301–310 of 360 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not understand. Sorry.
He's talking about how the government systematically Rob's from the future through inflation - in particular hurting the poor the hardest and creating lost decades and millennials along the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> SEC rulings only apply to American entities/business This is wrong. SEC rulings apply as soon as your investors are US residents. [1] I know neither of us are lawyers, but at least back up what you claim if it might put people's money at risk. [1] https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/internatl/foreign-priv...
I tried to be clear, but I can see where there is possible ambiguity. I said business, not businesses. The impact would be on their existence within the US, but not internationally. Not with regard to the SEC alone. edit: Okay, you started as snark, then tightened it up a bit after an edit, but my point still stands.
The question is whether or not what the Ethereum Foundation sold to US residents are securities in the SEC's eyes?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Again, the Howey test and SEC rulings only apply to American entities/business. So, if it may impact the status of the Ethereum Foundation (barring all other questions) in the United States, but it won't impact it elsewhere at all except maybe in sentiment. Lately the United States' power of influence in economic matters has decreased, so I don't see that being a major deficit in the long run with regard to a technol…
> SEC rulings only apply to American entities/business This is wrong. SEC rulings apply as soon as your investors are US residents. [1] I know neither of us are lawyers, but at least back up what you claim if it might put people's money at risk. [1] https://www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin/internatl/foreign-priv...
I can see how our wires got crossed.
I interpreted your original comment as questioning whether or not this was a threat to the specific tech or foundation at large, and not just isolated to the US region.
So, I guess the argument is moot -- seems like my mistake. It's certainly up in the air in the US at this point. I do find the progression of events interesting, regardless. In spite of what I said, the US does have a social impact with decisions like this -- just maybe not so much right now as in recent years[0].
I get argumentative because I see a lot of promise. I like technical discussion about it vs. regular degradation, so I usually have something to say.
[0] http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/imf-predicts-...
Crypto folks played it perfectly collectively over the past 4 years. It's now too late to squash the decentralization of trust and value transfer.
Just a couple more years and governments, banks, insurance, and legal industries will find themselves in the same unfortunate position as taxi companies with Uber or the music industry with bittorrent.
There I said it. Something people don't want to say for fear that we will "ruin it".
But it's too late. I already prefer dealing in BTC and ETH and will not need to convert to fiat very often in about 5-10 years out.
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.
> 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. Thi…
The SEC should show that it protects everyone's rights and not just large firms with piles of cash to pay to them and to pay expensive lawyers. Otherwise we have to assume that this is largely about trying to tax things. The way they can do this is by making a real effort to update their technical, documentation, and regulatory programs. Is there a straightforward way to do an Edgar filing that doesn't require a bunc…
Are you genuinely asking what the value of the SEC is? I generally am pro low taxes but the crypto environment right now is so flush with scams that it explains itself
I'm not terribly happy with the decision, though I can't say I'm surprised. I enjoy the drama of the Wild West that is Ethereum and the rest of the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Minimal regulation encourages innovation, while regulated markets can exist for people who want stability and certain guarantees to prevent fraud (or at least make it difficult). I wonder what would happen if financial regulations became more "op…
The regulations put in place by the SEC are not to help companies, but to protect U.S. citizens from being scammed all the time. Sure, the wild west is fun, but if you are in an economic ecosystem where a large percentage is comprised of scammers/fraudulent companies, then it will be detrimental to long term success.
Detrimental to long term success -- how do you know? I am inclined to believe the opposite.
I'm not terribly happy with the decision, though I can't say I'm surprised. I enjoy the drama of the Wild West that is Ethereum and the rest of the cryptocurrency ecosystem. Minimal regulation encourages innovation, while regulated markets can exist for people who want stability and certain guarantees to prevent fraud (or at least make it difficult). I wonder what would happen if financial regulations became more "op…
At one point, financial regulations were somewhat optional. The SEC was created to put an end to securities fraud, because it turns out that having no rules on speculation is a bad idea. Do we need to repeat history, just to prove that financial regulations are a good idea? We had a Depression once. I'd not like to do it again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most serious effort I've seen had a geoblocked website that worked with a Chrome plugin. You could get around it, without even using a proxy, but only if you could understand the smart contract code and figure out how to prepare the data it required. To my way of thinking, if you're sophisticated enough to do that, you're sophisticated enough in blockchain matters to make your own investment decisions.
It's a common fallacy that people think "I'm good at X, so I must also be good at Y" It seems to afflict techies the most, somehow we think just because we can understand computers, we must therefore be skilled in other domains too, like investments...