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

>     On 24 July 2014 16:06, Amir Taaki <genjix@???
>     <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','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