How do you know? You throw wild accusations, personal opinions and ad hominems around without a shred of evidence.

Interesting subject.

But full of common places and not actually pointing to anything that will present any kind of workable solutions, I think:

So regulation is bad, inevitable, but bad. Why? Well, because regulation has been a failure that only helps the rich get richer while the poor gets poorer. True indeed -in one context- but not necessarily i ALL contexts: Regulation has also saved millions of jobs, hundreds of thousands of companies and, as of today, in the US, protects then poor's balances up to $100,000. Lets not forget the positives either. And, if we extend that to the IMF or the EUF, we know also that several countries have been financially saved in the recent and not so recent past, from  Mexico and Argentina to several EU associates. So there's a lot tpo be said in favor of regulation, once we take a closer look and, above all, escape the common places that seem to work only with ignorants. truth is that without quantitative easing and the Corporate bail out, the US would be a bankrupt country financially, living if a decade-or-more great depression and a society in which violence and crime would be rampant. Put the avoidance of that also on the has column on REGULATION.

But, since we, in crypto, are so smart and have everything so easily figured out, why not taking a look at the non-regulation crypto alternative? Ok, we have this wonderful -and almost free-technology that allows, among many other things, worldwide transactions almost instantly and practically free. And, to go with it, a "starting anew" monetary system where inflation will be almost controlled -not really- and a new worldwide denomination currency to go with it... only problem is, without regulation, it is like banks with doors open and no guards inside or police that will stop thieves to come and get it as many times as they want and with guarantee of non-prosecution even if they are caught. It's been called the "Wild West" by some romantics but it is not even remotely close to the lawless West: in order to assault the mining payrolls and the mail and bank physical transfers, the bandits had to show  balls of steel, risk their lives and definitely facing the ruthless bounty hunters even when successful, while our crypto bandits get to brag about their thievery hidden, if they so choose, under anonymous handles.

So, fact is that, if you are against regulation, you are supporting these bandits all the way. There's no middle ground. It's either or. And no, the "they deserve it" 'argument' doesn't fly AND YOU KNOW IT.

It's time for the technology -and currency- to serve the people, not the bandits. Welcome regulation, even if it is already quite late. Regulation, for lack of a better word, is indeed GOOD.

Exactly in what way can the Moola-Mintpal be "good"? A good merger is the one where the synergies between the merging companies produces benefits to the acquiring one AND BOTH COMPANIES' CUSTOMERS. None of that applies here: Mintpal is a broken exchange, only saved from bankruptcy by the VRC  devs -who were forced to save it to save themselves and their coin-. This will be, best case scenario, a wahsing up the face to try and convince traders that the flaws in security of the past will be taken care off... which people may or may not want to believe and, ion any case, will not benefit them at all. Any integration that they may offer is already widely and freely available at Cryptsy, so no advantages whatsoever for customer. For Moolah? probably just another bad investment to try to benefit of "having a profitable exchange" that MintPal is far from being currently. And one they have, obviously, bought on the cheap, to boot.

There's no possible outcome in this merger that can even remotely benefit either crypto or the customers. None whatsoever.

I hope moolah add fiat pairs to mintpal.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10769041/The-US-is-an-oligarchy-study-concludes.html

The masses haven't had an effect on American public policy in the last 40 years. We are in effect already a corporate oligopoly.

How could you assume that bitcoin regulation wouldn't be written in the banks favor? That just seems incredibly naive by now.

I don't know why you would want to ignore such obvious warning signs. I know not everyone is being as hard-headed as you are. You must be in quite deep with the NAUT.

Well fair warning, once the rest of cryptoland understands Brian Kelly's true intentions, NAUT is going to drop like a rock.

How exactly am I missing the point? You clearly said he is trying destroy BTC, or whatever word you used.

You sound kind of like a radical newb, which is fine, but my point is very clearly stated that your hyping something that is never going to happen, wether it's the true motive or not.

So obviously your attempt is to troll the thread, regardless of your reasononing.  Shutting down of the bitcoin and 51% attacks are like Bigfoot, everyone has heard about it, but no one has actually seen one.......

It's old and tired, and radical and newbish

Will the multipool development be paid for by the NSF or do we need to organize a bounty? That's presuming someone doesn't want to run their own.

Man....do you have any idea how borring you are? Who do you think you are? Jesus Christ or maybe GOD himself? I think you are just a frustrated loner that has no friends, no girlfriend...maybe not even a dog, that wants you to walk him in the park.

Please get a life AND let other people life their life of choose

Dirac back at 1.4 and NAUT should be in a much stronger position if it happens again. I noticed David was getting mixed up with sync guys, not sure what the story is there.