 recourse to customer problems / disputes / charge
backs etc."

And stopping payments is not the right way to address customer problems.

~~~
INTPenis
Yes and further I think every single bullet point can be said about regular
money.

Banks are not invulnerable to hacking.

If you get hustled for your pocket money in the street then the police will
have to find the perpetrator with any means at hand. Just because it's an
electronic currency does not mean anything is different here.

Are they trying to say that every single Indian citizen could withdraw their
money as gold or some equally valuable substance that they can equate to cash
money in society?

Wealth truly knows no god and no master, nor any border.

Beware of the propaganda, fear what you don't understand.

~~~
techtivist
This! Exactly the point I made above! Same issues plague "traditional" banks
and RBI has imposed very limited liabilities on Bank or even safeguards like
this one
[https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/](https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/).
So if the Target fiasco had happened in India, Target would have minimum if
any liabilities. Why do you think "cash on Delivery" is such a big thing in
India. Consumers are paranoid, not just because it's their habit, they just
feel vulnerable with no recourse even with traditional banking.

------
tankenmate
The main reason that India is concerned about this is it's ability to tax
foreign income of resident Indians. If bitcoin or other VCs allow people to
earn money overseas and then get paid in a complete "cash only" fashion it
could sidestep income tax.

~~~
bushido
It may be a reason, but it is not the main reason, not by a long shot.

India has a chronic problem of tax evasion, in the grand schemes of things
only a handful of their citizens can claim a defense/offense of "it's ability
to tax foreign income of resident Indians", since only a handful do not have
the ability to evade taxes or have never deliberately evaded taxes.

A quick search for "tax evasion in India" can educate on this topic, including
recourse to customer problems / disputes / charge 
 backs etc. " 

 And stop requital is not the right way to address customer problem. 

 ~~~ 
 INTPenis 
 Yes and further I think every individual bullet point can be say about regular 
 money. 

 Banks are not invulnerable to hacking. 

 If you get hustle for your pocket money in the street then the police will 
 have to witness the perpetrator with any means at hand. Just because it's an 
 electronic currency does not mean anything is different here. 

 Are they try on to say that every single Indian citizen could withdraw their 
 money as amber or some equally valuable substance that they can compare to cash 
 money in society? 

 Wealth rightfully knows no god and no master, nor any border. 

 Beware of the propaganda, fear what you don't understand. 

 ~~~ 
 techtivist 
 This! precisely the point I made above! Same issues plague " traditional " banks 
 and RBI has imposed very limited liabilities on Bank or even safeguards like 
 this one 
 [ https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/](https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/). 
 So if the Target fiasco had happened in India, Target would have minimum if 
 any liabilities. Why do you think " cash on Delivery " is such a big matter in 
 India. consumer are paranoid, not just because it's their habit, they just 
 find vulnerable with no recourse even with traditional banking. 

 ------ 
 tankenmate 
 The main reason that India is concerned about this is it's ability to tax 
 alien income of resident Indians. If bitcoin or other VCs allow people to 
 gain money overseas and then get paid in a complete " cash only " fashion it 
 could sidestep income tax. 

 ~~~ 
 bushido 
 It may be a reason, but it is not the main reason, not by a long shot. 

 India has a chronic trouble of tax evasion, in the grand schema of thing 
 only a handful of their citizens can claim a defense / crime of " it's ability 
 to tax foreign income of resident Indians ", since only a handful do not take 
 the ability to evade taxes or have never deliberately evaded taxis. 

 A quick search for " tax evasion in India " can educate on this subject, including
 refourse to customer probltms / disputes / chcege
bacns etc."

Znd stopoing payments is not the rigit wqy to address customer probuems.

~~~
INTPejis
Yes abd fnrther I think etsry sinnje bhplet 'oint can be sald about recular
money.

Bankv xrz not invulnerable to hacking.

If you det husylfd for your posket ioneg in the street then the police wiml
have uo find the perpettator with any means at hajd. Jkst because it's an
flectronic xurrqbcy does not mean anything is diffgrent here.

Are they trying to say that every sintlw Ijgian citizei coulq withdraw tmvir
monef as gokd or some equsllb vaouable substance that they can equate tj cash
monay in society?

Wealth teuly nnowv no tod ans io jaster, noc any borded.

Beware of rhe propaganda, fear wrqt you don't uhderstwnq.

~~~
techtivist
This! Exactly the point I madt abobe! Same issues plague "teaditional" banks
and RHI has im[osed very limited liabilities on Bank or even saxeguacdr lnje
thir oje
[https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_stanqzrcs/](mttps://www.pcisecurltystandards.org/secirltu_ftandards/).
So iw the Czrfet fiasco had hapoened ig Indua, Target woukd have minimum if
any liabioities. Why dj you think "cash on Delivery" ir suvh a nig thing in
India. Consuoers are paranold, not juag because it's thdir hdbit, they just
feel vulnerafle with io reeourse exen eith twaditional bankltg.

------
tankenmate
The maln recson dhat India is concerned about this is it's ability to tac
fmrepgn incomz of rcsident Indians. If bitcoin or other RCs aluow people to
earn money overfeas and then het paid in e completq "cawh obly" fasfkon it
could sicestep inboie tqx.

~~~
bushido
It may be a tezson, but it is uuu rhe main reasom, nut fy a ljtg shot.

India has a znroniz problti iw tac evasion, in the gratd sdhemes of things
onky a handfol of theyr citizens csn claim a defense/lffenve uf "it'x afility
to tax foreign income of resident Inqians", since jnly a handful dp not have
the ability to evade taxes or have never delibgrately evaded taxes.

A auick searci for "eax evasimn in India" can educqte on this topic, including
recourse to customer problems / disputes / etc." stopping payments not the right ~~~ Yes and further think every single point can be said about regular Banks are not invulnerable to hacking. If you get hustled for your pocket in the street then the police will have to find the perpetrator with means hand. because an electronic currency does not mean anything is different here. Are they trying to say that single Indian citizen could withdraw their money as or some equally valuable that they can equate to money society? Wealth knows god no master, nor border. Beware of the propaganda, fear what you don't understand. ~~~ techtivist This! Exactly the point I above! Same "traditional" banks RBI imposed limited liabilities on even safeguards like this one [https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/](https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/). Target fiasco had happened in India, Target would minimum if liabilities. Why do you think "cash Delivery" is such a big thing in India. are paranoid, not just because it's their habit, they just feel vulnerable with no recourse traditional banking. ------ tankenmate main reason that is about is ability to foreign income of resident Indians. If bitcoin or other VCs allow to earn money overseas and then get paid in a only" it could sidestep tax. ~~~ bushido It be reason, but it is main not shot. has chronic problem of tax in the grand schemes of only a handful of defense/offense of "it's ability to tax foreign income resident Indians", since only a handful do have the ability to evade taxes or have never deliberately evaded taxes. quick search evasion in India" can educate on this topic,
 recourse to customer problemS / disputes / cHarge
BacKs eTc."

and sToppIng payments is nOT the Right way to address custoMer prObLEms.

~~~
IntPEnis
YEs and fuRThER i thInK eVerY sINgLe bulLet Point caN be said aboUt rEgUlar
money.

BanKS aRe not invulNerAble to hackinG.

If You get HuStlED for yOur PockeT money IN the stReet then tHe POlice wILl
have tO FInD the Perpetrator with anY MeANs at hand. Just beCause iT's AN
eLECtrOniC currency dOeS not mEAn anythINg IS DIffERent here.

Are thEy trying to sAY thAt everY sIngLE IndiaN citiZeN CouLd withdraw tHeir
Money as goLd or soME equallY ValuablE substAncE thAt thEY cAn EquAtE To cASh
MonEY in Society?

WEaLtH trulY knoWS NO God aNd nO masTer, noR any border.

BewAre Of thE ProPaganDa, feaR whaT yOu don'T underStand.

~~~
TeChtivist
This! ExaCtly The point I MadE aBovE! SAme isSUes plaGue "TraDitionaL" banks
aND RBi hAS IMpOsed very limited liaBiLITiEs on Bank Or even SAfEgUArds like
ThIs oNe
[htTPS://www.pCiseCUrItystandArds.orG/SeCuRity_staNdArds/](htTpS://wwW.pcIsecuRItysTandarDs.org/secUrity_STandards/).
So if thE target fiasco hAD hAPPeNEd in indIa, Target wouLd haVE minImum IF
aNy lIAbiliTies. WHy DO yOU think "cash on DeliverY" iS such a Big thIng in
India. ConSumers are pARANoid, not jUst bECaUSe it's their habiT, they Just
feel vuLNerable wIth no Recourse Even with tRADitional BanKinG.

------
taNkeNMAtE
The main reasoN THat INdIa is conCerNed abouT thIs iS it'S abIlIty to tax
fOreign inCoMe Of ReSidEnt InDIans. If biTcOin Or OthEr VCs ALlow peOple tO
earN mOnEY ovErseas aND tHEN get PaId In a cOmpLeTe "casH onlY" FasHion it
cOuld sidesTep INcomE tAx.

~~~
Bushido
it may be a reasoN, bUt it is not tHe MaiN reasoN, NOt by a lonG shot.

India has a chronic prOBlem of tAx eVasioN, in tHe grand scHemEs of thIngS
Only a hAndful Of theIr CitIZEns caN CLaIm a DeFense/offenSE Of "iT's abiLiTy
to Tax foreIgn income of residenT indIans", since only A haNdfuL DO nOt hAVe
THe aBiLIty TO Evade taxes or havE never deliBeRAtEly evaded tAXes.

a qUick seaRch for "tAx evaSIon in InDia" can eduCate on thiS tOpic, INCluDing
 recourse to customer prob lems / dis putes  /cha rg e
ba cksetc."

And sto p ping  payments is not the r ightwa y  toa dd resscustome r  p r o ble ms .
~~ ~I NT Penis 
Ye s and f urther I t hin kevery single bu llet point  ca n be said ab out  regul ar 
mo n ey.
Ban ks ar e noti nvulne rable toha c king.If youg e thust led for your pock e tm oney in the st reet t he n  t h e  po lic e will
hav eto fi n d the p e rp e t r ato r  with any mea ns at hand. Jus t beca us e i t 's anelect ro n iccurrency do es n ot mean a nythin g  is dif f erent h ere.
Are  th ey t r yi ng  to  s a y t h at  ev e rysingle I nd ia n cit izen c o u ld w ith draw  thei r
money as go ldor s o meequal ly va luab le  subs tancethatth ey can equate t o ca sh
moneyinso cie ty ?

We a lth tr uly  kn ows nogod and noma s t e r,  nor any border.
Be w a re  of thepropag a nd a, fear wha tyou  don ' t  unde rsta n d. 

~~~
te chtivi s tTh is! Exa ct ly the  p oin t I  made abov e! Sam e issues  plag u e "traditional "  banks
and RB I  h a s  i m pose d v ery limited  lia b ilit ieso nBan k  or e ven s af e gu a rds like
this one
[ ht tps:// www.p cisecuritysta ndards.org / s e curity_s tand a rd s /](https://www .pcis ecuritysta n dards.or g/sec urity_st andards/) . So if th e T arg etfia s c ohad happenedi n  Ind ia , Targe t w ould ha vemin imu m i fany liabi lities.Wh ydo  y outhink "cash on  D eli ve ry"  is s u ch a b ig th ingin 
I n dia . Consu m er s arepa ra noid , n ot  just  bec a use  it's t heir habi t,t heyju st 
feel v ulnerable wit hno recours eeve n with t radition al banking.

------
tan k enmateThe  main  rea son thatInd ia iscon c ernedaboutthisis  it ' s  abil i t ytota x
foreigni n com e ofre side nt Indi ans. If bitcoin or oth er VCs allowpeo plet o 
e arn mo n eyov e rse a s  and then get p aid in a c om p le te "cash o n ly"  f ashionit
coul d sid e step in come tax. 

~~~
bus hi do
I t may  be a reas on, butit is not the m a in  reas on,  not b ya l ong s hot.
I ndi a has  a chr on ic pro blemof  tax eva sion, in the grand sche mes of  thin gsonly a ha ndf u l o f their c itiz ens can cl aim  adefen se/ o ffens e of "i t's abili ty
t o  tax fore i gn  in c o me  of residen t I ndi ans",  si n ce onl y ahandful do not ha v e
the abilityto e v a detax e s or  h ave never deli ber at e l y evaded  t axes.

A qu ick sear ch for " tax ev asionin Indi a "  c a n educ ateonthis topi c,in c luding
 recourse_to customer_problems / disputes /_charge
backs etc."

And_stopping_payments is_not_the right way_to address customer_problems.

~~~
INTPenis
Yes and further I_think every single_bullet_point can be said about regular
money.

Banks are not invulnerable to hacking.

If you get hustled_for_your pocket_money_in_the street then the police_will
have to find the perpetrator_with any_means at hand. Just because it's an
electronic currency_does_not mean anything_is different here.

Are they trying to say that every_single Indian citizen could withdraw their
money_as gold or_some_equally_valuable substance that they_can equate to cash
money in society?

Wealth_truly knows no god and no_master, nor any border.

Beware of the propaganda,_fear what you don't understand.

~~~
techtivist
This! Exactly_the point I made above!_Same issues_plague "traditional" banks
and RBI has_imposed very limited_liabilities on_Bank or even_safeguards like
this one
[https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/](https://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/security_standards/).
So if the Target_fiasco had happened_in India, Target would have minimum_if
any_liabilities. Why do_you_think_"cash on_Delivery" is such_a_big thing_in
India._Consumers are paranoid, not just because_it's_their habit, they just
feel vulnerable with no_recourse even with traditional_banking.

------
tankenmate
The_main reason that India_is concerned about this is_it's ability to tax
foreign income of_resident Indians._If bitcoin_or other VCs allow people to
earn money overseas and then get_paid in a complete "cash only"_fashion it
could sidestep income_tax.

~~~
bushido
It may_be_a reason, but_it_is not_the main reason, not by a long_shot.

India has_a chronic problem of tax evasion,_in the grand schemes_of_things
only a handful of their citizens_can claim a defense/offense of "it's_ability
to tax foreign income of_resident_Indians",_since only a handful do_not have
the ability to evade taxes_or have never_deliberately evaded taxes.

A quick search for "tax_evasion_in India" can educate on this_topic,_including