https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-...
Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.
251–260 of 338 posts
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-...
Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.
The thing that makes me very uneasy about this is... it's crypto. If you let people walk away with anything less than decades in prison you're setting a bad precedent. Why? Because the entire design of crypto is to allow you to squirrel money away, honestly what are the chances that these guys have some cold wallet lying around with a few million dollars in bitcoin? That's what I'd do if I was running this scam.
The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.
It's the SEC's position that you can issue tokens, but they have to be "registered," specifically with them.
The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.
The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s hard to know for sure but I agree. SBF might catch a break for looking innocent and young, but this really is a textbook example of when bail should not be granted. Bail may happen if he ends up cooperating. I’m very interested to see if the parents are charged.
>looking innocent lol. lmao even
The thing that makes me very uneasy about this is... it's crypto. If you let people walk away with anything less than decades in prison you're setting a bad precedent. Why? Because the entire design of crypto is to allow you to squirrel money away, honestly what are the chances that these guys have some cold wallet lying around with a few million dollars in bitcoin? That's what I'd do if I was running this scam.
You're assuming that FTX is the extent of the DOJ and SEC investigations. SBF is going to be offered a deal - "Spend the rest of your life in prison or give us CZ/Binance and all the other big players and be out in 10". Remember, in addition to their chat group labeled "Wirefraud" they also had another one called "Exchange coordination" that the heads of other exchanges participated in. In addition to SBF, CZ (Binanc…
For example, if someone steals a bunch of coins from exchange A then you would want exchanges B and C to be able to made aware of that ASAP so that they can stop the movement of those coins.
The bigger story is that in their complaint, the SEC is declaring FTT to be an investment contract and therefore a "security". https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-calls-ftt-exchange-token-... Since all exchange native tokens more or less work the same way, that would mean they are all securities. That would include BNB. If this holds, the crypto exchange game is over.
Having scanned the documents, I can imagine a dynamic where Ellison was the CEO, but SBF was really pulling the strings. I bet many companies are like that, where investors or a chairman are the real decision maker and the CEO is managing downwards only. Especially when you have a complex corporate setup where you are told to request funds and resources from a parent org etc. If I am in a C-level position again I wou…
I get where you are coming from, but if she was CEO, she was responsible for her actions (and inactions) in that position. Letting some people off is not just and the various narratives these people are all spinning to avoid responsibility for their actions are ALL equally BS.