Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 360 posts

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#191

Post by ericd »

Jabanga wrote: post #112
chowells wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You interfere with my right to personal autonomy by bankrupting yourself throwing good money after bad in stupid investments, leaving yourself destitute and in need of additional public services. Or do you also intend to claim that the poor should be allowed to die on the streets as punishment for not being rich?

No one has a right to force you to support someone who made themselves destitute. You're using one infringement of personal autonomy to justify another.

In which case I assume you're of the "taxes are an infringement on freedom" camp of extreme libertarian?

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#192

Post by _delirium »

prgmatic wrote: post #161

What does this mean if you've bought or sold cryptocurrency within 2017?

The only people directly affected are people who have offered an "initial coin offering" (ICO) of pre-mined coins from a new cryptocurrency, in the U.S., without registering the offering with the SEC. This ruling is looking at ICOs specifically, not just anyone who has bought or sold cryptocurrency.

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#193

Post by JumpCrisscross »

smokeyj wrote: post #166
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the SEC should show that it protects everyone's rights One sure-fire way to get the SEC to go absolutely ballistic is to hurt mom-and-pop investors. This is why the commission was founded [1] and why securities law maintains "accredited investor" thresholds, controversial as they are. > Is there a straightforward way to do an Edgar filing that doesn't require a bunch of training? Securities lawyers are a few thousa…

Why shouldn't mom-and-pop get the choice to invest in SEC regulated companies? If you like what the SEC has to offer, you can keep it. Taking away that choice seems paternalistic at best, corrupt at worst.

> Why shouldn't mom-and-pop get the choice to invest in SEC regulated companies?

When retail, i.e. unaccredited investors, get hurt (a) there are more of them and (b) it more often than not puts them into dire, sometimes existential, straits. The latter leads to political backlash and instability, e.g. the 1930s.

Basically, you must have a nest egg to act as a safety cushion before you can invest in risky things. This makes sense on another level, in that doing diligence on un-registered companies is expensive. That, in turn, drives a minimum practical investment size.

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#194

Post by resf »

krschultz wrote: post #50
oneplane wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they don't. That organisation only works in the USA, they can't do anything for 'the world'. Let me clarify this: Just because the US SEC wants something doesn't make it happen on the internet. They can do things with governments and companies, and that's about it. If some random hacker in Ukraine decides to use a ETH or BTC or smart contract or create a new coin, the SEC isn't going to be able to influence that.…

Good luck building the "economy of the future" without the US banking system. There is a reason banking sanctions are the US's most powerful non-military diplomatic tool.

Tell that to WeChat, Alipay et al.

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#195

Post by wuliwong »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #180
smokeyj wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't mom-and-pop get the choice to invest in SEC regulated companies? If you like what the SEC has to offer, you can keep it. Taking away that choice seems paternalistic at best, corrupt at worst.

Should they also have the choice to take non-FDA approved drugs?

I would say yes. :)

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#196

Post by regulation_d »

Animats wrote: post #21
joeyspn wrote: post #2

BOOM! the game just changed... > In light of the facts and circumstances, the agency has decided not to bring charges in this instance, or make findings of violations in the Report, but rather to caution the industry and market participants: the federal securities laws apply to those who offer and sell securities in the United States, regardless whether the issuing entity is a traditional company or a decentralized a…

Yes. The SEC is indicating that they're not going to apply this retroactively. Any upcoming Initial Coin Offering to US persons, though, is in trouble. Like all the ones listed here.[1] [1] https://www.icoalert.com/

I'm not sure what you mean by "apply this retroactively". their legal argument for tokens being a security is established law. This press release has very little bearing on whether an company may or may not be prosecuted. Furthermore, ICO's are certainly not prima facie forbidden. The legal analysis will be a case by case basis, particularly asking whether a token would be considered an "investment contract".

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#198

Post by Jabanga »

ericd wrote: post #191
Jabanga wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one has a right to force you to support someone who made themselves destitute. You're using one infringement of personal autonomy to justify another.

In which case I assume you're of the "taxes are an infringement on freedom" camp of extreme libertarian?

I don't believe all taxes are an infringement on freedom. A tax on natural resource consumption, and to a lesser extent, immovable property within a state's jurisdiction, can be morally justified in my opinion. I also don't have a problem with a head tax, conditioned on the punishment for noncompliance being exile, rather than imprisonment. A tax on private transactions is an infringement on liberty in my opinion.

On that note, it's interesting that the first 'War on Drugs' used taxes on private transactions as its avenue to prohibition. Since the government at the time didn't have the Constitutional authority (this is before the Supreme Court was utterly corrupted by politics) to outright ban drugs, what it did instead is require that all targeted drugs pay a stamp tax, and then simply refuse to issue the stamp. This shows the prohibitive nature of taxes on private transactions.

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#199

Post by rdlecler1 »

Ironically ether & bitcoin started dropping last night around midnight. Makes me wonder if any SEC folks were involved in insider trading. Anyone care to speculate on what this will do to ether/bitcoin values? Does this concentrate interest in the existing players or does it hurt demand and speculation therefore depressing prices?

Re: SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities

#200

Post by [deleted] »

lstyls wrote: post #172
FajitaNachos wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is your hedge fund registered with the SEC? What's the name of it? I've been thinking about crypto hedge funds lately and am genuinely curious.

From HN profile > General Partner, Crypto Lotus. > Cryptolotus.com First google result for "crypyolotus sec" is an apparent SEC filing: https://goo.gl/txKA3t

[deleted]
Post reply on HN