Quote from: Jaagu on March 24, 2013, 03:22:16 PM

Quote from: DigitalHermit on March 24, 2013, 02:39:22 PM

This concept has been discussed at length before and vigorously rejected:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=85433.0

This not the first time Mike is taking up the same rhyme:

Freezing BitCoin addresses by regulating miners
April 17, 2011
by Mike Hearn
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5979.0

There is some hidden agenda, isn't it?

More on the same topic:

What if bitcoins that can be tracked back to Silk Road are declared 'illegal'?
June 22, 2011
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=20979.0

Governments/regulators may eventually actually *like* Bitcoin. - coin blacklists
December 02, 2011
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=53539.0;all

And he didn't get a good response then, either.

Mike Hearn clearly advocates Bitcoin as a means of diminishing financial liberty, not that of improving it. Please go somewhere else with this Mike, I am beginning to find your rhetoric rather deceitful. By all means, create an establishment conformant alt-coin, but stop trying to turn Bitcoin into one. Satoshi's intentions quite clearly never included rationalising for increased state control of the monetary system, in fact, it was quite clearly and consistently the precise opposite.