SEC Disapproves of Proposed Rule Change for Winklevoss ...

I'm trying to put together a list of what's coming out this year. Have this very simple list so far. Anyone care to add anything or suggest some better dates?

Latest News (most recent first) - Instant channels enable safe Lightning payments with unconfirmed funding Beta - Feb 10, 2019 - Voyager, New trading app from Uber & E-Trade execs announce launch date - Feb 9, 2019 - bumi/blockstream_satellite ruby gem for the Blockstream Satellite API - Feb 8, 2019 - New Zap Desktop 0.3.4 is out. New features, massive performance - Feb 8, 2019 - New release: @lightning desktop app v0.4.0-alpha - Feb 8, 2019 - valerio-vaccaro/Liquid-dashboard - Feb 7, 2019 - Japanese SBI Holdings will allow trading of coins - March 2019 - lnd v0.5.2-beta released - Feb 6, 2019 - Koala studios launches online LN gaming platform - Feb 6, 2019 - Independent Reserve has become the first #crypto exchange in Australia to be insured, with coverage underwritten by Lloyd's of London. - Feb 6, 2019 - Coinbase announces BTC support for their mobile (keep your own keys) wallet - Feb 6, 2019 - Blockstream published a new open source Proof of Reserves tool. - Feb 5, 2019 - RTL release v0.1.14-alpha - Feb 5, 2019 - dr-orlovsky/typhon-spec spec for new trestles side chain published - Feb 5, 2019 - Payment requests coming soon to BTCPay. - Feb 5th, 2019 - Kraken Acquires Futures Startup In Deal Worth At Least $100 Million - Feb 5th, 2019 - Next Blockchain cruise scheduled for June 9-13 - Feb 4, 2019 - Work on a GoTenna plugin to Electrum wallet in progress - Feb 4, 2019 - Bitcoin Candy Dispensers being open sourced - Feb 4, 2019 - New release of JoinMarket v0.5.3 - Feb 4, 2019 - Prime Trust won’t charge its clients to custody digital assets any longer. - Feb 4, 2019 - nodogsplash/nodogsplash wifi access using LN - Feb 3, 2019 - @tippin_me Receive tips using Lightning Network adds message feature - Feb 3, 2019 - Bitcoin-for-Taxes Bill in NH Unanimously Approved by House Subcommittee - Feb 3, 2019 - Full support for native segwit merged into bitcoinj - Feb 3, 2019 - Bitfury is partnering with financial services firm Final Frontier! - Feb 2, 2019 - Now you can open #LightningNetwork channels in @LightningJoule - Feb 2, 2019 - Integrating Blockstream’s Liquid payments on SideShift AI - Feb 1, 2019 - Wyoming legislature passes bill to recognize cryptocurrency as money - Feb 1, 2019 - Casa is open sourcing the code for the Casa Node - Feb 1, 2019 - Casa Browser Extension released - v0.5.2-beta-rc6 of lnd, full release getting very close now - Feb 1, 2019 - Tallycoin adds subscriptions and paywall features in bid to rival Patreon - Jan 31, 2019 - Static channel backup PR merged into LN - Jan 31, 2019 - The NYDFS grants another Bitlicense to ATM operator - Jan 31, 2019 - @pwuille currently proposing the “MiniScript” language to describe BTC output locking conditions for practical composition - Jan 31, 2019 - Fidelity is in the “final testing” phase for its new digital asset business - Jan 31, 2019 - Hardware wallet PR #109 just got merged so that @Trezor no longer requires user interaction for PIN - Jan 31, 2019 - CBOE, VanEck & SolidX filed a new & improved bitcoin ETF proposal. - Jan 31, 2019 - Casa Node code is now open sourced - Jan 31, 2019 - Next Bitoin halving in roughly 497 days - Jan 31, 2019 - BTCPay released 1.0.3.53 - Jan 31, 2019 - @binance now lets users purchase cryptos using Visa and Mastercard credit. - Jan 31, 2019 - Bitfury to Launch Bitcoin Operations in Paraguay - Jan 31, 2019 - Coinbase introduces very generous affiliate program - Jan 30, 2019 - DOJO Trusted Node bitcoin full node. Coming Early 2019 - Jan 30, 2019 - FastBitcoins.com Enables Cash-for-Bitcoin Exchange Via the Lightning Network - Jan 30, 2019 - TD Ameritrade says clients want cryptocurrency investment options - company plans major announcement in 'first half of 2019' - Jan 30, 2019 - Storage component of Fidelity's @DigitalAssets live, with some assets under management, @nikhileshde - Jan 29, 2019 - lightning mainnet has reached 600 BTC capacity - Jan 29, 2019 - Drivechain shows picture of Grin side chain and suggests might be ready in 2 month - Jan 29, 2019 - Lightning labs iOS neutrino wallet in testing stage now - Jan 29, 2019 - Aliant offering cryptocurrency processing free-of-charge - Jan 29, 2019 - Chainstone’s Regulator product to manage assets on the way - Jan 29, 2019 - Fidelity Investments’ new crypto custody service may officially launch in March. - Jan 29, 2019 - Gemini's becomes FIRST crypto EXCHANGE and CUSTODIAN to complete a SOC 2 Review by Deloitte - Jan 29, 2019 - Iran has lifted the ban on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency - Jan 29, 2019 - Confidential Transactions being added into Litecoin announcement - Jan 28, 2019 - http://FastBitcoins.com Enables Cash-for-Bitcoin Exchange Via the Lightning Network - Jan 28, 2019 - Germany’s largest online food delivery platform now accepts btc - Jan 27, 2019 - Launching a Bitcoin Developers School in Switzerland - Jan 27, 2019 - RTL release v0.1.13-alpha Lightning Build repository released - Jan 27, 2019 - The first pay-per-page fantasy novel available to Lightning Network. - Jan 27, 2019 - Numerous tools become available to write messages transmitted with Blockstream Satellite - Jan 26, 2019; - BTCPay 1.0.3.47 released - Jan 26,2019 - WordPress + WooCommerce + BTCPay Plugin is now live - Jan 25, 2019 - Juan Guaido has been promoting #Bitcoin since 2014 is new interim president of Venezuela - Jan 25, 2019 - Morgan Creek funds @RealBlocks - Jan 25, 2019 - Coinbase integrates TurboTax - Jan 25, 2019 - Robinhood received Bitlicense - Jan 25, 2019 - Anchor Labs launches custody - Jan 25, 2019 - NYSE Arca files w/ @BitwiseInvest for BTC ETF approval - Jan 25, 2019 - South Korea, Seoul, Busan & Jeju Island currently working to create pro crypto economic zones. - Jan 25, 2019 - valerio-vaccaro/Liquid-dashboard - Jan 25, 2019 - Bermuda to launch crypto friendly bank - Jan 25, 2019 - Mobile Bitcoin Wallet BRD Raises $15 Million, Plans for Expansion in Asia - Jan 25, 2019 - BullBitcoin rolling out alpha access of platform - Jan 25, 2019 - Electrum Wallet Release 3.3.3 - Jan 25, 2019 - Bitrefill, purchase Bitcoin and have it delivered directly over LN - Jan 25, 2019 - South Korean crypto exchange Bithumb looking to go public in USA - Jan 24, 2019 - Bitcoin Exchanges Don’t Need Money Transmitter Licenses in Pennsylvania - Jan 24, 2019 - US; New Hampshire Bill Aims to Legalize Bitcoin for State Payments in 2020 - Jan 24, 2019 - Robinhood, LibertyX Receive Licenses from New York Regulators - Jan 24, 2019 - Bakkt Bitcoin futures contract details released - Jan 24, 2019 - Blockstream CryptoFeed V3 now includes 30+ venues and 200M+ updates per day - Jan 24, 2019 - Binance Jersey – The Latest Binance European Exchange - Jan 2019
Commit Activity
Nodes and Market Dominance
Bitcoin
Financial
Lightning:
ASIC Miners:
Will update this section when I hear new developments
Wallets:
Hardware wallets:
LN
LN Apps:
LN Extensions / Launchers
LN Desktop wallets:
LN Mobile wallets:
LN Network:
LN Nodes:
LN Plugins:
LN Services:
Liquid Network
Rgulatory:
Exchanges:
Payments:
Please comment if you have any ideas on dates. Many of these dates are placeholders waiting for me to update. If you comment then I will update the post.
submitted by kolinHall to Bitcoin [link] [comments]

ETF developments - new news

People haven't been talking about ETFs much lately, but stuff is still happening that may end up being big.
The Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust "COIN" ETF was denied, of course, but they did appeal back in March.
Since then, however, something big happened: LedgerX got approval from the CFTC to start selling Bitcoin options. They're not alone either, because CBOE is partnering with Gemini to offer Bitcoin futures as well. Based on these US-regulated offerings, in the past few weeks there have been two new ETF filings.
2 weeks ago: VanEck Vectors Bitcoin Strategy ETF
last week: REX Bitcoin Strategy ETF and REX Short Bitcoin Strategy ETF
These new ETFs are substantially different than the COIN ETF because they will hold options and futures instead of directly holding Bitcoin, but they still represent a way for retail investors to gain exposure to the Bitcoin price right in their existing brokerage or retirement accounts. Also, unlike GBTC, demand for these ETFs can actually affect the real Bitcoin price!
The SEC has undoubtedly seen the demand for Bitcoin investments after they suspended trading in some shares that rose 7000% just because they had "Bitcoin" in their name. Will they approve this new style of Bitcoin ETF?
submitted by modeless to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust: Excerpts from the BATS Rule Change Proposal

Below are excerpts from the BATS rule change proposal which, if approved by the SEC, would allow shares of the Bitcoin Trust to be traded on the BATS exchange (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/batsbzx/2016/34-78262.pdf)
Edit: To be clear, the approval of this rule change is separate from the SEC approving the Trust itself (i.e., its registration statement, Form S-1). So unfortunately, even if this rule change is approved, it doesn't necessarily mean the Trust itself will be approved anytime soon or at all
These are all direct quotes shown in order, but in the interest of readability I have generally not used ellipses or otherwise indicated where clauses, sentences or sections are omitted. I have put in bold parts that I think are particularly notable:
SR-BatsBZX-2016-30 34-78262 Jul. 8, 2016
Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change to BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), Commodity-Based Trust Shares, to List and Trade Winklevoss Bitcoin Shares Issued by the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust
Bats BZX Exchange . . . filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission the proposed rule change. The Exchange filed a proposal to list and trade Winklevoss Bitcoin Shares (the “Shares”) issued by the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust (the “Trust”) under BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), Commodity-Based Trust Shares. The text of the proposed rule change is available at the Exchange’s website at www.batstrading.com.
In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in Sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such statements.
The Exchange proposes to list and trade the Shares under BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), which governs the listing and trading of Commodity Based Trust Shares on the Exchange. The Shares will be offered by the Trust. Digital Asset Services, LLC, formerly MathBased Asset Services, LLC, will be the sponsor of the Trust (the “Sponsor”). Gemini Trust Company, LLC will be the custodian of the Trust (the “Custodian”). The Custodian will hold the bitcoin deposited with the Custodian on behalf of the Trust in a segregated custody account. The Custodian will use its proprietary and patent-pending offline (i.e., air-gapped) Cold Storage System to store the Trust’s bitcoin.
The Trust is expected to issue and redeem Shares from time to time only in one or more whole Baskets. Certain Authorized Participants are the only persons that may place orders to create or redeem Baskets. Authorized Participants or their affiliated market makers are expected to have the facility to participate directly on one or more Bitcoin Exchanges.
The investment objective of the Trust is for the Shares to track the price of bitcoin, as measured by the spot price at 4:00 p.m. Eastern time on the Gemini exchange. The Shares represent units of fractional undivided beneficial interest in and ownership of the Trust and are expected to be traded under the ticker symbol “COIN” on the Exchange. The Trust values its bitcoin as measured at 4:00 p.m. Eastern time using the Gemini Exchange Spot Price on each Business Day.
The Trust has entered into preliminary conversations with a number of potential Authorized Participants as well as market makers, each of which is an experienced participant in the ETP marketplace and is actively engaged in trading ETPs. A number of these potential Authorized Participants, currently trade bitcoin and are already registered participants that trade on the Gemini Exchange. Authorized Participants will not be required to use the Gemini Exchange to trade their bitcoin, and the Gemini Exchange is not the only venue on which Authorized Participants can purchase bitcoin for delivery to the Trust.
The Trust represents the first known ETP in the United States that seeks to track the price of a Digital Asset (a “Digital Asset ETP”). Securitized instruments have been created for other marketplaces, but have encountered limited success due to their lack of transparency and thorough regulatory oversight. Two notable examples are the Grayscale Investment Trust, which trades under the ticker GBTC on OTC Markets (formerly the “Pink Sheets”) and does not qualify as an exchange-listed product, and Bitcoin Tracker One, which trades under the ticker COINXBT on the Stockholm Stock Exchange.
The Shares will be listed and trade on BZX . . . [and] will be eligible for margin accounts.
The value of the Trust’s holdings will be reported each day on the Trust’s website.
Using the precious metals exchange-traded trusts currently trading on U.S. exchanges as design paradigms, the Sponsor has structured the Trust to be a similar passive investment vehicle holding a single asset. Like the precious metals exchange traded trusts cited above, the Trust will only own and store bitcoin and will not be permitted to hold cash or any other Digital Asset.
Custodian can use Signers to sign a specific message chosen by the Custodian that references a current event (i.e., to prove recency), thereby proving control of the private keys associated with the public Bitcoin addresses in which the Trust’s bitcoin are held. This allows the Custodian to evidence control of the Trust’s assets periodically during audits on-demand and without necessitating the transfer of any of the Trust’s bitcoin.
Custodian will accept, on behalf of the Trust, delivery of bitcoin from Authorized Participants into the Trust Custody Account in the creation of a Basket. In order for an Authorized Participant to redeem a Basket and receive a distribution of bitcoin from the Trust, the Custodian, upon receiving instructions from the Administrator, will sign transactions necessary to transfer bitcoin out of the Trust Custody Account and distribute to the Bitcoin address specified by the Authorized Participant.
Sponsor must engage an independent audit firm to periodically audit the Custodian’s Cold Storage System protocols and internal controls (“Internal Controls Audit”), and report to the Sponsor at least annually on such matters. Additionally, the Sponsor must engage an independent audit firm to biannually verify that the Custodian can demonstrate “proof of control” of the private keys that control the Trust’s bitcoin (“Proof of Control Audit”). One Proof of Control Audit will be conducted at the end of each calendar year and the other at random.
The Administrator will use the Gemini Exchange Spot Price as measured at 4:00 p.m. Eastern time (the “Evaluation Time”) to calculate the Trust’s NAV. The Administrator will calculate the Trust’s NAV by dividing the net assets of the Trust by the number of the Shares outstanding as of the close of trading on the Exchange (which includes the net number of any of the Shares created or redeemed on such Business Day).
The Trust will issue and redeem the Shares in Baskets only to certain Authorized Participants on an ongoing basis. On a creation, Baskets will be distributed to the Authorized Participants by the Trust in exchange for the delivery to the Trust of the appropriate number of bitcoin (i.e., bitcoin equal in value to the value of the Shares being purchased). On a redemption, the Trust will distribute bitcoin equal in value to the value of the Shares being redeemed to the redeeming Authorized Participant in exchange for the delivery to the Trust of one or more Baskets. On each Business Day, the value of each Basket accepted by the Administrator in a creation or redemption transaction will be the same (i.e., each Basket will consist of 50,000 Shares and the value of the Basket will be equal to the value of 50,000 Shares at their net asset value per Share on that day). Authorized Participants must be (i) registered broker-dealers or other securities market participants, such as banks and other financial institutions, which are not required to register as broker-dealers to engage in securities transactions, and (ii) DTC Participants.
The Trust’s website, which will be publicly available prior to the public offering of the Shares, will include a form of the prospectus for the Trust that may be downloaded. The website will include additional quantitative information updated on a daily basis, including, for the Trust: (i) the prior Business Day’s reported NAV, the highest quoted bid price for the Shares (the “Best Bid”) and lowest quoted offer price for the Shares (the “Best Ask”), the mid-point of the spread between the Best Bid and the Best Ask at the time of the NAV calculation(the “Best Bid/Best Ask”), the daily trading volume of the Shares, and the calculation of the premium and discount of the Best Bid/Best Ask against the NAV . . .
The Sponsor will calculate an estimated fair value of the Shares based on the most recent Gemini Exchange Spot Price (the “Intraday Indicative Value”), which will be updated and widely disseminated by one or more major market data vendors at least every fifteen (15) seconds during the Exchange’s regular trading hours.
The Basket creation and redemption process is important for the Trust in providing Authorized Participants with an arbitrage mechanism through which they may keep Share trading prices in line with the NAV. If the market price of the Shares is greater than the NAV, an Authorized Participant can purchase sufficient bitcoin to create a Basket, and then sell the new Shares on the secondary market at a profit. If the NAV is greater than the market price of the Shares, an Authorized Participant can purchase Shares on the secondary market in an amount equal to a Basket and redeem them for bitcoin, and then sell the bitcoin at a profit.
The Shares will be subject to BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4), which sets forth the initial and continued listing criteria applicable to Commodity-Based Trust Shares.
The Trust currently expects that there will be at least 100,000 Shares outstanding at the time of commencement of trading on the Exchange. The Exchange deems the Shares to be equity securities, thus rendering trading in the Shares subject to the Exchange’s existing rules governing the trading of equity securities. BZX will allow trading in the Shares from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will: (a) by order approve or disapprove such proposed rule change; or (b) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The Commission will post all comments on the Commission’s Internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
submitted by tryn2hlp to BitcoinMarkets [link] [comments]

Scrap the Negative and Keep Waiting Like a Good Little Trooper

Be patient, my Sisters and Brothers. I/We can sense the lack of inspiration from a lot of directions. Not buyin' it. Be a good Scout for now. Be a Mary Poppins, Be Batman. Do good things come to all who wait? Why the hell not? I am a "Hesterian" as of THIS VERY MOMENT, and that's the end of it:
Big KUDOS to: BeerBellyFatAss Bull
Key points
"I respectfully dissent from the Commission’s order disapproving a proposed rule change, as amended, to list and trade shares of the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust on Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. (“BZX”).[1] ......I would set aside the action the staff took by delegated authority in this matter and approve the proposed rule change.-....More generally, the Commission’s interpretation and application of the statutory standard sends a strong signal that innovation is unwelcome in our markets, a signal that may have effects far beyond the fate of bitcoin ETPs. I will discuss each of these issues in turn.
I. The Proposed Rule Change Satisfies the Requirements of Exchange Act Section 6(b)
II. The Disapproval Order Inhibits Institutionalization
III. The Disapproval Order Dampens Innovation
IV. Conclusion - I reject the role of gatekeeper of innovation—a role very different from (and, indeed, inconsistent with) our mission of protecting investors, fostering capital formation, and facilitating fair, orderly, and efficient markets. Accordingly, I dissent."
Hester M. Peirce, Commissioner
submitted by MilkDudDandy to ethtrader [link] [comments]

A few thoughts - Friday, July 18, 2014

Good afternoon! Yesterday was the darkest day in at least the recent history of bitcoin, perhaps ever. I'll get into why yesterday was more significant than Mt. Gox and China later, but the end point of this post is going to be that these proposed regulations are a breathtaking expansion of government power into areas of commerce that have never traditionally been regulated. If this passes, we may well find ourselves fighting against bitcoin acceptance.

Some basic truth about The Law

First, it's important to eliminate a common misunderstanding in /bitcoinmarkets. Some users are arguing that this law (lowercase letters) isn't that bad because while it covers a broad range of activity, it is only intended as a tool to fight money laundering (or some other goal, depending on the user). People need to understand that the long arm of The Law (capital letters) does not care what laws were actually intended to do. You either violate them, or you do not. A judge isn't going to allow a business to operate based on the argument that this law was intended for a different purpose.
As you make your evaluation of the effects of this law, you need to consider every possible activity that could be illegal under it. You can't write off certain activities because they were unintentionally added to the law. The Law is not compassionate and does not allow people to get away with things because the creators were trying to prevent some other behavior. There are many examples of poorly-designed laws that have had devastating unintended consequences.

Some examples

Now that we are clear that the intent of the law doesn't matter, I thought it would be worth sharing how a few examples of bitcoin-related activities in New York will work. This section includes three rows each. The first is the activity, the second is an example of what I would consider some reasonable regulations, and the third is the actions needed for compliance under this law. Since there are an absurd number of requirements for each case, I only listed one or two of the most ridiculous for each.
Activity: Operating a tipping bot that sends $0.25 tips to residents of New York that holds balances
Reasonable: Require the tips to be backed with 100% reserve in the tipped currency
Lawsky: Collect personally identifiable information about all people ever tipped, retain it for 10 years, and submit paperwork to the department when tips qualifying as "suspicious activity" are sent
Activity: Changing a variable in the bitcoin code and creating a new blockchain for testing a proposed feature
Reasonable: No regulation
Lawsky: Register with the NYDFS, payi thousands of dollars, wait 90 days, and undergo a background check with the FBI
Activity: Operating the Elgius mining pool, which adds PPLNS payouts to its own blocks, so that users never have outstanding balances
Reasonable: Allow people to take civil action if their payouts don't match what they are owed
Lawsky: Register as a money transmission service, develop compliance programs, and conduct "intrusion prevention" tests against the nonexistent wallets
Activity: Running a business like blockchain.info, which does not hold any balances whatsoever in dollars and pays all employees and vendors in bitcoins
Reasonable: Require recordkeeping of profits and expenses similar to current laws
Lawsky: This business model is expressly prohibited; no business is allowed to take profits in bitcoins
Activity: Operating an altcoin exchange, which takes untraceable litecoins and exchanges them for untraceable nanotokens
Reasonable: Prohibit fractional reserve banking and require that reserves be kept in the currencies they are backing
Lawsky: Requires altcoin exchanges to back its reserves in dollars and to associate every altcoin address with a username. If there is a bubble, the business goes under because it is no longer able to back customers' deposits.
Activity: Being a one-time arbitrator, where two parties trade something and use a multisignature transaction with you as the decider in the case something goes wrong
Reasonable: At most, require background checks on the arbitrator to verify his integrity
Lawsky: File paperwork with security plans, a list of anyone who might help you with collecting evidence to make the decision (even if you are never called upon to do so), and obtain background checks and fingerprints for all of them; pay thousands of dollars to register, wait 90 days to be approved, file suspicious activity report if the transaction is over $3k regardless of whether you are called upon to arbitrate or not
Activity: Modify your mining pool's pay-per-share algorithm to prevent block withholding attacks, or introduce a new algorithm like PPLNS, without branching out into other business areas
Reasonable: No paperwork necessary
Lawsky: File new request with the Department and wait 90 days for the new model to be approved before rolling out the feature, while competitors in other states launch immediately

Businesses no logner possible to be served to New York residents

In addition to the regulation requirements, there are also some types of business models that simply cannot overcome the regulations at all. Here are some of those types of businesses:
Arguably, the following business types could also not operate in New York because of cost concerns:
The greatest problem with these regulations is simply that there is no clause for the amount of money the company has to control. While we plan to take all possible security measures, our pool's greatest security measure is that we automatically pay out balances that are too large, so that we will never owe more than $10k in customer funds. If there were to be a hack, then we would simply eat the cost of less than $10k from personal funds because it is a small amount. The reason this works is because it would cost more than $100k to provide the sort of professional infrastructure that Lawsky is requiring, so even if the site were hacked ten times, and even if we never fixed the security holes, we would still be ahead.
That's why this legislation is irreparably flawed and cannot be salvaged. It makes sense for people holding a billion dollars to be subject to strict regulations. It is nonsensical to require people who hold $5k in customer funds to spend $200k/yr in compliance measures, given that taking 40 hacks are still preferable to such ridiculous regulations.

The likely outcome of these regulations is less protection

Now that we know the local effects on certain types of businesses, we should ask what the end result is going to be a year from now, should these regulations not be completely overhauled. I propose that the end outcome of these regulations is going to be less consumer protection and more crime. The only businesses able to operate in New York will be huge banks and hedge funds. While the banks charge excessive fees and rip customers off, they already are far more trustworthy than Mark Karpeles ever was. They already practice good security anyway because they understand (unlike Mt Gox) that customer service is important. The law isn't going to have much impact on them. Furthermore, these guys aren't even into the bitcoin business yet, so (at least at first), the only people the law effects are the small guys.
Meanwhile, everyone else other than the banks is going to do exactly what we may be forced to do: milk the system by applying for licenses and waiting as long as possible, and then, on the day before compliance is required, ban New York residents from our service and avoid doing business with anyone in New York. However, it will be impossible for us, or anyone else, to eliminate every single New York resident from our system no matter how hard we try or how good our intentions are. Because there is no minimum funds limit, New York residents are going to find that they are excluded from the use of nearly every altcoin, mining pool, exchange, open source project, wallet service, auction site, escrow system, and so on.
They key here is that by making the regulations too hard to comply with, every site is going to be equalized. If the cost of compliance were low, then honest businesses would have no problem complying. When the cost of compliance is high, there is no distinction between honest and scam businesses because New York residents will have to do business illegally. This leads to more scams and losses of money. Whereas now a New York resident who uses a service available in New York can sue the provider of a scam, they have no recourse in this proposed new world. After all, the New York resident was engaging in illegal activity by using a non-licensed business. This allows scammers to directly target people who live in New York because they have fewer legal protections than do people who live in other states.
I'm very glad that I do not live in New York right now, and I actually feel sorry for what those who have been in bitcoins since the beginning and who live in New York are going to be unable to take part in the future.

About money laundering

One of the reasons we got into this mess is because the Federal government ignored consumer protection. While they were issuing regulations about money laundering, people like Mark Karpeles were able to take advantage of a complete lack of attention to consumer protection. The Federal government wasted millions of dollars in its cases against bitcoin_charlie, who is not accused of stealing any money or participating in any violent behavior, while ignoring real consumers who were being ripped off by exchanges operating as fractional reserves like Mt Gox and Vircurex. BenLawsky is now able to seize upon the Federal government's inaction and make himself look like a hero of consumer protection because New York will do what the Feds didn't do.
Proponents of anti-money laundering regulations argue that terrorists have been significantly hindered by restrictions in moving money. Terrorism is a great excuse for many things. Consider the case of airport x-ray screening devices. Every time a person goes through one of those devices, he has a 1 in 30 million chance of developing cancer as a direct result of the x-ray exposure pushing that person over the cumulative radiation exposure threshold at which cancer would develop. The risk of dying in a terrorist attack on the plane before the machines were installed was also about 1 in 30 million. Therefore, we spent hundreds of millions of dollars on machines that kill as many people as the terrorists do. Not only that, but anyone would rather die in a terrorist attack than go through chemotherapy and years of pain in a long, excruciating death.
People seem to accept that money laundering rules are necessary, and are pushing the bar of regulation lower and lower every day. How much would your risk of death really increase if money laundering regulations were loosened? If you have a 1 in 1 million greater chance of death but vastly more freedom in your finances, wouldn't you take that? In a perfect world where people didn't die, that would be an unacceptable compromise. In our world, however, people do die. It is ludicrous that people allow themselves to become obese and then live in fear of a terrorist attack.

The creation of a new kind of criminality?

There were some shameful comments from people like the Winklevoss twins yesterday about how they appreciate regulation of the industry. For those guys, it's all about getting rich, which isn't surprising given how their wealth is largely based on winning lawsuits rather than actually creating stuff. Few people seem to be reading the text of the document and understanding how this goes beyond bitcoins. This is a breathtaking expansion of government power that has never been seen before in the financial world. The regulations in this document expand the scope of financial oversight into industries far removed from anything that is covered by existing financial regulations, like open source development. For the first time, they dictate how businesses may pay out profits and promote inefficiency by requiring a bitcoin -> dollar -> bitcoin conversion, widening the pockets of Coinbase. They signal the creation of a huge bureaucracy that will require ever more taxpayer dollars to process millions of "suspicious activity reports," licenses, and minute software changes.
But most importantly, they require recordkeeping and information gathering of unprecedented scope, and trust so many entities to gather these records that they will be leaked to everyone. People running small mining pools that pay out $0.30 per day will be retaining passport numbers. Some people are viewing this as the "government" collecting information on people, but the government already has all this information. What will happen is that these records will be so prevalent because so many people are mandated to collect them that every hacker in the world will have a copy. In what other area of business are so many people required to keep huge databases of passport photos, utility bills, and other documentation that enables all sorts of criminal activity? These records will exist for at least 10 years, be copied in mergers and acquisitions, and leaked to the media and to the criminals, who will pay record sums for them.
The criminals and rogue insiders can use the data not only to perform identity theft, but to learn everything you ever bought, who your contacts are, where you live, how much you earn, what time of day you are away from your house, and what sites you use. They can phish for passwords at just the sites you use, arrange a theft when they recognize you are on vacation, threaten to phone your employer with false allegations of rape unless you pay up, use stolen wallets to frame you by purchasing child pornography with them, and contact repressive governments to have you arrested for associating with a known dissident.
That brings me back to the opening sentence in these thoughts for today. If these regulations pass and spread to other jurisdictions, we may actually find ourselves opposing the uptake of bitcoins. If more states adopt these regulations and people start adopting, then the stage will be set for an increase in government power to track everything about everyone, and a corresponding increase in criminal activity.
I said in the past that bans on bitcoins would not have an impact on the technology because people would go somewhere else, so they were not a change to the fundamentals. Few anticipated such a dramatic expansion of government power like we saw yesterday. Using the technology to procure unprecedented amounts of data would be a change to the fundamentals which even Nakamoto probably didn't intend.

Other

submitted by quintin3265 to BitcoinThoughts [link] [comments]

The SEC will reconsider the Winklevoss ETF, the reasons it gave for rejecting it the first time haven't changed. Why reconsider then?

This is an automatic summary, original reduced by 50%.
The US Securities and Exchange Commission - SEC - will reconsider its decision to reject the creation of the bitcoin-based Winklevoss ETF. The SEC denied approval for the Winklevoss ETF on March 11st. After the refusal to approve the bitcoin ETF for trade on the Bats BZX exchange, the SEC decided to reconsider this decision.
The SEC is currently considering an Ethereum ETF too.
BATS Exchange Intervenes in Behalf of the Winklevoss ETF. The BATS exchange launched a petition in behalf of the Winklevoss ETF to have a new review.
Apart from reconsidering the Winklevoss ETF, The SEC is also moving ahead with the review of the EtherIndex Ether Trust.
The SEC Reviewing the Ethereum ETF. The SEC declared that "The Commission is instituting proceedings pursuant to Section 19(b)(2)(B) of the Act11 to determine whether the proposed rule change should be approved or disapproved." Hopefully, the SEC will approve the Ether fund, because the underlying asset is different than that of the Winklevoss ETF. Nevertheless, there is still a chance that the SEC rejects both, given that the markets for both assets are still unregulated.
This makes the SEC decision to reconsider the Winklevoss ETF and its willingness to consider any other fund based on cryptocurrency, difficult to understand.
Summary Source | FAQ | Theory | Feedback | Top five keywords: SEC#1 ETF#2 Exchange#3 Ether#4 Winklevoss#5
Post found in /Bitcoin, /btc and /BitcoinAll.
NOTICE: This thread is for discussing the submission topic. Please do not discuss the concept of the autotldr bot here.
submitted by autotldr to autotldr [link] [comments]

Winklevoss Twins Launch Gemini Bitcoin Exchange  Bitcoin News  TheProtocol.TV Balancing the Ledger: Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss of Gemini I Fortune Is this the reason the bitcoin price is not exploding right now? Bitcoin Winklevoss ETF the Game Changer Proposed Bitcoin & Marijuana ETFs Generate Intrigue, Controversy

Previously, on March 10, 2017, the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) disapproved the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust petition to trade the first ever Bitcoin ETF. However, the SEC subsequently granted a petition seeking a review of the disapproval. Upon this second review, on July 26, 2018, the SEC again rejected the listing of a Bitcoin ETF. If ... Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust – TRANSFER AGENCY AND SERVICE AGREEMENT (February 8th, 2017). THIS AGREEMENT is made as of the 28th day of September, 2016, by and among STATE STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, Massachusetts trust company having its principal office and place of business at One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02111 (“State Street” or the “Transfer Agent”), WINKLEVOSS ... Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust ETF … The Long and Winding SEC Road. 15 Aug August 15, 2018. By Timothy F. Mills, Editor Blockchain / Crypto, Compliance, Cryptocurrency Securities and Exchange Commission Comments Off on Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust ETF … The Long and Winding SEC Road Like: 0 ... See generally Bats BZX Exch., Inc. Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust Order, Exchange Act Release No. 34-83723, 2018 WL 3596769 (July 26, 2018) [hereinafter SEC Release]. In a three-to-one vote on July 26, 2018, the SEC declined an appeal by the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust to launch the much-awaited Bitcoin ETF. SEC’s ETF [...] SEC’s ETF [...] Skip to content

[index] [49218] [44705] [21280] [34006] [6394] [34309] [33751] [40281] [11044] [35567]

Winklevoss Twins Launch Gemini Bitcoin Exchange Bitcoin News TheProtocol.TV

Negotiation Skills: Former FBI Negotiator Chris Voss At The Australia Real Estate Conference - Duration: 45:53. The Black Swan Group Recommended for you The Winklevoss brothers have launched the 'Revolution Needs Rules' marketing campaign to educate consumers about their product. Subscribe to Fortune - http:/... Official site: https://www.fundgemini.com If you’re wanting to get into selling and buying Bitcoin or Ether but you have no idea where to start, this Gemini exchange review should help you to ... Official site: https://www.fundgemini.com If you’re wanting to get into selling and buying Bitcoin or Ether but you have no idea where to start, this Gemini ... https://bitcoin-geekend.teachable.com The ETF that Winklevoss Trust soon launches will create bridge between conventional stock market and bitcoin. Exact sam...

#