ppl are getting closer to "The blockchain may only ever be applicable to Bitcoin as Money"-cypherdoc.

There is only one blockchain and it’s called Bitcoin

http://blog.oleganza.com/post/104274846653/there-is-only-one-blockchain-and-its-called

Wonder how much they would have had to pay if Bitcoin addresses were stolen? Oh, that's right, nothing. 

I think Pantera is not going to like it. Tim Draper is nuts for Bitcoin and will bid aggressively.

Lol, oh brother.  Listen to what he's saying.

1) Recourse.  There's no recourse for a fraudulent transaction in the Bitcoin world.  Sure, it's possible that in the future a bank or insurance company could act as an intermediary to shield people from these risks, but as it is right now, you're on your own.

2) Ease of use.  Bitcoin wins in some circumstances.  Charge cards win in other circumstances.

3) Transparency.  No one likes oversight into their own financial matters, but like it or not, people in general want those who engage in illegal trade to be brought to justice.  They also expect everyone else to pay their taxes.  This isn't about what you want, it's about what the voters demand.  Bitcoin makes forensic accounting more troublesome, so naturally law enforcement and the tax collectors bristle at the idea of criminals utilizing technology that makes their job harder.

And no, I'm not saying he's 100% right, but to say this is "scary", "dangerous", etc. is simply fear mongering.  MasterCard isn't going to embrace Bitcoin competition, but I don't think anything he said was outright disingenuous.  If anything, his arguments were tepid.  He didn't even mention the tax implications of using Bitcoins for something as simple as a cup of coffee.  I don't find anything troubling about his statements, they're pretty much what you'd expect from someone in his position.  May the best man win.

A little ridicule...

Matthew Driver 1:43: "It's quite hard to understand what the appeal is of a cryptocurrency"
NL:  "Then do not speak about what you do not understand"

Matthew Driver  2:56: "We at Mastercard are not completely ..um.. comfortable with the idea of cryptocurrencies largely because
They go against the whole principle that we have established out business on which is really moving to a world beyond cash and assuring greater transparency and security and (chuckle) simplicity."
NL:  "That bit you mentioned before about not understanding cryptocurrencies?  You really should study what transparency security and simplicity mean and how they are delivered better with cryptocurrencies by the efforts of a few years of hobbyist developing, than they are by your multi-billion multi-decade operation has accomplished.  Do that before you think about bragging."

Matthew Driver 3:35: "Trust is a critical component in any payment system."
NL: "You might think so until you have the opportunity to do without it as a requirement.  Mastercard requires far more trust (and blind faith) than cryptocurrency.  So if you mean that it is critical that folks trust you in order for you to soak up their money, than we agree."

True, although bear in mind that "caught" (and fines paid) doesn't necessarily mean guilty in the casual sense either. Often times the actual offense being charged or investigated (and then settled) are technical violations of recordkeeping requirements, failure to follow the bank's own AML policies, etc. These may or may not relate directly to actual criminal activity. This doesn't mean they aren't guilty of course. For example, one reason a bank might settle is to stop the digging before it uncovers something worse.

Haha.  Thanks for the laugh.

Sure, the blockchain is public, but good luck linking a cautious criminal to a wallet.  And good luck tracking coins through a well-designed mixing service, not to mention portions of ill gotten coins being sprinkled like pixie dust across innocent wallets to throw off the authorities.  Really, this isn't supernatural.  It isn't complicated.  A patient, thoughtful criminal will have no problem evading even the best forensic specialists.  It's a nice feature for Bitcoin users and a pain in the ass for investigators.  A losing battle.  Does Bitcoin offer true anonymity right out of the box?  No, not directly, but the tools are there.

You're arguing that since most money laundering is done through banks, then money laundering through Bitcoin isn't practical?  You realize how ridiculous that argument is, I hope.  Essentially all of the world's wealth sits in banks.  Thus, I would expect most laundering to originate from those banks.  Besides, you're talking about a technology that hasn't even been around for a decade.  It'll take just a little time to catch up.

A contributing factor: 2.0 business


https://koinify.com/blog/gems-public-sale-launch/

Actually we don't even need to fight, just build an alternative system that is completely outside of their facist control.

Enough with the BS compromise and 'working with regulators' memes, these are all essentially sops to the facists when examined closely.