W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-interledger@w3.org > November 2016

Re: Regulatory Considerations running an ILP node (Re: [Ledger] Bootstrapping Interledger)

From: Andrew Bransford Brown <andrewbb@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 19:11:50 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPS+YFKa=Vnh5TkOP34Z3Kg=wkNgkVRdG5j02AswdyC9ThZ7rA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Frazee <pfrazee@gmail.com>
Cc: Ken Griffith <kengriffith@gmail.com>, Interledger Community Group <public-interledger@w3.org>
You are in a similar place as I was 9 years ago.  Designing things right
don't provide enough visible leverage points for the ones with capital to
see as valuable.

Fortunately, things are changing.  And the value provided has outweighed
their desire for instant/perpetual returns.

Andrew B. Brown
(512) 947-8282
http://KidsCourtyard.com


On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Paul Frazee <pfrazee@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have to ask then, is my usecase realistic? I dont have much use for
> Texan stocks. I need general payments.
>
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Andrew Bransford Brown <
> andrewbb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That is due to existing people with leverage points they don't want to
>> give up.  However, a new market can be designed right.  That's why I'm
>> suggesting a Texas Stock Market.
>>
>>
>> Andrew B. Brown
>> (512) 947-8282
>> http://KidsCourtyard.com
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 6:08 PM, Ken Griffith <kengriffith@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> > The value being traded exists somewhere at all times and its location
>>> > and owner must be known at every step in the transaction.
>>>
>>> That is the fundamental weakness of an open system like Interledger. The
>>> regulators will never allow a regulated node to connect to the unregulated
>>> nodes.  Maybe in 50 years this will be possible.  But the world we live in
>>> today is bogged down with AML rules.
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Friday, 11 November 2016 00:12:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 11 November 2016 00:12:24 UTC