Post
Topic
Board Bitcoin Discussion
Re: [ANN] Bitcoin Foundation Board Election Details Announced
by
Arto
on 02/09/2013, 14:29:53 UTC
As such, we need someone who will engage fully with the US government, not someone who is saying 'trying to implement it into the regulatory framework of the legacy financial system is an absurd' and hope that the banks who are refusing to open accounts for bitcoin businesses understand, or that the momentum will pick up enough in isolation that it becomes inevitable - it won't.

I believe Joerg's coming at this from a multi-decade cypherpunk perspective where he's witnessed time and again that you can try all you want to get all your ducks in a row and proactively ask the powers that be to regulate you, and still get screwed. At least when it comes to U.S. interests, for whom maintaining the dollar hegemony is a categorical imperative that is not open to negotiation.

As Jon Matonis aptly put this, "Doug Jackson of e-gold knows you can have the rules changed on you at any time." ...and: "We can see from the case against digital money provider e-gold that an efficient challenger to the provision of a stable monetary unit will not be permitted."

That is, e-gold tried to do everything "right", with what in hindsight was an almost pathetic naivety and trust in the rule of law and justice in the U.S., and they still got screwed over big time. (Indeed, as Jeffrey Tucker puts it, "Bitcoin is karma for e-gold"; which speaks to Joerg's point that sometimes the next generation can learn from the previous one's naivety.) Joerg and Jon Matonis clearly see eye-to-eye on this question.

As you no doubt have heard, Mt.Gox are presently getting a good taste, to the tune of a cool $5M, of how it feels when the rules get changed on you retroactively. It's a safe bet they won't be the last to learn that lesson, regardless of any and all lobbying efforts to the contrary.