The below is an off-site archive of all tweets posted by @lopp ever

September 2nd, 2015

Of course, using node votes for anything isn’t feasible unless we have a Proof of Full Node mechanism. https://t.co/IRkfx6R5Zj /cc @SDLerner

via Twitter Web Client

If you consider the blockchain to be a shared network resource, if anyone deserves to vote on the max block size it’s node operators.

via Twitter Web Client

mgiraldo there, I fixed it: pic.twitter.com/7dXInPm559

via Twitter Web Client (retweeted on 4:05 PM, Sep 2nd, 2015 via Twitter Web Client)

Decided to take advantage of the difficulty reset and mined a few thousand blocks. Now I’m a Testnet Bitcoin Baron. pic.twitter.com/uiKw28PBeA

via Twitter for Android

@desantis It only counts if you take a fee, so don’t take a $0.000000001 fee ;-)

via Twitter Web Client in reply to desantis

7) SB680 does not seek to clarify which business models fall under money transmission. It’s subject to whim of the Commissioner of Banks.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

6) There is no min threshold to be considered a money transmitter under SB680; transmitting $0.0000001 could require you to have a license.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

5) SB680’s $250K min net worth is the “lowest possible req” to show that you are “financially responsible.” Crypto assets don’t count.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

4) “Money” transmission covers any value exchange, even crypto => crypto.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

3) SB680 seeks to regulate anyone who “engages in business” of value transmission by charging a fee on top of current exchange rates.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

2) SB680 is unlikely to pass this session because the legislators are still struggling to even pass the state budget, but it will return.

via Twitter Web Client in reply to lopp

1) Takeaways from last night’s Triangle Bitcoin & Business Meetup on proposed digital currency legislation, SB680. http://t.co/EWHyQ5I9jg

via Twitter Web Client