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

US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 443 posts

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#241

Post by awaythrow483 »

paulpauper wrote: post #46
EddieEngineers wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true when it’s going down and false when it’s going up. Do the same analysis of previous years during bull crypto markets and does this hold up?

bitcoin's performance since late 2017 lags QQQ. the rolling 5-year returns have gotten way worse. Much of the gains were from pre-2018. many people five years ago were predicting six-figures by now, nowhere even close.

Let's layout the fallacy here because it is trivially obvious:

You are cherry picking the exact top for bitcoin while not doing the same thing for QQQ.

You mention 5 years ago so lets use your arbitrary data point:

Bitcoin was floating between 7500 and 6500 this week 5 years ago. Let's use the upper end. Bitcoin is up well over 300% over this period.

QQQ is up 103.10% according to google over the last 5 years.

Nothing about adding the word "rolling" changes this.

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#242

Post by jallen_dot_dev »

mulmen wrote: post #163
dcow wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, I think your understanding is behind the curve. Even the SEC says BTC itself is a commodity. You consume a BTC by using/trading it. You consume gold or maple syrup by using/trading it. Just because the uses are a little different doesn't mean it's incompatible with the definition of commodity. If I started using gold in a nonsensical way you wouldn't start saying "oh now it's a security", would you?

I think the hangup with BTC as a commodity is that I can make a loaf of bread with wheat and eat it and the amount of wheat in the world is depleted as a result. Similarly I can use gold to build a cell phone or some jewelry and while it is possible to recover it isn't as simple as trading BTC. How is a BTC consumed ?

Technically the thing you hold and use is a transaction output, and once an unspent transaction output (UTXO) is spent it can't be spent again. So from that perspective it is consumed!

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#243

Post by awaythrow483 »

paulpauper wrote: post #60
flanfly wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you mean. BTC is up 29x since 2017 while QQQ is up 1.8x

it went up 20x in 2017. i said late 2017. it peaked at 20k in dec 2017.

As pointed out above, complete fallacy. You are cherry picking a handful of dates that support your argument and those dates are completely arbitrary.

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#244

Post by modeless »

mjburgess wrote: post #239
x86x87 wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hah. Protecting investors. What a bunch of croc. This was never about protecting investors. If it was they would have issues the guidance 5 years ago. This is about blowing up crypto in general by removing the on/off ramps (ie the exchanges). Also: mandatory crypto is bad for the environment and it consumes more power than the whole country of Argentina! /s But nobody seems to care or talk about how much power crapGP…

This is such a dangerous attitude. The reason regulators have waited years, despite the facts of the matter being legally obvious, is not wanting to be blamed for blowing up the whole ponzi house-of-cards. They've waited until enough such houses blew up on their own, that they feel "the facts have been demonstrated". If you want to know why they didnt "blow up crypto", "five years ago", its because of you -- and this…

The whole point of the regulation is to stop it from blowing up and harming investors. If they wait until after then they have failed at their job.

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#245

Post by scottiebarnes »

mulmen wrote: post #204
scottiebarnes wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of gold usage is in investment/central bank reserve. Technology applications are a fraction of the usage. Jewelry is a major usage, however part of the reason for its use in jewelry is a hybrid combination of its store of value properties (ex. in Indian culture afaik, gold jewelry plays a large part in passing down wealth, families gift gold jewelry at weddings etc.). So you consume bitcoin the same way…

Trading something doesn’t consume it. That’s a very confusing overloading of terminology.

Well consumer comes from the base word consume, which by definition includes the buying of a good or service, which is essentially a trade.

Consume:

- eat, drink, or ingest (food or drink).

- buy (goods or services).

- use up (a resource).

- (especially of a fire) completely destroy.

- (of a feeling) absorb all of the attention and energy of (someone).

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#246

Post by [deleted] »

mulmen wrote: post #163
dcow wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, I think your understanding is behind the curve. Even the SEC says BTC itself is a commodity. You consume a BTC by using/trading it. You consume gold or maple syrup by using/trading it. Just because the uses are a little different doesn't mean it's incompatible with the definition of commodity. If I started using gold in a nonsensical way you wouldn't start saying "oh now it's a security", would you?

I think the hangup with BTC as a commodity is that I can make a loaf of bread with wheat and eat it and the amount of wheat in the world is depleted as a result. Similarly I can use gold to build a cell phone or some jewelry and while it is possible to recover it isn't as simple as trading BTC. How is a BTC consumed ?

[deleted]

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#247

Post by [deleted] »

andreygrehov wrote: post #84
itake wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because, what if there are more Americans who've made money than those who have lost? Why does this matter? Even if Americans are scamming foreigners (0 Americans losing money), that doesn’t make this legal. The difference between aapl and coinbase is there is regulatory audits of the books and required publications about the health of the security. There are rules about insider trading and insurance protections if…

> Why does this matter? Because the parent said "that many Americans lost money over". Plus the SEC is "protecting investors". So I'm asking, what if there are more people who've made money over those who lost? Does that mean life's good? Coinbase has been pretty transparent about their operations. Not only transparent, they've publicly mentioned several times how frustrated they are dealing with SEC, the organizatio…

[deleted]

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#248

Post by tyre »

modeless wrote: post #160

The specific crypto tokens they are classifying as securities are: SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO. 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, rath…

Nononononononononononono we don't get to play that game. The SEC has perfectly clearly communicated for years its regulatory clarity: most crypto-currencies are obviously securities.

When Coinbase and others say "regulatory clarity", they want the answer to be some framework for how they can continue to sell crypto to everyone/anyone. But that's not the policy!

Most of these coins are some combination of ponzi schemes, vaporware, pump-and-dumps, fraud, money laundering, rug pulls, etc. The SEC's position absolutely protects investors from getting involved with that crap.

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#249

Post by qeternity »

CuriousCosmic wrote: post #229
mrcode007 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under the Howey test, the rules are clear. "The test is whether the scheme involves an investment of money in a common enterprise with profits to come solely from the efforts of others. If that test be satisfied, it is immaterial whether the enterprise is speculative or non-speculative or whether there is a sale of property with or without intrinsic value." I think it is plausible that all pure staking initiatives wi…

> investment of money in a common enterprise with profits to come solely from the efforts of others This is where I see the "staking makes a cryptocurrency a security" fall apart. There are a handful of definitions for "staking" and some of them definitely meet the criteria of "a common enterprise with profits to come solely from the efforts of others" however many do not. 1. Ethereum's staking at a protocol level re…

You’re ignoring all the ICOs which are almost certainly unregistered security offerings.

Ethereum was funded as a public ICO.

Re: US SEC sues Coinbase, one day after suing Binance

#250

Post by [deleted] »

chroma wrote: post #82
menthe wrote: post #23

There is a well-documented public history of Coinbase taunting the SEC - they had it coming. - https://www.coinbase.com/blog/the-sec-has-told-us-it-wants-t... - https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbase-does-not-list-securit... - https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbases-staking-services-are... - https://www.coinbase.com/blog/we-asked-the-sec-for-reasonabl... - https://www.coinbase.com/blog/coinbase-takes-another-formal-.…

If criticizing a regulatory body causes them to go after you, then that regulatory body is corrupt and should be dismantled and replaced with something else.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN