151–160 of 443 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn’t it true that the SEC wouldn’t let Coinbase register since they said Bitcoin _isn’t_ a security? It’s my understanding that Coinbase tried.
Bitcoin itself might not be. Even many other currencies might not. But what other "products" they are running? Those could and probably would fall under various classifications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the use of crypto again? Because I think it's kinda useless. Just like NFT's
Imagine your business or employer is suddenly blacklisted by payment processors over political/cultural reasons. The advantages of crypto should become pretty clear at that point.
I was at the first HOPE in 1994[1] at the Penn Hotel in NYC when Eric Hughes (known for the Cypherpunk Manifesto) and others gave a talk on cryptography and how it would be part of a future of privacy and security for anonymous banking etc. I was so enthused about getting rid of the middle man (a minimum of 4 or 5 entities process your latte purchase at Starbucks and take a cut as well as track you and your data trail). Government doesn't like this. "What do you have to hide?" is a tired defense of prying eyes.
Yes, there were a lot of bad fish in the pool, but the goal was and is still good in my book.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the real crux of the issue is that these instruments were designed to be confusing to regulate and, alas, they're confusing to regulate. The error was in thinking that a confused regulator says "I don't understand what's going on here, carry on and rest easy" rather than what actually happens: "I don't understand what's going on here, and until I do -- on my schedule, not yours -- your business is always at r…
I don't think the pure commodity coins (layer 1 networks like btc, xch, etc) are confusing at all. You do work and get rewarded with a digital commodity. It’s exactly like digging up gold, or tapping a tree for maple syrup. Then a bunch of crypto anarchists showed up and started speculating that these coins would be worth a lot in the future because we could topple the financial hegemony by their powers combined. Oka…
But then people had they idea that they could still make money from it by grifting people if they just added layer upon layer of complexity in order to disguise the ultimate uselessness of the underlying technology. That is where all of your Ponzis, rugpulls, NFTs and everything else comes into the picture.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Crypto companies think they don't trade securities To quote the Binance Chief "Compliance" Officer: "we are operating as a fking unlicensed securities exchange in the USA bro" Source: Quoted in the filing yesterday where SEC sued Binance > 111. As Binance’s CCO bluntly admitted to another Binance compliance officer in December 2018, “we are operating as a fking unlicensed securities exchange in the USA bro.” https:…
It's almost unbelievable that someone would put something so monumentally incriminating in writing, but there it is. Those boys are doomed.
Crypto companies think they don't trade securities which is clearly wrong and contradicted by their own advertising. People buy crypto without a real use for crypto because they think they can sell it for more later. Everyone under the sun knows this. It's obviously a security and failing to register should be met by SEC cases like this one.
There are two modalities to crypto and the law needs to treat them differently. Running a node on a crypto currency network does not generate securities. It generates commodities. We don't tax people on the FMV of gold when they dig it out of the ground. But, speculating on the price of gold by creating a virtual token/contract/etc. and selling that, well that’s obviously a security. Just because people buy gold spec…
Uh, yeah, we definitely do. I have relatives who sell the oil under their property, and that absolutely is taxable income.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SEC isn't suing Coinbase over Bitcoin. They're suing under two things: 1. Unregistered exchange for several tokens the SEC believes are securities: > This includes, but is not limited to, the units of each of the crypto asset securities further described below—with trading symbols SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO—(the “Crypto Asset Securities”). 2. Unregistered sale of securi…
Very good points. People often go a long way to argue against the Howey test. The best example is Howey Co case. If someone is a lawyer dealing in securities and acting as an advisor I would have expected them to be familiar with the law. Coinbase issuing public statements to SEC “tell us what is a security” were basically a ploy or the lawyers involved were extremely inexperienced. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SE…
1. Despite any theoretical applications, all applications of crypto thus far have been to bypass laws. Some of these might be moral (eg avoiding currency controls in some countries like Venezuela) but mostly it's just illegal stuff;
2. No one is really interested in applications. They're "hodling" [sic] because of Bitcoin FOMO. They want in on the next Bitcoin.
3. Scams and rug pulls are rife in crypto. Taken with (2), this implies that people who think they're getting rich in crypto are only going to do so by scamming or rug pulling other people who will be left holding the bag;
4. Despite all the claims about verifiability, somehow the crypto space still needs strong government intervention to deter and prosecute scammers, criminals and thieves. That's another big L for the libertarians and goldbugs-turned-crypto-bros out there;
5. NFTs are the next level scam about crypto and really only exist to sell more crypto;
6. A lot of otherwise smart people have fooled themselves into thinking that their knowledge, skills and experience with some other area somehow magically translates into finance;
7. A whole bunch more snake oil salesmen are happy to sell others this lie;
8. The desire and desperation to get rich by many "hodlers" causes them to fool themselves into thinking there's any value in crypto;
9. Reversability of transactions and the ability to change the money supply volume are features not bugs; and
10. What underpins the US dollar is, ultimately, the full might of the US government and military as well as trust. Crypto too is ultimately still built on trust but has nothing else behind it.
It actually seemed to me that Coinbase was the one company operating legitimately. I haven't read the complaint so I'm not sure how much merit the charges have. We shall see.
Of course they say "not limited to" to hedge their bets, but those are the ones they specifically mention. This is the exact "regulatory clarity" Coinbase has been asking for, but the SEC prefers to sit on their hands for years (while investors are "harmed") and then sue, rather than actually tell Coinbase what they think up front. Sure seems self-serving to me, rather than anything like a genuine interest in protecting investors.