Bitcoins banned in Thailand

[beb]

RE changes with a majority: majority of what?!

Buyers, users, developers etc.

[Briggsy]

Currencies are created by governments by the issuance of promissory notes. If you or I sell goods or services and receive say, Baht, the Central Bank is the debtor and you or I are the creditor. The 2 sides of the double-entry system are satisfied.

Quite simply, if you or I hold Bitcoins, we again are the creditor but who is the debtor if there is no central bank?

I am sorry I need somebody to answer this fundamental question regarding this 'currency'.

How about gold or silver? There is no central bank but rather only a marketplace. It's worth what someone will pay for it and it can go way up or down. You have to find your own buyer.

Now of course I'm not comparing bitcoins with PM's per se, but the principle is there. It's market driven, not government driven.

Thank you, Never Sure, for being the only person to address this question.

You have used the analogy of gold and silver to address risk issues with bitcoin. There are some fundamental and key differences though.

a) Gold and Silver are finite resources. Bitcoins can be created ad infinitum even though there is a stated limit.

Gold and Silver are physical assets with uses in industry and jewellery. There is therefore a clear value attached to its uses as there is very likely to be a level of consistency in the demand and supply equation. Bitcoin is an intangible asset and its value is only maintained if there is some demand. This demand could disappear overnight.

c) Gold and Silver are mature markets with deep traditions across many countries. They are both seen as safe havens for storing wealth and this has been the case for centuries. This diverse demand across geographical and time boundaries show that precious metals stand the test of time.

In summary, you have attempted to compare a commodity with intrinsic value with a currency backed by absolutely nothing but optimism.

My view therefore remains that both precious metals and bitcoins will continue to undergo market fluctuations but bitcoins are many, many times more volatile investment tools than precious metals. So anybody purchasing them or planning to use them to do business needs to factor this very high risk in.

[beb]

Currencies are created by governments by the issuance of promissory notes. If you or I sell goods or services and receive say, Baht, the Central Bank is the debtor and you or I are the creditor. The 2 sides of the double-entry system are satisfied.

Quite simply, if you or I hold Bitcoins, we again are the creditor but who is the debtor if there is no central bank?

I am sorry I need somebody to answer this fundamental question regarding this 'currency'.

How about gold or silver? There is no central bank but rather only a marketplace. It's worth what someone will pay for it and it can go way up or down. You have to find your own buyer.

Now of course I'm not comparing bitcoins with PM's per se, but the principle is there. It's market driven, not government driven.

Thank you, Never Sure, for being the only person to address this question.

You have used the analogy of gold and silver to address risk issues with bitcoin. There are some fundamental and key differences though.

a) Gold and Silver are finite resources. Bitcoins can be created ad infinitum even though there is a stated limit.

Gold and Silver are physical assets with uses in industry and jewellery. There is therefore a clear value attached to its uses as there is very likely to be a level of consistency in the demand and supply equation. Bitcoin is an intangible asset and its value is only maintained if there is some demand. This demand could disappear overnight.

c) Gold and Silver are mature markets with deep traditions across many countries. They are both seen as safe havens for storing wealth and this has been the case for centuries. This diverse demand across geographical and time boundaries show that precious metals stand the test of time.

In summary, you have attempted to compare a commodity with intrinsic value with a currency backed by absolutely nothing but optimism.

My view therefore remains that both precious metals and bitcoins will continue to undergo market fluctuations but bitcoins are many, many times more volatile investment tools than precious metals. So anybody purchasing them or planning to use them to do business needs to factor this very high risk in.

Sorry if I'm blowing up this thread but it's a slow day at the desk.

As I understand it, an ounce of gold has an intrinsic value of approximately $150. The rest is speculation. I understand the difficulty in overcoming the issue of a tangible object you can hold in your hand but gold is in no way a sure fire investment. When the apocalypse comes, I think I'd rather have a cow than a pound of gold.

[hawker9000]

RE changes with a majority: majority of what?!

Buyers, users, developers etc.

Well, there is a bitcoin "community" website (that hasn't included the original developer(s) = "Satoshi Nakamoto" since 2010) and a guy to email improvement proposals to at bitcoin.it . As the whole scheme seems to depend on a single block chain that conforms to a protocol and contains every transaction that has ever taken (and will ever take) place, which must be downloaded and processed by every participant in the "collective" (well, as I understand it, the "lightweight" e-wallet products don't actually do so, at the cost of some security), with no central authority, it doesn't sound like something that's very adaptable or susceptible to any major change (i.e., the ability to "innovate" new features when new rival crypto currencies crops up, as they have been). But who knows?

[beb]

RE changes with a majority: majority of what?!

Buyers, users, developers etc.

Well, there is a bitcoin "community" website (that hasn't included the original developer(s) = "Satoshi Nakamoto" since 2010) and a guy to email improvement proposals to at bitcoin.it . As the whole scheme seems to depend on a single block chain that conforms to a protocol and contains every transaction that has ever taken (and will ever take) place, which must be downloaded and processed by every participant in the "collective" (well, as I understand it, the "lightweight" e-wallet products don't actually do so, at the cost of some security), with no central authority, it doesn't sound like something that's very adaptable or susceptible to any major change (i.e., the ability to "innovate" new features when new rival crypto currencies crops up, as they have been). But who knows?

Actually this isn't something that's theory or speculation. It's happened before and will happen again. It sounds like you're doing a lot of research. Keep it up.

[pancakeman]

Well, there is a bitcoin "community" website (that hasn't included the original developer(s) = "Satoshi Nakamoto" since 2010) and a guy to email improvement proposals to at bitcoin.it . As the whole scheme seems to depend on a single block chain that conforms to a protocol and contains every transaction that has ever taken (and will ever take) place, which must be downloaded and processed by every participant in the "collective" (well, as I understand it, the "lightweight" e-wallet products don't actually do so, at the cost of some security), with no central authority, it doesn't sound like something that's very adaptable or susceptible to any major change (i.e., the ability to "innovate" new features when new rival crypto currencies crops up, as they have been). But who knows?

It's as innovative as the majority want it to be. Anyone can create an update to the software (download the source and modify it), if a majority of users start using that new version then that is the new version of bitcoin.

If the majority of users choose to stick with their current version forever, then there would be zero bitcoin innovation.

[UbonOz]

BTC is something that is really needed.

We are being robbed blind with taxes by governments that spend those taxes in most inappropriate ways, with no concern for the man in the street.

There is no way BTC or similar will go away now the cat is out of the bag.

A ban in Thailand or anywhere else will just make people more innovative and it will flourish.

All you have to do is arrange to meet somebody at a pre-arranged point and the exchange of BTC and cash is done via your smartphone, no need for an online exchange. Nil or very minimum fees.

I have read a great deal on the subject in the last couple of weeks.

Nobody knows who you are or where you are. Do you know where I am at the moment? You assume I am in Thailand, not necessarily.

Yesterday I bought four BTC, could not see any reason not to make a small investment that could possibly have significant benefits.

The world order needs a good shake up, just look at what happened in Cyprus. It will happen again but people are now taking action.

Will be very interesting to come back to this topic in twelve months time and see where it is heading.

[Naam]

BTC is something that is really needed.

We are being robbed blind with taxes by governments that spend those taxes in most inappropriate ways, with no concern for the man in the street.

please elaborate why Bitcoin will prevent governments to levy taxes.

[UbonOz]

BTC is something that is really needed.

We are being robbed blind with taxes by governments that spend those taxes in most inappropriate ways, with no concern for the man in the street.

please elaborate why Bitcoin will prevent governments to levy taxes.

All transactions are anonymous. Who can be taxed?

Obviously, tax will be paid when cash is spent in the form of GST/VAT etc. Maybe that is where they will hike up those taxes if BTC becomes part of the world economy.

[hawker9000]

BTC is something that is really needed.

We are being robbed blind with taxes by governments that spend those taxes in most inappropriate ways, with no concern for the man in the street.

There is no way BTC or similar will go away now the cat is out of the bag.

A ban in Thailand or anywhere else will just make people more innovative and it will flourish.

All you have to do is arrange to meet somebody at a pre-arranged point and the exchange of BTC and cash is done via your smartphone, no need for an online exchange. Nil or very minimum fees.

I have read a great deal on the subject in the last couple of weeks.

Nobody knows who you are or where you are. Do you know where I am at the moment? You assume I am in Thailand, not necessarily.

Yesterday I bought four BTC, could not see any reason not to make a small investment that could possibly have significant benefits.

The world order needs a good shake up, just look at what happened in Cyprus. It will happen again but people are now taking action.

Will be very interesting to come back to this topic in twelve months time and see where it is heading.

FOUR BTC! Woohoo! Actually, selling, rather than buying, BTC strikes me as being the harder to do at anything close to par, esp. in any real quantity and outside of an exchange (where you can't be anonymous). But OK, rather than rain on your parade, I'll just say you should enjoy it while it lasts...

[UbonOz]

Have a look at the link below.

http://miningbitcoins.net/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-value-of-a-bitcoin/

Plenty more "For and Against" on YouTube or Google.

I just find it all very interesting. The world cannot stand still and operate in the dark ages.

[hawker9000]

Have a look at the link below.

http://miningbitcoins.net/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-value-of-a-bitcoin/

Plenty more "For and Against" on YouTube or Google.

I just find it all very interesting. The world cannot stand still and operate in the dark ages.

Yes, you're right. Plenty for as well as against. I wouldn't bet one way the other (therefore, no buying of bitcoins in large quantities or as investments, or mining, for me). Should it ever become a strong success however, I don't think there's any arguing that the IRS (and the tax authorities of other countries) will find a way to get involved and collect what they think is their due. If it gets tarred as a terror or drug trafficking tool, then LE agencies will get involved as well. There are probably hundreds of ways to get on lists you don't want to be on; this could eventually be one.

[Morakot]

Haven't read such undifferentiated non-sense in the media for a long time.

It's highly questionable whether the pronouncement by the Foreign Exchange Administration and Policy Department (that effectively hinders the operation Bitcoin Company in Thailand), or the current absence of any legal framework, would make bitcoins illegal in Thailand.

The commentariat takes an opinion by Thai authorities for face value without any in-depth analysis.

[Gomyway]

And now Germany recognizes Bitcoins as legitimate...

[hawker9000]

And now Germany recognizes Bitcoins as legitimate...

Interesting, but what does that mean, exactly? They're treated as a foreign currency? And is that a good thing or a bad thing?

Edited August 17, 2013 by hawker9000

[Morakot]

Germany Provides Leadership for Bitcoin Tax Clarity

by Johann Summers on June 27, 2013

If the American IRS is looking for precedent for their upcoming tax guidelines related to bitcoin, they can now look to Germany. An inquest from the Bundestag(German Parliament) reported in the German language publication Die Welt declared that profits from the sale of bitcoins held as an investment are exempt from taxation if the coins are held for over one year.

http://bitcoinmagazine.com/germany-provides-leadership-for-bitcoin-tax-clarity/

Edited August 17, 2013 by Morakot

[Gomyway]

And now Germany recognizes Bitcoins as legitimate...

Interesting, but what does that mean, exactly? They're treated as a foreign currency? And is that a good thing or a bad thing?

The report in "Die Welt" newspaper says Germany recognizes Bitcoins as "Private Money".

Many questions and I think in this early stage it's not easy to answer bc it also could be understood as conspiracy.

Just think about that Germany is not going against them like the USA and at least the opposite way like Thailand where they are completly banned and maybe remind about the financial success of the last german currency the "German Mark".

At least the future will show...

[hawker9000]

And now Germany recognizes Bitcoins as legitimate...

Interesting, but what does that mean, exactly? They're treated as a foreign currency? And is that a good thing or a bad thing?

The report in "Die Welt" newspaper says Germany recognizes Bitcoins as "Private Money".

Many questions and I think in this early stage it's not easy to answer bc it also could be understood as conspiracy.

Just think about that Germany is not going against them like the USA and at least the opposite way like Thailand where they are completly banned and maybe remind about the financial success of the last german currency the "German Mark".

At least the future will show...

Sorry, that doesn't really answer my question. Of what practical significance (to bitcoin users/owners in Germany) is the fact that Germany "recognizes" them? Of what significance was the fact that Germany previously did not "recognize" them? Was it previously illegal for Germans to own bitcoins, or use them online to pay for anything? Thanks for trying, but please don't answer if you don't know.

[Gomyway]

@hawker9000 - I think nobody outside of the German government is able to answer your specific questions or can give you any solution so everything said in the moment will and must be a guess.

If you're able to read german language then please read this: http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article119104708/Deutschland-kann-die-Euro-Zone-nicht-retten.html

Here you'll find a report about this in english: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/10015593/Euro-may-only-last-five-years-says-senior-German-government-advisor.html

Maybe this could be an indication where the road is leading to (but at least it's a guess also) and in front of the german election nothing important should happen.

[hawker9000]

Can't find any mention of bitcoin in the 2nd link anywhere. Used Google Translate to try and translate the 1st link into English, and it seems to mirror the 2nd link and again, can't find any mention of bitcoin. Both seem to just be talking about the dim prospects for the euro... The only news I could find online concerning Germany and bitcoin is the 1yr holding period to avoid taxation on income from it. Concerning the U.S. and bitcoin, the most current news seems to be about a growing impression of it at the federal and state levels as a medium for money laundering and other nefarious activity.

[beb]

@hawker9000 - I think nobody outside of the German government is able to answer your specific questions or can give you any solution so everything said in the moment will and must be a guess.

If you're able to read german language then please read this: http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article119104708/Deutschland-kann-die-Euro-Zone-nicht-retten.html

Here you'll find a report about this in english: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/10015593/Euro-may-only-last-five-years-says-senior-German-government-advisor.html

Maybe this could be an indication where the road is leading to (but at least it's a guess also) and in front of the german election nothing important should happen.

Agreed that nobody can say with certainty what this ultimately means but every single event like this does mean something in the world of bitcoin. A US judge recently said that BTC is currency http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/bitcoin-is-a-currency-rules-us-judge-8770963.html What that ultimately means is unknown but it does set a precedent as far as that question is concerned.

It seems to me that people want big answers to the big questions when the big questions are actually going to be resolved over the course of a lot of little decisions.

[beb]

Can't find any mention of bitcoin in the 2nd link anywhere. Used Google Translate to try and translate the 1st link into English, and it seems to mirror the 2nd link and again, can't find any mention of bitcoin. Both seem to just be talking about the dim prospects for the euro... The only news I could find online concerning Germany and bitcoin is the 1yr holding period to avoid taxation on income from it. Concerning the U.S. and bitcoin, the most current news seems to be about a growing impression of it at the federal and state levels as a medium for money laundering and other nefarious activity.

I don't read German but am pretty confident that the story is about BTC because "bitcoin" is in the url http://www.welt.de/finanzen/geldanlage/article117493178/Bitcoin-Geschaefte-sind-nach-einem-Jahr-steuerfrei.html

[beb]

Here is my google translated page 27/06/13

Internet Currency Bitcoin transactions are tax-free after one year

A parliamentary inquiry creates clarity: sale of Bitcoins are subject to a one-year holding period, no withholding tax. This makes the currency attractive to investors. From Daniel Eckert and Kathrin Gotthold

Photo: APBitcoins can not be propagating freely. This makes them interesting for investors

RELATED LINKS

• Bitcoins: "What do you actually need a central bank?"
• Currencies: Is Bitcoin the future of money?
• Digital Money Bitcoin: The euro is facing stiff competition from the Internet
• Bitcoins: Currency of the Internet may endanger the euro

TOPICS

• Tax
• Cashless Payments
• Electronic money

With Bitcoins winnings will be tax-free after one year. Thus, the digital money from the Treasury treated differently than, for example, stocks, bonds or certificates.

All of these asset classes are subject to withholding tax of 25 percent plus solidarity surcharge and church tax. In bitcoins falls after a holding period of one year on the other hand, no such tax.

The tax exemption of capital gains in Bitcoinsfindings of a parliamentary inquiry that has provided to the federal government the FDP financial expert Frank Schaeffler and the "world" exists. "It is good that investments in Bitcoins is finally legal certainty. Private profits from the sale of Bitcoins are tax-free after one year," said Schaeffler.

Bitcoin for fans it's a lot of money

The legal nature and tax treatment of digital currency has been controversial for a long time. The response of the federal government only creates clarity. For fans of cyber-currency, it covers a lot of money. Despite strong fluctuations in the price of Bitcoin is now more than twelve times as high as twelve months ago. The tax treatment for investors is therefore of great importance.

An example illustrates this: in online exchanges like bitcoin.de or mtgox.com 100 Bitcoins could be acquired in mid-2012 for about 550 euros. Today, the same amount is worth about 7600 euros.

Event of a sale after more than twelve months holding period therefore falls to a gain of about 7000 euro. The flat tax would strike here at 1750 euros. Legally, these are for a private sale transaction under Section 23, paragraph 1, point 2 of the Income Tax Act.

BITCOINS

• Rate
• Inventors
• User

Tweets from @ Deep wedding

Currency is play money for speculators

Bitcoins are enjoying increasing popularity in the Internet community, but also a playground for speculators. They allow the cost payment for goods and services on the Internet without the need for a traditional bank account or a credit card is required. More than 2,000 companies worldwide organization and accept the digital money now.

Bitcoins were introduced in 2009 by a Japanese cryptographer named Satoshi Nakamoto, who wanted to create an absolutely tamper-proof money for the cyber universe by his own admission. However, the name appears to be a pseudonym. The true identity of the programmer is unknown.

The virtual currency is characterized in that the total number of Bitcoins is limited by an algorithm. Bitcoins are created by computer operations (experts speak of "mining"), which can only be performed by extremely powerful computers. They can be exchanged at several online exchange for paper currencies such as Euros or dollars.

Online money banks an eyesore

In the year 2140 the maximum will be reached with 21 million digital coins. Right from the year 2033 no significant amounts of new Bitcoins are created more. Today, about half of all computable coins in the world. Limiting the amount Bitcoin Bitcoin makes interesting for investors to put the fact that the demand for Internet currency will increase.

With a slowly growing Bitcoin offer that should lead to rising prices in the long term, is their calculus. However, digital currencies supervisors and central banks are an eyesore. Strict regulation or a total ban, the risks. Economists evaluate bitcoins as " private money ", which also means that they are not legal tender.

The FDP financial expert coopers, who made the request, is also known as "Euro-rebels" because he has repeatedly voted in parliament against the so-called "rescue" policy. The liberals advocated the abolition of the central bank monopoly. It is economically damaging, if a central body such as the ECB controlling the money supply, and be guided by political motives.

[hawker9000]

Can't find any mention of bitcoin in the 2nd link anywhere. Used Google Translate to try and translate the 1st link into English, and it seems to mirror the 2nd link and again, can't find any mention of bitcoin. Both seem to just be talking about the dim prospects for the euro... The only news I could find online concerning Germany and bitcoin is the 1yr holding period to avoid taxation on income from it. Concerning the U.S. and bitcoin, the most current news seems to be about a growing impression of it at the federal and state levels as a medium for money laundering and other nefarious activity.

I don't read German but am pretty confident that the story is about BTC because "bitcoin" is in the url http://www.welt.de/finanzen/geldanlage/article117493178/Bitcoin-Geschaefte-sind-nach-einem-Jahr-steuerfrei.html

My post was directed at, and I was referring to, Gomyway's links (see #139), not you(rs).

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article119104708/Deutschland-kann-die-Euro-Zone-nicht-retten.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/10015593/Euro-may-only-last-five-years-says-senior-German-government-advisor.html

YOUR article is a pretty good summary, IMO, of what's been discussed in this thread so far, and the whole bitcoin thing generally. But I was trying to address this "news" apparently coming out of Germany to ferret out if there was actually anything worthwhile noting in it.

Edited August 17, 2013 by hawker9000

[beb]

Can't find any mention of bitcoin in the 2nd link anywhere. Used Google Translate to try and translate the 1st link into English, and it seems to mirror the 2nd link and again, can't find any mention of bitcoin. Both seem to just be talking about the dim prospects for the euro... The only news I could find online concerning Germany and bitcoin is the 1yr holding period to avoid taxation on income from it. Concerning the U.S. and bitcoin, the most current news seems to be about a growing impression of it at the federal and state levels as a medium for money laundering and other nefarious activity.

I don't read German but am pretty confident that the story is about BTC because "bitcoin" is in the url http://www.welt.de/finanzen/geldanlage/article117493178/Bitcoin-Geschaefte-sind-nach-einem-Jahr-steuerfrei.html

My post was directed at, and I was referring to, Gomyway's links (see #139), not you(rs).

http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article119104708/Deutschland-kann-die-Euro-Zone-nicht-retten.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/10015593/Euro-may-only-last-five-years-says-senior-German-government-advisor.html

YOUR article is a pretty good summary, IMO, of what's been discussed in this thread so far, and the whole bitcoin thing generally. But I was trying to address this "news" apparently coming out of Germany to ferret out if there was actually anything worthwhile noting in it.

My mistake then. The news from Germany is about a new development there but is one of several about bitcoin being increasingly addressed at various levels by different countries. If you're into BTC then all of these stories are of interest because this is kind of a necessary step in the development of the currency. A lot of the developments are a little upsetting to people but I'm a little less so because I see it as necessary growing pains.

[Khun Jean]

Bitcoins are not anonymous.

They have a record of every transaction.

And because most of it goes over the internet it is pretty easy to pinpoint your position by using your ip address and time of transaction.

Of course this can be prevented, but 99.9% of the users have no idea how to do that. Leaving mostly the organised criminals with a really good currency.

[hawker9000]

I thought it was the 'wallet' address, rather than the IP address, that was included in the transaction records in the block chain. Any you can (and probably should) get a new wallet address for every transaction if you want.

[beb]

Bitcoins are not anonymous.

They have a record of every transaction.

And because most of it goes over the internet it is pretty easy to pinpoint your position by using your ip address and time of transaction.

Of course this can be prevented, but 99.9% of the users have no idea how to do that. Leaving mostly the organised criminals with a really good currency.

No offense intended but the argument about criminal activity is simply silly and a red herring to the entire issue. As said before, the most anonymous form of currency for criminal activity is the US dollar and its counterparts. That's what's used in the vast majority of criminal activities. If you put together a list of all criminal activities involving fiat currencies and placed them against the same with BTC, the btc wouldn't even register.

You could do the same kind of criticism of boats if you wanted to get rid of boats. I mean, how many criminal enterprises are possible because of boats? We could probably get rid of the majority of smuggling of all kinds of nefarious products, not to mention human trafficking, if we simply got rid of all those evil boats.

How about cars? How many times are cars used in the committing of crimes?

Now that I think about it, what the hell are we going to do about that damn oxygen? I bet the majority of criminals probably use that as well.

The fact is that crypto currency is the future. Maybe certain countries will do their best to stop it but it simply is too much of an technological advance that will have enormous value to people all over the world. In ways that you can't even imagine. And it's still in Beta.

So maybe some countries will succeed in stopping its use for a while but my prediction is that this will be as effective as the music industry was when it decided it would shut down digital music at the beginning of the century. Instead of embracing a better and more convenient technology, they tried to block it and instead ran their users to other options that were more convenient than what they offered. And they almost destroyed themselves.

People who know just a little about BTC suddenly become experts with the bold pronouncement that it's similar to the Tulip craze. Well I'll use a similarly overused cliche and invoke "Luddite".

[hawker9000]

Bitcoins are not anonymous.

They have a record of every transaction.

And because most of it goes over the internet it is pretty easy to pinpoint your position by using your ip address and time of transaction.

Of course this can be prevented, but 99.9% of the users have no idea how to do that. Leaving mostly the organised criminals with a really good currency.

No offense intended but the argument about criminal activity is simply silly and a red herring to the entire issue. As said before, the most anonymous form of currency for criminal activity is the US dollar and its counterparts. That's what's used in the vast majority of criminal activities. If you put together a list of all criminal activities involving fiat currencies and placed them against the same with BTC, the btc wouldn't even register.

You could do the same kind of criticism of boats if you wanted to get rid of boats. I mean, how many criminal enterprises are possible because of boats? We could probably get rid of the majority of smuggling of all kinds of nefarious products, not to mention human trafficking, if we simply got rid of all those evil boats.

How about cars? How many times are cars used in the committing of crimes?

Now that I think about it, what the hell are we going to do about that dam_n oxygen? I bet the majority of criminals probably use that as well.

The fact is that crypto currency is the future. Maybe certain countries will do their best to stop it but it simply is too much of an technological advance that will have enormous value to people all over the world. In ways that you can't even imagine. And it's still in Beta.

So maybe some countries will succeed in stopping its use for a while but my prediction is that this will be as effective as the music industry was when it decided it would shut down digital music at the beginning of the century. Instead of embracing a better and more convenient technology, they tried to block it and instead ran their users to other options that were more convenient than what they offered. And they almost destroyed themselves.

People who know just a little about BTC suddenly become experts with the bold pronouncement that it's similar to the Tulip craze. Well I'll use a similarly overused cliche and invoke "Luddite".

Silly, maybe, but governments have a certain demonstrated penchant for getting themselves involved in silliness. It does no good to call politicians silly. Newsflash - it's a VERY popular sport, and the politicians could care less. It won't stop them from imposing silly rules, trying to legislate silly behavior, expending silly amounts of resources, or making silly judgments. So I would say 'silly' is perfectly valid for discussion.

[beb]

You can make the argument that governments will pursue actions in spite of their validity and you can make the argument (and I agree) that that reality should be understood to be possible and even probable. But if you make a point that has no basis in fact or is not serious in any way in the discussion, then your point is silly.

So yes, you can embrace silly arguments and you can claim validation because some no-nothing bureaucrats are your source for such arguments but you're not contributing to the conversation and instead only parroting gobbledygook. Have fun with that but nobody is going to take you seriously or pay attention.