edit: welcome bitcoin bagholders/downvoters!
edit: welcome bitcoin bagholders/downvoters!
Laws versus tech, the law almost always wins (one of the few scenarios I'm familiar with where tech "won" was the reversal of PGP being treated as an export restricted munition [1] [2]). Tech is just a tool, and the arguments for crypto currencies compared to traditional fiat digitally represented (Central Bank Digital Currencies aka CBDCs [3]) just aren't that compelling (especially with countries, 54 so far more on the way, continuing to roll out instant payment networks [4]). This emboldens the very real observation Ms Yellen makes that crypto exists to obfuscate the transfer and storage of value against the intent of government financial regulation.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...
[2] https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/55023/what-was-...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_bank_digital_currency
[4] https://empower1.fisglobal.com/rs/650-KGE-239/images/Report_...
What seems more likely is KYC regulation for transactions and SEC review for ICOs. If this happens, Bitcoin will skyrocket in value as it crosses into the mainstream.
(disclosure: minor HODLer since 2013)
I can see a strong argument for governments to be intrinsically against something that takes away their own power. On the other hand, if that thing takes away the power of their rivals more, there's no reason for them to see it as a net win and act accordingly.
Good luck fighters...
Yeah Janet Yellen the famous Marxist... wtf??
If you want to set up your own currency, you also need to set up a legal system to resolve disputes, a law enforcement system to enforce judgements, and a military to ultimately defend all these other systems.
Crypto seemed like it had to reinvent the wheel of the financial system, with all its pitfalls. Turns out the rabbit hole is much deeper than that.
That makes gold less useful as a currency than cocaine, ammunition or ram sticks.