[bmsd_0923]

What a terrifyingly dumb perspective... "it has helped facilitate a whole lot of bad things" is his whole hand-wavy argument for why people (presumably lawyers) need to go around "throwing sand in the gears."

IMO we should be throwing sand in the gears of the government. Starting wars and killing hundreds of thousands of people is much worse than ransomware attacks.

[toomuchtodo]

I derive significant utility from my government, and prefer it to continue to function, despite its flaws that need addressing. Less needless wars, for sure, but also less crypto please (if the crypto evades democratic government regulations and laws).

If this is a path to applying more regulatory pressure on crypto, by all means, full steam ahead.

[aww_dang]

Much of cryptocurrency's value comes from the lack of regulation. People are not satisfied with the existing solutions, thus the need for innovation. BTC emerged after the US destroyed LibertyReserve and eGold.

Government could eliminate the some of the needs for cryptocurrencies by removing regulatory barriers to transact.

As an example, compliance costs prohibit PayPal from efficiently processing 25 cent arcade or in game transactions.

>Instead of the standard 2.90% + 30p per transaction that PayPal charges, you’ll be charged a 5% + £0.05 fee on every transaction. This would mean that on a £1 transaction, you will pay 10p as transaction fees, rather than 59p, and you save 41p. Ordinarily, this does not look much, but if you sell very high volumes at low prices, it quickly adds up to become a significant saving. After all, it’s a small leak that sinks great ships.

Additionally, for electronic goods most processors require the merchant to offer a no questions asked refund policy.

[cainxinth]

> People are not satisfied with the existing solutions, thus the need for innovation.

IMHO, that describes maybe a tenth (maybe) of crypto buyers. Everyone else is just speculating on volatile new assets that are gaining value rapidly.

[sklearncowboy]

Exactly. The irony to me is no one really wants price discovery in order for volatility to be reduced so that crypto can actually function as money. Function as money in the sense of signing a year long apartment lease for x amount of BTC a month. Not just paying in USD after a conversion.

That is almost the last thing people want.

[aww_dang]

As someone who develops sites which use cryptocurrency, USD price volatility isn't a concern. Users are riding the same wave. What is important is that it is technically possible. I realize this isn't the majority view, but that doesn't make it any less valid. There are many things which are popular with the masses that are arguably irrational.

https://mises.org/wire/why-wild-swings-crypto-prices-are-not...

>Weston Nakamura in an interview with Real Vision’s Jack Farley made the trenchant point, “This is what markets look like when you don't have global central banks artificially suppressing volatility, intervention of central banks buying every dip, putting a safety net under every single slight tremor or taper tantrum or whatever it may be, this is what happens.”

>He explains, “Bitcoin is not a US asset, just like oil is not a US asset, just like gold is not a US asset. Now, those are denominated in USD.” Sure, Americans think in US dollars, but “it's BTC/fiat, and it's not an American asset. People need to get that in their head. If you actually look at BTC/JPY (Japanese yen), the levels make a hell of a lot more sense.”

[slowhand09]

When I first saw this I was thinking "Gee, what other technology will some gov't entity decide is dangerous to its centralization of power".

[raintrees]

I agree. Using the same logic, the USD should definitely be banned.

[BitwiseFool]

The organization's name "Lawfare", has some pretty negative connotations in-and-of-itself.