of payment. This helps, not hurt, Bitcoin. If they considered Bitcoin harmful they would not have done that. One of the factors pushing Bitcoin up to such high levels is the Japanese consumer who is now empowered by the Japanese government legalizing Bitcoin.
https://www.coindesk.com/japan...
Bitcoin Surpasses $4,000 Due to Strong Japanese Demand: CNBC
https://cointelegraph.com/news......
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Translation: "OMG, people are transacting business in unregulated free markets without the heavy hand of government being able to scoop out its pound of flesh or pay off its cronies."
Well, good luck with that. I'm sure it's going to be just as effective as trying to repeal the laws of mathematics.
Mr. Keenan: you're an ignorant, totalitarian prick, and you'll be the laughing stock of future generations, provided that you are lucky enough that they'll remember you at all.
A centralized governing body moves to control decentralized banking. Right, of course. God forbid the control of capital is given back to the people. Or that it cannot be easily controlled and manipulated by a handful of deep state actors. We can't have people exchanging goods and services among themselves using a system that isn't easily monitored, tracked, and controlled! That's madness.
You give these fuckers a taste of total tyrannical control of the monetary system and suddenly they believe it's their god-given right to reach down into everyone's private lives and business.
Have the originator of the digital currency declare that all of the currency used to pay ransom will not be recognized as valid. Before you pay a ransom, notify the originator. The originator will verify the validity of the units of currency transferred to the ransomer, but any further transfers will not be validated.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
So, you don't understand cryptocurrencies.
We get it.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
I am going to call shenanigans on this.
The government just prints more money and the people who get dumped on are ordinary working people who don't get raises and have to pay higher prices for EVERYTHING from the inflation.
Outlaw government stealth taxes and keep their Weimar, dystopian fingers out of our pockets.
It's too bad that there aren't any statistics out there for "legit" Bitcoin transactions versus the ones used for things like ransomware, money laundering, kiddie porn, and illegal drugs.
My hunch is that the latter would greatly outweigh the former.
Modest inflation is part of a healthy economy. You really need to understand why before you start calling for the implementation of methods to eliminate it (or even, at a minimum, government control of it via diluting of currency in circulation).
That's great, except that the founder of Bitcoin is a mysterious shadow figure that goes by a pseudonym. Besides, the real future of Bitcoin is basically in the hands of a few large Chinese mining organizations at this point. I doubt that they give a damn what it's being used for... they just want the newly minted coins and the transaction fees.
Likely far better than you since you're obviously a proponent of them, which indicates you're a fool or idiot or some combination thereof.
"You really need to know why" sounds like you have super secret reasons that are inarguable and perhaps, subtly, wearing the mantle of Keynes.
I see two or three flawed premises there.
Slashdot doesn't have the capacity to carry the conversation required to educate you; you are necessarily profoundly ignorant on the subject given your previous post.
"You really need to know why" is shorthand for "Go take a series of courses in economics before you want to argue about economics". Understanding the current working theories is important before you want to credibly claim the theories are wrong.
If your position is that in your ignorance you know more than people who have dedicated years to studying economies and examining the findings of those who have gone before them... there's no hope for you.
The two fundamental ones have to do with population growth and discouraging hoarding.
As the population grows you get economic growth and to represent that growth you need more money going around.
With regards to hoarding it is better for the ecconamy if people put their money to work, so engineering a system where a dollar is worth more now than it will be tomorrow encourages you to buy a dollar's share in something that will create value (say a textiles factory) today rather than holding onto the dollar.
There is more to it than that, but that's the version that can be explained in a short post and without relying on more than a freshman curriculum in basic theory.
If you could do that again tonight, I'd appreciate it. I want to watch the game.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
The real criminals are those in power who dare to tread on our freedoms and liberties. They steal our money and implement immoral wealth redistribution schemes both toward corporations and persons. There is nothing immoral about donating to charity. However put into a government mandated scheme that involves violence, theft, and kidnapping, and the elimination of our rights, privacy, and freedom it becomes unethical and immoral. We wouldn't need anti-money legislation if the government wasn't stealing 70-90% of individuals wealth. The vast majority of people can't afford to survive without these schemes simply because the government has already stolen their money. We've all been made dependants of the state. Even the poorest individuals would be seriously better off if left to direct their funds appropriately. The programs governments thrust on us all have serious running costs. And don't eve get me started about how the poor receive more than they contribute. That's just non-sense and requires the total disregard of the hidden taxes and fees (from hidden taxes on foods/goods as is the case in much of the world to the hidden taxes in the USA: 15% tax on people's individual income that the employer pays and another 15% you actually see removed from your paycheck for example- to the vehicle registration 'fees'- just because they don't call them taxes doesn't mean government isn't stealing from you).
If you'd rather retain control over your future, your money, your liberties, and your freedom, and generally do as you please short of actual violence (murder, dumping toxic waste, etc) join me and the Free State Project in New Hampshire:
http://www.freestateproject.org/
Life is risk and laws that aim to reduce minor risks at the expensive of liberties and freedom are immoral. Whether we are talking censorship (of ANYTHING including white supremacists groups and illicit distasteful pornography) or drivers licenses.
Drivers licenses may be well intended but actually they were devised as a control mechanism during the days of the horse and buggy by people who disliked auto mobiles (and later people argued 'safety'), and are more of a control mechanism today and have little to do with actual safety- courts routinely suspend/delay drivers licenses for graffiti, child support, and many other things- and rights are suppose to supersede everything else- and you have a right to travel, but reality is you don't because without a drivers license you can't access the majority of this country. Some states drivers licenses didn't require any written or driving test as late as 1969.
Govenment = taxes = taking money from people
No government will long tolerate a form of commerce and/or payments where it cannot [1] take its "fair share" and [2] track and analyze the financial transactions enough to know it is getting its "fair share". Things like BitCoin can be tolerated when they are little-used and bothering with them is not worth the trouble, but if they look to be gaining traction or setting legal precedents intervension WILL HAPPEN.
Want less of this? You need to support MUCH smaller government. Something at least as small as JFK had, but probably pre-FDR levels. Small government still wants its cut of the action, but it wants a much smaller cut.
Most of the big exchanges that operate in Australian dollars (and support deposits from Australian banks) already require a 100 point identity check, and gather and track all the information required for AUSTRAC compliance.
And the offshore exchanges will continue to be offshore exchanges.