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

Sorry, for the grammatical error.  I was thinking while typing and did not
re-read.

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


On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 7:11 PM, Andrew Bransford Brown <andrewbb@gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>