Bitcoin app rejected by Apple • Hacker News Board

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#71

Post by weavejester » Sun, May 08, 2011, 10:35 AM UTC

joe_the_user wrote: post #43

weavejester wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. Where Bitcoin might run into trouble is the trading of bitcoins for dollars or commodities. Depending on how bitcoins are classified legally, there may be additional regulati…

There is no doubt that bitcoins will fall under one or another regulations. One argument would be that bitcoin is an illegal pyramid scheme. Another would be that bitcoin is means circumvent the tax system (all barter and local currency systems, for example, have to pay taxes). I'm sure many other arguments could be found.

Actually there's a lot of doubt. Bitcoins are not a pyramid scheme, and whilst they could be used as a method to circumvent tax, any skilled accountant can already suggest a dozen other means to achieve the same thing.

Bitcoins are probably most at risk from being classified as a type of security, which would put them under the scope of a large number of financial regulations. It wouldn't make them illegal, but it would make them more difficult to trade.

However, in general I'm optimistic about Bitcoin's chances. I certainly don't believe it is inevitable that they will be regulated out of existence.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#72

Post by weavejester » Sun, May 08, 2011, 10:48 AM UTC

Joakal wrote: post #47

weavejester wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. Where Bitcoin might run into trouble is the trading of bitcoins for dollars or commodities. Depending on how bitcoins are classified legally, there may be additional regulati…

It is likely to be illegal; banking without a licence, not revealing the ownership, etc. Look at E-Gold's fall: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/06/e-gold/

How do those apply to bitcoin?

E-Gold was a private organization that allowed people to open anonymous accounts backed by gold. I can see how this could be construed as a bank.

Bitcoins are not backed by anything, and are not managed or owned by any organization. I don't think you could classify the Bitcoin network as a "bank", any more than you could classify any random crowd of people as a bank.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#73

Post by cookiecaper » Sun, May 08, 2011, 11:02 AM UTC

weavejester wrote: post #15

thinkcomp wrote: post #2

This really should not be a surprise to anyone. If Bitcoin is not already illegal (and I have reason to believe it is due to most states' money transmitter laws), it's almost guaranteed that it will be soon.

I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. Where Bitcoin might run into trouble is the trading of bitcoins for dollars or commodities. Depending on how bitcoins are classified legally, there may be additional regulati…

I don't see much point in this kind of rationalization. We know that it's probably not technically illegal to run the bitcoin network. I'm sure they'll find some way to postulate that btc as a currency is technically illegal, but even if they didn't, you have to know that everything that is big in government and the power scene right now is going to collude to take btc out of the picture as far as possible. They are going to marginalize and destroy it as much as they can.

The government hates it because it's difficult to track the money; they'll claim it's used for terrorism, money laundering, and other forms of illegal funding, and as you know, once such a claim is solidified in the public psyche it doesn't really matter what statute the actual legal charge is based on. They'll also hate it because it makes taxation much more difficult. You may argue that cash does the same, but cash still originates and terminates in the government's officially sponsored banking system and it bears official government markings that are used to track its movement. Cash has also been (intentionally) corralled into disuse by the major financial players (governments, banks, huge businesses).

The banks will hate it because it cuts them out of their usual money-shifting shenanigans, which are both obscenely profitable and generally amoral, if not in principle, then in practice due to gouging and misrepresentation.

Bitcoin allows easy and practically free e-commerce. Bitcoin allows for extremely innovative new banking interfaces and practices. Bitcoin is at least practically if not technically unbound by the onerous regulations and rules that bankers have installed for themselves to help control which people are allowed to play with them. Banks aren't going to like that kind of competition at all.

Bitcoin is in for it as soon as any kind of normal usage begins to occur. It is silly to pretend otherwise. I have extremely high doubts that btc will be allowed to stand; the only way I can see that happening is intervention from US intelligence services, requesting that btc be allowed to continue to operate without molestation because of that agency's specific plans for the platform.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#74

Post by nicpottier » Sun, May 08, 2011, 11:03 AM UTC

narrator wrote: post #61

thinkcomp wrote: post #2

This really should not be a surprise to anyone. If Bitcoin is not already illegal (and I have reason to believe it is due to most states' money transmitter laws), it's almost guaranteed that it will be soon.

Why would it be illegal if bitcoins are never exchanged for dollars? I know it's totally utterly contrary to human nature, but if everyone got up tomorrow and left their wallets at home and took things from stores with the consent of the owner and went to work, but received no pay, and stood in line at the soup kitchen and did not take from stores if they felt they had not contributed to the society, would that be il…

this!

Not sure why you were downvoted, but you nail it. It's all an illusion.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#75

Post by true_religion » Sun, May 08, 2011, 11:04 AM UTC

shasta wrote: post #36

Natsu wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nah, they'd do an analysis and say that it ends at exactly 1 cm away from the end of one's nose or whatever. Then people would complain that it wasn't fair, because they intended to stop at 1 cm, but actually stopped at 0.99 cm and that should be close enough. And then someone would try to drag relativity into play and question what reference frame we should be measuring that 1 cm in and things would go downhill from…

Right, because while you and I are able to see absurdity of that, these super intelligent geeks you have in mind wouldn't be able to.

He's going with the "geeks are blind to common sense" fallacy.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#76

Post by Tichy » Sun, May 08, 2011, 11:33 AM UTC

narrator wrote: post #61

thinkcomp wrote: post #2

This really should not be a surprise to anyone. If Bitcoin is not already illegal (and I have reason to believe it is due to most states' money transmitter laws), it's almost guaranteed that it will be soon.

Why would it be illegal if bitcoins are never exchanged for dollars? I know it's totally utterly contrary to human nature, but if everyone got up tomorrow and left their wallets at home and took things from stores with the consent of the owner and went to work, but received no pay, and stood in line at the soup kitchen and did not take from stores if they felt they had not contributed to the society, would that be il…

It could actually be illegal if it would turn out to be a scheme for evading tax payments. For example I think you can not simply start exchanging goods for services and quit paying taxes because you don't make money - somehow you have to make a statement to the tax office.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#77

Post by rmc » Sun, May 08, 2011, 12:03 PM UTC

weavejester wrote: post #15

thinkcomp wrote: post #2

This really should not be a surprise to anyone. If Bitcoin is not already illegal (and I have reason to believe it is due to most states' money transmitter laws), it's almost guaranteed that it will be soon.

I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. Where Bitcoin might run into trouble is the trading of bitcoins for dollars or commodities. Depending on how bitcoins are classified legally, there may be additional regulati…

So essentially you're saying they can't make bitcoin illegal, just make it completely illegal to use in any practical manner. That sounds like making bitcoin illegal.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#78

Post by patio11 » Sun, May 08, 2011, 12:23 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #76

narrator wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it be illegal if bitcoins are never exchanged for dollars? I know it's totally utterly contrary to human nature, but if everyone got up tomorrow and left their wallets at home and took things from stores with the consent of the owner and went to work, but received no pay, and stood in line at the soup kitchen and did not take from stores if they felt they had not contributed to the society, would that be il…

It could actually be illegal if it would turn out to be a scheme for evading tax payments. For example I think you can not simply start exchanging goods for services and quit paying taxes because you don't make money - somehow you have to make a statement to the tax office.

Try this on for size: if someone offers to trade me a week of their time for a week of my time (do NOT do this, please, as it makes little sense for me and even less for you), and I say yes, then I have a legal obligation to a) declare the fair market value of your time as income I received for services and b) file a form with the IRS saying that I paid you something of value equivalent to my usual consulting rate for the week. You then get taxed at your usual rate on that implied income, despite no dollar changing hands. (That would almost certainly be several thousand dollars in taxes.)

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#79

Post by weavejester » Sun, May 08, 2011, 2:27 PM UTC

rmc wrote: post #77

weavejester wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. Where Bitcoin might run into trouble is the trading of bitcoins for dollars or commodities. Depending on how bitcoins are classified legally, there may be additional regulati…

So essentially you're saying they can't make bitcoin illegal, just make it completely illegal to use in any practical manner. That sounds like making bitcoin illegal.

That's not what I said at all.

Regulation does not necessarily mean "make it completely illegal". Food is regulated, but that doesn't mean the government has made it illegal (or even difficult) to eat.

Re: Bitcoin app rejected by Apple

#80

Post by weavejester » Sun, May 08, 2011, 2:37 PM UTC

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #66

weavejester wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I doubt Bitcoin will be made illegal. By itself, the Bitcoin network is just a mechanism for passing around signed messages and calculating hash values. It would be difficult to outlaw that without running into constitutional free speech issues. Where Bitcoin might run into trouble is the trading of bitcoins for dollars or commodities. Depending on how bitcoins are classified legally, there may be additional regulati…

While I am sympathetic, this is the same sort of argument that was made in the past with napster and the trend of later laws has been to hold "enablers" liable (at least when it comes to copyright). Given what happened with egold I would not have much faith that the US (and western world) legal establishment will tolerate something like bitcoin. But who knows, maybe we'll get a judge who is willing to make fine disti…

Napster had a centralized search engine. Later P2P networks, like Bittorrent and Gnutella are decentralised, and no-one has yet declared those technologies illegal.

Even more so than Napster, E-Gold was very centralized, and thus an easy target. Bitcoins are an entirely decentralized network like Bittorrent or Gnutella, which have not been declared illegal.