pull down to refresh

A Piece Of History - An Early Bitcoin Article
2303 sats \ 13 comments \ @siggy47 18 Feb bitcoin
I found this article Trace Mayer wrote about bitcoin in January of 2011. It's kind of an historical artifact:
https://www.howtovanish.com/the-best-financial-privacy-is-here-probably/
I found this passage interesting:
The risk is currently very low that anyone who engages in the business of exchanging national currencies for Bitcoins within jurisdiction of US federal law will be subject to regulation as a Money Service Business.
I don't think Samourai and Tornado cash devs would agree!
Disney is not listed as a registered Money Service Business for selling Disney Dollars. Washington D.C. area businesses trade in a local currency called Potomacs to support local businesses, but nobody is registered as an MSB to exchange those. Even virtual currencies like those used in World of Warcraft or Second Life, which regularly are exchanged for national currencies, have never given rise to registration requirements. But, none of those currencies ever posed a threat to the power of the money printing press that central banks now enjoy.
write
preview
related posts
150 sats \ 7 replies \ @IamSINGLE 19 Feb
When I listen about these private currencies (or some cultural ones), I think State cannot force us to use any currency. It's our choice and it's all I see in India when a villager comes to town with a sack of grain to exchange it for other items.
reply
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 19 Feb
The state is content as long as alternatives to its fiat monopoly do not get too big. They will tolerate barter because it is very difficult to outlaw. In the case of Bitcoin which does (did?) have the potential to be used as a MoE globally and extensively they have acted very slyly and successfully to prevent Bitcoin becoming a serious threat to their MoE hegemony. In case you have not noticed within a few years US institutions will hold custody of most bitcoin ever produced. They have slyly and successfully shifted the narrative of Bitcoin from a P2P protocol to a speculative commodity...in such a form it poses little if any threat to their fiat MoE hegemony.
reply
28 sats \ 5 replies \ @IamSINGLE 19 Feb
I've noticed it. I've also noticed that African and LatAm countries now turning more and more towards Bitcoin Circular Economies.
The narrative shift won't come from America, Americans are too lazy, it'll be from poorer countries.
reply
0 sats \ 4 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 19 Feb
I hope so but the amount being accumulated by the US institutions is significant and their monetary hegemony extends globally via the USD and so their reach is global...and they want to keep it. Trump threatened BRICS members recently not to further their ideas on a BRICSPay MoE. The USA is hugely reliant upon retaining its global monetary hegemony and will work to retain it.
reply
21 sats \ 3 replies \ @IamSINGLE 19 Feb
Ok. I'm in a mood to talk to bots 😂.
Here's a spoiler Alert:
If US government and institutions retain most of Bitcoin in future and try to rekt us, well, we'll give them a lollipop in the form of a fork and start using the standard. It's technology my bot friend, they can't store it forever. Technology needs to be spent.
reply
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 19 Feb
Bitcoin can be used however anyone holding custody of it chooses and ETFs and similar US institutional custodians of Bitcoin do not use it to enable P2P payments- they expressly prevent that portion of the protocol being used for P2P.
They have done this in addition to governmens almost universally imposing tax requirements that make use of Bitcoin for MoE effectively impractical except for most people who want to remain within the law.
Banks have also threatened businesses who accept Bitcoin with debanking and KYCed the vast majority of holders. Even citizens buying Bitcoin are sometimes debanked. There is no appeal to such sanctions - the banks own your government.
All this combined has resulted in Bitcoin now being almost exclusively held as a speculative commodity and very rarely used as a MoE.
I hope these multiple obstructions to Bitcoinss use as a MoE can be overcome but I see very little recognition of the size, scale and reality of the problem by the Bitcoin community and so am not sure they will be. Most Bitcoiners present as if they just want more Hopium, FOMO and NGU - to add to their speculative commodity gains.
When raising these concerns it is common to be labelled a bot or statist or other derogatory terms - somehow the respondents thinking they can ostracise me and the points I raise ~ because they do not want to confront or respond in a reasoned manner to the points I raise but instead would rather chase me out of the village yelling names - they I say are trolls the traitors to the ethos and intent of Bitcoin...
BTW to answer to your idea of a fork solving the problem, it is possible but not a probable solution as the value is held in the primary blockchain and that is where the institutions are buying in to. They know that the creation of Bitcoin is probably a one off event and to build the critical mass that it has is not something easily replicated- others have tried already forking off the core protocol and failed as have the many thousands of shitcoins. The perception and use of Bitcoin by most Bitcoiners is already that it is a speculative commodity, not a P2P payments protocol- the fiat powers have already all but captured and controlled the narrative and thus the protocol. A few farmers markets and 3rd world stall holders will not worry them greatly as long as they hold the majority narrative and prevent Bitcoin becoming a real and actual widespread alternative to their fiat MoE hegemony.
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @IamSINGLE 19 Feb
As I said Technology can't be stored forever. First of all its not so easy for institutions and governments to take hold all of Bitcoin, not as technology, even if they be successful, we Bitcoiners always reserve the right to alter their hold of power by creating or advancing towards more powerful tech.
They are doing it right now because they see us divided. Over the time we all become united, were becoming, and then there will be no stopping.
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 19 Feb
They do not need to hold custody of all Bitcoin. They only need to control the majority use and narrative and they already have achieved that.
They don't care if a few marginal communities and villages are using Bitcoin as a P2P payments protocol. What they do care about is that Bitcoin does not become a widely used payments protocol and they have already achieved that.
You say we will become united- this is pure baseless hopium nonsense.
Ask yourself this question- If the US government introduced a ban on private custody of Bitcoin (backed by assertions of moneylaundering and tax evasion etc and the argument that you can still invest in Bitcoin via trusted institutional custodians eg ETFs) ) and offered all private citizen US Bitcoin holders a buyout at market price how many hodlers do you think would accept?
Based on historical evidence and human nature it would be 90%+. See E.O. 6102.
Most Bitcoiners would surrender their coins as to not would leave their speculative asset outside of the law and it could only be sold privately and illegally, probably at a significant discount to market price.
But as things stand it is unlikely they need to ever use an E.O. ban - as they have already managed to shift the vast majority narrative and use of Bitcoin from that of a P2P payments protocol to that of a KYCed speculative commodity (increasingly held by institutional custodians) that is very rarely used as a payments protocol and increasingly is not held by anyone who would use it in that way.
reply on another page
99 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 19 Feb
reply
46 sats \ 0 replies \ @0xbitcoiner 18 Feb
This gold shovel is well deserved, a great find!
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @expatriotic 20 Feb
Wow that second quote block is thought provoking. Even the very fact that Bitcoin is legally a commodity/property should suffice to keep open source devs like Samourai Wallet and TDev from being attacked, and they don't even allow for swapping in and out of dollars!!
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @kepford 19 Feb
The risk is currently very low that anyone who engages in the business of exchanging national currencies for Bitcoins within jurisdiction of US federal law will be subject to regulation as a Money Service Business.
The classic mistake of using actual logic to determine what the government will do. Never underestimate how lawyers can twist interpretation.
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @DarthCoin 19 Feb
Looks like Trace Meyer didn't vanished hahahaha https://xcancel.com/TheBitcoinConf/status/1891599404605260125
reply