Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

techtake.info

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 55 posts

Re: Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

#11

Post by nicky0 »

IncRnd wrote: post #7
gitgud wrote: post #2

I am not sure how this could possibly work. To govern and regulate a public block-chain is fundamentally against what they stand for. A public block-chain-based cryptocurrency is meant to be resistant to government forces. They shouldn't be allowed to enforce rules on who or what you trade. A better approach would be to regulate the exchanges, which is probably not too far off. However, even in this case decentralise…

> To govern and regulate a public block-chain is fundamentally against what they stand for. A block-chain has no stance for or against anything. Saying that a block-chain could be for or against governance is similar to saying that b*trees are pro-life.

Decentralisation and censorship resistance are fundamental properties of Bitcoin.

Re: Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

#14

Post by neilwilson »

Eventually software people will work out what fiat money is - a way for a state to obtain service.

Since you need the states money to pay taxes and you need to obtain it or be jailed then there will always be exchanges. So you just regulate on the state money side of the fence and ban all exchange transactions into the states money that cannot prove their source.

Once enough people have been burned in the Wild West the fad will fade to an eclectic elite. Just like buying fine art.

And the stuff that's useful - like decoupling your account from the transaction provider - will be adopted by state currencies.

Re: Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

#17

Post by runeks »

In my opinion, this article conflates two separate phenomena: technology and politics.

Bitcoin is technology. It’s assembling different parts into a tool that people can choose to use. Much like a car is assembled from different parts.

Regulation is politics. It’s a social phenomenon that concerns how we use the tools offered to us by technology.

The issue is that most, if not all, tools can be used both ethically and unethically. This reveals the fact that regulation has nothing to do with the tool itself, which means trying to modify the tool itself — as a form of regulation — doesn’t make sense, since it ends up hurting the people who use the tool for doing good.

By all means, prosecute people who break the law, but do we really need to regulate the shape and size of vases, such that they can’t be used to hit a spouse over the head during an argument?

Re: Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

#18

Post by alokashtikar »

The regulatory nodes seem to have created quite a stir! I believe this stir is partly because it is being viewed as a central authority to control the blockchain. This is an incorrect understanding of the proposal.

The top node of the hierarchy of regulation can be created by anyone.

However, those who want to legitimately (within their jurisdictions) use blockchains to improve the experience of transfer of coins (not just money, could be equity as well) can use it with the regulatory framework of the country.

Also, we must not forget that unregulated blockchains are being used as a bridge to transfer money between the legal and the illegal businesses.

By adopting the regulatory nodes framework, the transfer of coins will happen only between (or within) "well intended" regulations.

Re: Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

#19

Post by pelasaco »

alokashtikar wrote: post #18

The regulatory nodes seem to have created quite a stir! I believe this stir is partly because it is being viewed as a central authority to control the blockchain. This is an incorrect understanding of the proposal. The top node of the hierarchy of regulation can be created by anyone. However, those who want to legitimately (within their jurisdictions) use blockchains to improve the experience of transfer of coins (no…

> Also, we must not forget that unregulated blockchains are being used as a bridge to transfer money between the legal and the illegal businesses.

sure, without Blockchain, in the "regulated" way, there was no money washing scheme and illegal business couldn't transfer money.. right

Re: Technical feasibility of regulating public Blockchain explored

#20

Post by runeks »

alokashtikar wrote: post #18

The regulatory nodes seem to have created quite a stir! I believe this stir is partly because it is being viewed as a central authority to control the blockchain. This is an incorrect understanding of the proposal. The top node of the hierarchy of regulation can be created by anyone. However, those who want to legitimately (within their jurisdictions) use blockchains to improve the experience of transfer of coins (no…

If adopting this technology is voluntary, it has nothing to do with regulation. It would simply be a superior protocol, that people choose to use.

“Voluntary regulation” is an oxymoron.

> Also, we must not forget that unregulated blockchains are being used as a bridge to transfer money between the legal and the illegal businesses.

Nor must we forget that many countries, like Argentina, make it illegal for people to save up for retirement in currencies that are less inflationary than the national currency.

In these countries, this makes saving up in bitcoins illegal activity. But it should be clear who’s committing a crime against whom (the government against the people).

Bitcoin was built for exactly this purpose: to fight against government regulation whose purpose is only the survival of government at the expense of the people, as opposed to being a service to the people.

Post reply on HN