[uncletammy]

> Proof of work blockchains should be banned by various governments for this reason alone.

How does one ban a blockchain? Serious question.

Would you only arrest the miners or would you also arrest non-mining full node operators?

How could you tell if regular citizens were transacting with POW coins? Would you subpoena telecom companies for records where customers have visited known sites which transact in POW coins? Or would you go the AT&T route and pipe telecom traffic through a little cabinet that uses deep packet inspection to sniff out POW transactions occurring over RPC?

What about traders? Would you outlaw trading POW coins and make exchange exclude US customers? That could make for some serious arbitrage opportunities for tech savy citizens.

I would genuinely appreciate your answer to any or all of these questions.

I build cryptocurrency software and would gain a lot from additional insight into the threat model I face in the not-so-distant future.

[kelp]

You regulate exchanges like Coinbase and Gemini, so there are no legitimate ways to trade your proof of work cryptocurrency for USD (or your local gov backed currency).

Then the demand for the crypto currency plummets.

In 2010-2011, I traded BTC for USD in person, with a laptop on wifi. And via PayPal with someone I met on IRC, where there was a bot that kept track of your reputation so the BTC sellers would know if it was safe to sell to you.

At that time the price of 1 BTC was about $1 USD.

I think we'd see something similar, if there was an outright ban.

[gruez]

On the other hand:

* cocaine prices aren't $1/kg, even after governments around the world banned it

* exotic/endangered species are still being traded for top dollars, despite anti-poaching and anti-trafficking regulations

* stolen art is still worth millions

[rspeele]

Those things are valued for more than their resale price.

The only reason I would ever want to hold a Bitcoin is that I trust that somebody else will give me something of value for it in the future.

If governments make it very difficult for me to exchange bitcoins for other things, its utility as a "store of value" gets lower. I'd rather store my value in stocks, real estate, gold, or whatever else. The regulation directly interferes with the use case.

On the other hand, all the regulation in the world doesn't interfere with cocaine's use case of getting you high. If governments could make it so that cocaine doesn't get you high, its price would certainly plummet.

[innagadadavida]

Another option is to levy wealth tax in bitcoin holdings. This is definitely less draconian that what you are proposing, but will achieve similar results.

[verdverm]

You don't ban the blockchain, you make it illegal to use the coins. Then the network loses value and mining doesn't pay off. If you don't do KYC or AML, you will likely become part of the banned list.

Also you can look for energy consumption. Towns in upstate New York are banning new permits for mining. So it's already happened.

In short, society has certain expectations and if you violate those there will be consequences. Govt and laws are always behind the publics will, so it's coming for cryptos. Which survive is the real speculative bets that will pay off

[dgellow]

As always, you regulate at the edge: You control that banks do not accept Bitcoin-related money. You regulate exchanges to delist Bitcoin.