" he joked about dogecoin" can you believe it!!!!!!!! such a normal fun
guy!!!!!!


On 24 July 2014 16:06, Amir Taaki <genjix@???> wrote:

>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2aycxs/hi_this_is_ben_lawsky_at_nydfs_here_are_the/
>
> people are like "oh dear, we need better legislation" without realising
> the foot in the door danger. it's like the used car salesman who rips
> you off with an overpriced crappy car which you jump on after "he speaks
> to the boss" (i.e smokes a ciggy), knocking down his initial high offer.
> wow! what a bargain!
>
> G8 magazine, June 2013 "Protecting digital economies": "If the leaders
> of the European Union and United States could be convinced to take a
> lead on these initiatives [banning Bitcoin], that would be a huge
> contribution to making the internet a safe place for financial
> transactions. At the same time, it would also strike a blow against
> those who would try to destroy the fabric of our world’s well-being."
>
> JP Morgan, Feb 2014 "The audacity of Bitcoin": "But followers of
> financial history know the limitation of a system based on a fixed or
> slow-growing money supply: it imposes uncomfortable financial discipline
> on governments, households and corporates. [i.e governments, consumers,
> the corporations" (goes on to talk about how printing dollars was used
> to fund WW1 and the Vietnam war as a good thing)
>
> ECB, Oct 2012 "Virtual currency schemes": "Authorities need to consider
> whether they intend to formalise or acknowledge and regulate these
> schemes. In this regard, a likely suggestion could sooner or later
> involve virtual currency scheme owners registering as financial
> institutions with their local regulating authorities. This is a similar
> trajectory to the one PayPal has undergone, as it was granted a banking
> licence in Luxembourg in 2007 after its service became popular. This is
> not an easy step, but it looks like the only possible way to strike a
> proper balance between money and payment innovations on the one hand,
> and consumer protection and financial stability, on the other."
>
> Mark my words. The problem is not with this regulation needing to be
> fixed. They will probably tone down the proposal and it will be hailed
> as a victory within the community, yet be another step toward
> normalisation of their activities.
>
> http://www.coindesk.com/ben-lawsky-friend-foe/
>
> "The choice for the regulators is: permit money laundering on the one
> hand, or permit innovation on the other, and we’re always going to choose
> squelching the money laundering first. It’s not worth it to society to
> allow money laundering and all of the things it facilitates to persist in
> order to permit 1000 flowers to bloom on the innovation side.”
>
> funny he's affiliated with chuck schumer too who is a populist and someone
> who in the early days was very anti-bitcoin (silk road).
>
> i love the whole tone of this propaganda piece which is like "he's such a
> nice guy". I bet he has good manners too.
>
> maybe you all appreciate this article,
>
>
> http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-dark-wallet-developers-plan-for-startup-governments-run-on-bitcoin
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> unSYSTEM mailing list: http://unsystem.net
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem
>