Hawaii’s New Money Transmitters Act Will Require Virtual Currency Licenses (news.bitcoin.com)

The state of Hawaii is planning to regulate the use of bitcoin and digital currencies that would require licensure to transmit cryptocurrency-based funds. Two bills introduced by a group of partisan Hawaiian lawmakers are focused on digital currencies as a monetary instrument under the state’s Money Transmitters Act.
Also read: Coinbase


ICYMI: Another attack on bitcoin coming from Congress (bill would ban “aggregated transactions,” attempts to make “concealment” of data a crime, proposes freezing bank accounts, and would require individual users of “digital currencies” to be regulated to the same level as banks).

The whole text of their proposal: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1241/text

If in the U.S.: Write your representatives to oppose S.1241: https://democracy.io/

Write to Administration to demand a veto of S.1241 or anything like it if it were ever to reach the White House for signature or veto: https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

An opposition letter to S.1241 has been developed by the Bitcoin Foundation, but I don't think it goes far enough. I think any organizational opposition letter (e.g. from EFF, Bitcoin Foundation, or other org) should call for total and absolute death by fire of S.1241 or anything like it. (See second season of Stranger Things if you have any question about what I mean about death by fire.) https://bitcoinfoundation.org/redraft-%c2%a71241-combating-money-laundering-act-2017/

(The following is my recent letter over the weekend sent to the U.S. Administration regarding S.1241, requesting that a position be taken on the bill to announce that a veto would be provided if the legislation were to be advanced. Please feel free to copy and paste from it or develop your own.)

This is regarding S.1241 – the so-called "Combating Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing, and Counterfeiting Act of 2017."

This proposal is a sick joke. Its proponents have given a fancy name to something that simply put, is designed to attack the American worker and would do absolutely zero in relation to what the title implies.

The bill would brings cryptocurrencies under the umbrella of civil forfeiture. It also would require the DHS to provide, within 18 months of ratification, a report on strategies to detect cryptocurrencies at border crossings, which would be impossible since there is no technology that can do that.

I can put a bitcoin on a paper wallet or memorize seed words in my brain that represent a whole wallet and cross borders physically or virtually, then later reproducing the wallet at will. This law would attempt to prohibit me from exercising my memory to access my resources across borders, a ridiculous approach to finance. Finance is of course cross-border and private.

Section 13 of the proposed Act is just one particularly vicious aspect of it, constituting nothing less than an attack upon the American worker.

Sec. 13 of S.1241 seeks to define anyone issuing, redeeming, or cashing bitcoin as a financial institution, requiring them to comply with the Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. §5312 and requiring INDIVIDUALS AND SMALL BUSINESSES to adopt the same formal reporting procedures as financial institutions for the purpose of reporting suspicious financial transactions.

In effect this Act would treat INDIVIDUALS as though they were BANKS and impose the same financial licensing and reporting obligations on them.

Please communicate to those who are pushing S.1241 forward that it will get nothing but a Veto.

Thank you.

submitted by /u/pcvcolin
[link] [comments]

How much extra disk space does txindex=1 require?

For example for a 1 MB block, does the extra Tx index database take up another 100 kB on average?

And a follow-up: once my node has completed -reindex after setting txindex=1 can I COPY the blockchain AND the TX index database together to other nodes? I know the blockchain can be copied but I’m not sure if the new node needs to reindex the blockchain itself or if the index database copies over as well.

Recent Questions – Bitcoin Stack Exchange

Why do compiled binaries still require libdb, BerkeleyDB, and others?

I compiled Bitcoin Core on one Raspberry Pi from source after installing all the necessary dependencies including all the libboost’s and BerkeleyDB. That application runs fine, and bitcoind lives happily in /usr/local/bin

So I tried copying bitcoind and the other Bitcoin executables from that directory to a brand new Raspberry Pi running a brand new clean operating system, and the applications wouldn’t run. I got errors until I installed libboost and BerkeleyDB and all the other dependencies on that second computer as well.

I thought the compiling process made a stand-alone executable program? Why did the compiled binary still require these shared libraries?

Like, executables are available to download from bitcoin.org that are truly stand-alone. How can I compile from source an executable as stand-alone as these?

Recent Questions – Bitcoin Stack Exchange