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

Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

kitco.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 598 posts

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#261

Post by lmm »

whatever1 wrote: post #102
lvl102 wrote: post #36

Bitcoin solves this. Sorry I just had to. I think crypto as an investable asset class is finished. SEC is sending a very clear signal here. It’s entirely the community’s fault for failing to properly manage this space. They actually earned public’s trust (sometime during the pandemic). And then they threw it all away for a few bucks.

Crypto investing should die. But I would also want to see derivatives die. Like what it even mean to "invest" in QQQ or VIX? This is just gambling (unless you have market inside knowledge).

Either you're hedging, you're taking risk and getting paid for it, you're market-making, you're arbitraging, or you're purely speculating/gambling. The first and second are genuinely useful, the third and fourth are necessary to grease the wheels, and the fifth is at least relatively harmless (no-one's taking a rake, so it's better than betting on the horse racing or whatever).

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#262

Post by electric_muse »

arcticbull wrote: post #217
whatever1 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crypto investing should die. But I would also want to see derivatives die. Like what it even mean to "invest" in QQQ or VIX? This is just gambling (unless you have market inside knowledge).

QQQ, like most ETFs, isn't a derivative. You get a share that represents a basket of all of the NASDAQ-100 companies. This tracks the price of the components through creation/redemption mechanism. Authorized participants are able to create QQQ by sending a share of the constituent companies to the trust, and they're able to redeem QQQ for the shares in the trust. In this way participants are able to arbitrage the spr…

Thanks for such a great ELI5

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#263

Post by arcticbull »

whatever1 wrote: post #256
arcticbull wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QQQ, like most ETFs, isn't a derivative. You get a share that represents a basket of all of the NASDAQ-100 companies. This tracks the price of the components through creation/redemption mechanism. Authorized participants are able to create QQQ by sending a share of the constituent companies to the trust, and they're able to redeem QQQ for the shares in the trust. In this way participants are able to arbitrage the spr…

Apologies I meant SQQQ, inverse QQQ

Ah, nice, another classic product. I quite enjoy deep-diving on this stuff. I looked them up, they hold a bunch of QQQ index swaps. I'll have to research them some more later, may follow up if I learn something interesting :) I just happened to know how QQQ and the VIX worked off hand.

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#264

Post by lolinder »

testacct22 wrote: post #246
lolinder wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find the original source, but a while ago I read a really compelling article (linked from here) which explained why centralization is inevitable. I think it's relevant here, because if centralization is inevitable then it's reasonable to treat crypto as interchangeable with the exchanges. Essentially, the thesis was that a decentralized protocol can never evolve and adapt as quickly as a centralized platform,…

What about BitTorrent?

That's a reasonable counterexample. I'd say that probably happened because the primary use case for BitTorrent is piracy (I know there are other use cases, but that's the main one), so there was never a space for a legit business to form. Crypto had speculation, which was less obviously illegal than downloading pirated TV shows and provided a great revenue stream to boot.

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#266

Post by siwatanejo »

glitchc wrote: post #254
siwatanejo wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How do I get some Bitcoin? There are bitcoin-only exchanges, e.g. Bitaroo. There are also P2P exchanges that don't hold user's funds, like LN2bot (this one is very handy because it supports Lightning, so fees are ridiculously low, and trades very fast for not being a SPOT exchange). > I can't afford to mine it anymore. Right, it's a professional industry now; hobbyists can still do it, but at a loss. > What if I wa…

My point is that I'm relying on an exchange to perform most of the functions you say. How do I know those exchanges are any safer than Binance? And Bitcoin absolutely tanked with rising interest rates, just like the equity markets. Can't say it's not responding to QE.

> How do I know those exchanges are any safer than Binance?

Did you miss the part where I recommended an exchange that doesn't hold user's funds?

> And Bitcoin absolutely tanked with rising interest rates, just like the equity markets.

Right, and where's the value of it 4 years after each value-tank event?

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#267

Post by EscapeFromNY »

lolinder wrote: post #225
testacct22 wrote: post #215

Why do so many of the comments here and journalists assert that crypto and exchanges are the same thing? Doesn't keeping coin in an exchange (as opposed to in a wallet, locally) sort of violate the ideology of crypto? Wasn't this shit invented to circumvent the banks? I don't get it, using something meant to circumvent the banks, just to invest it in a less regulated form of a bank Isn't to say I have a problem with…

I can't find the original source, but a while ago I read a really compelling article (linked from here) which explained why centralization is inevitable. I think it's relevant here, because if centralization is inevitable then it's reasonable to treat crypto as interchangeable with the exchanges. Essentially, the thesis was that a decentralized protocol can never evolve and adapt as quickly as a centralized platform,…

It's an interesting point, but I think you've stretched it a little thin. Taking one of your examples, I don't think anyone would ever say "it's reasonable to treat the web as interchangeable with Facebook". Sure, for some people Facebook is all they use the web for - but that's definitely not true for everyone. And the web doesn't depend on Facebook existing either. When Facebook dies, the web will be just fine.

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#268

Post by x3sphere »

pavlov wrote: post #188
TacticalCoder wrote: post #172

The SEC was meeting with SBF and failed to protect US citizens who sent money to FTX. So far Binance hasn't pulled a ponzi scam (they existed before Alameda/FTX and have never stolen anyone's money). So basically the SEC failed to protect people from that ponzi scammer boy SBF was, but they're going after the like of Binance and Coinbase, who, so far, never stole a cent from anyone?

How do you know Binance hasn't stolen anyone's money? Is there a reputable auditor's statement to that effect? Seems very unlikely when Binance pretends they're not even headquartered in any jurisdiction. Nobody has any idea about Binance's actual money flows and where customer funds have actually ended up.

We don't. But by the same token, these are just allegations so far.

It is interesting however, the SEC purportedly has tons of evidence of wrongdoing at these exchanges but completely missed FTX which was a massive fraud. Color me skeptical, it's almost like they are saving face for missing FTX. FTX was even regulated to some extent -- I remember you were able to buy tokenized versions of US stocks on there.

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#269

Post by [deleted] »

derefr wrote: post #203
LapsangGuzzler wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to NYT, Binance was moving billions into accounts held in Seychelles, Lithuania and Kazakhstan etc. via two banks that failed earlier this year in patterns that resemble money laundering[0]. If Binance was laundering its funds through two banks that just went through liquidation, you can bet that auditors figured that out pretty quick. 0: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/07/business/binance-cash-ban...

Patterns that resemble money laundering, but more closely resemble tax sheltering.

[deleted]

Re: Proposed SEC order to freeze, repatriate Binance.US assets

#270

Post by brendoelfrendo »

lxgr wrote: post #234
derefr wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steam but where you actually own, and so can resell, your game licenses. And where other supply-side companies can take over providing the game-download-delivery logistics if the original company providing that service goes belly-up. Or: Pokemon, but you can trade the pokemon outside the game itself; and the game can prove that your competitive mon were authentically caught and raised, rather than hacked in, because…

> Steam but where you actually own, and so can resell, your game licenses. Where’s the need for crypto in this business model? > Pokemon, but you can trade the pokemon outside the game itself; and the game can prove that your competitive mon were authentically caught and raised, So… cheating protection? Every notable multiplayer game in the world already does hat. > so that people playing can easily cash back out of…

> > Steam but where you actually own, and so can resell, your game licenses.

> Where’s the need for crypto in this business model?

Crypto advocates misinterpret this as a technological failing or gap. It's actually an issue that could be solved purely in existing technology, but no one wants to because lock-in is desirable to everyone but the consumer. The market will never decide on its own to offer this solution.

Post reply on HN