Not strictly a pay-wall but a "register wall" ...
I think they are thinking "well if you can't beat 'em, join 'em"..
I just hope they don't enforce the white listing of bitcoin addresses though ( ie transactions must be to another registered address only or it will be classed as potentially fraudulent).
And what if they do? People will just use other exchanges.
In recent weeks businesses using bitcoin in the US and Canada have had their bank accounts shut down, pointing to nervousness by the banks about the rise of the digital currency.
No shit.
Re. white-listing, I think it could be far more serious for Bitcoin.
From the "Do we want to work with money regulators, or keep Bitcoin unregulated?" thread
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=192924.msg2002839#msg2002839Bitcoin will remain unregulated. It doesnt matter if people in the community want it regulated or if government(s) want it regulated. Bitcoin, by nature, is unregulated. They cannot seize your btc unless under duress, etc. You are your own bank.
Until the devs fork it and say: "Here is the regulated Bitcoin 2.0 which will be worth 10000USD because of big company involvement, if you don't want use it then use the unregulated Bitcoin 1.0 for illegal activities which will be worth about 2USD."Looking at the majority of people involved in Bitcoin i'd place my money on that everybody would go for 2.0.
Of course, the Bitcoin Foundation together with other large companies (paypal, banks etc), will make a plan to slowly manipulate us into believing that a regulated Bitcoin will be much better for everyone. If you ask me, it has already begun. As I have said before, I believe that Bitcoin was started not just by an idealist with an honorable vision but by government Us/UK or both, hopelessly in debt and at the mercy of corrupt financial institutions. Bitcoin or a variant of, if regulated would help government get back on track financially, indeed if all those untouched early mined coins were held by govt. they have a substantial reserve as the price rises.