pull down to refresh

Well here we go. I expect crypto = terrorism to start memeing in DC.
The recommendations go on, however, to claim to close “loopholes in Treasury authorities.” It does this by defining “virtual asset wallet providers, certain blockchain validator nodes, and decentralized finance services” as “financial institutions.” This definition would make each of these entities subject to the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). Treasury also recommends that “DeFi service providers, noncustodial wallet providers, miners, and validators” all be treated the same as financial institutions and banks.
Finally, the recommendations also include making “blockchain nodes or other elements of cryptocurrency transactions” subject to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).
I'm excited to see how this plays out now, with so much anti-government-surveillance-state vibe in the air, and the pending election season.
Well, "excited" is not the best word, but it's the best I can do.
reply
It’s likely the acid test.
Time for the network to come of age. No longer just a teenager.
reply
Agree, it's a crucial moment for the network to mature and evolve.
reply
Yellen can suck my node
reply
  1. 1st they ignore you ☑️ 2010
  2. Then laugh at you ☑️ 2017
  3. Then they fight you ⬅️ 2024
  4. Then you win… 🏁 2031
Lucky number 7 increments. Laughably predictable.
reply
First, they MUST show proof they have any authority or jurisdiction over Bitcoin.
  • Is it Bitcoin created by their central banks / govs / institutions ?
  • Is it Bitcoin something different than simply money, form of exchange value? (because if they want to ban money, then they would have to ban anything else as medium of exchange and they are fucked).
  • Who are them to control my own money and how do I use it? Show me any proof that I signed ANY contract with a gov, bank or anybody else that I GIVE THEM MY CONSETNT to control my own money, labor and freedom.
THESE are the questions NOBODY is asking but just bitching about how a govs ban x or y.
MAKE THE GOVS OBSOLETE JUST BY NOT OBEYING THEM.
reply
It's hilarious when they talk about "financial inclusion" for CBDCs and then put out shit like this. They're sole reason for existing is to make access to financial services as exclusive as possible, as these recommendations prove.
reply
Your critique of financial inclusion rhetoric versus actual policy is sharply observed.
reply
Will be fun to watch them expose themselves even more.
reply
Great show incoming!
deleted by author
reply