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

271–280 of 598 posts

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

#271

Post by [deleted] »

derefr wrote: post #206
jrmg wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other kinds of ‘crypto gaming company’ _could_ there be?

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…

[deleted]

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

#272

Post by Eisenstein »

siwatanejo wrote: post #237
glitchc wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I get some Bitcoin? I can't afford to mine it anymore. What if I want to buy some more? Or sell some of what I have? What can I spend Bitcoin on? What does Bitcoin solve for me?

> 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…

> Anything, really.

I tried to bring my bitcoin to the grocery store to buy some brownie mix and cheese slices but they wouldn't take any coins from my Trezor.

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

#273

Post by [deleted] »

cmcaleer wrote: post #125
Retric wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s be real, a large fraction of all interest in crypto is as a financial asset. The financial transaction / storage side is relatively uninteresting to people because the existing financial system generally works really well for them in terms of risks, fees, uptime etc. Which isn’t to say the existing financial system works well for everybody all the time, but in practice crypto just isn’t showing real benefits to…

One thing crypto does having going for it is the lack of moralising payment processors. I'm really baffled that sex workers and other groups who provide legal services that payment processors don't like aren't embracing crypto. Seems like a perfect environment for it and the on and off-ramps today are far better than what existed back in 2016.

[deleted]

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

#274

Post by water554 »

nroets wrote: post #241
raincole wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Crypto's fate is bound be like those alternative Reddits and Twitters. What kind of users an alternative Reddit attracts? 1. People who don't like Reddit because of privacy concerns or other ideological reasons. 2. People who are banned by Reddit. It turns out group 2 is much larger than group 1 and the community rots. Now what kind of people who cryptos (a.k.a. alternative money) attract? 1. People who don't like ba…

Crypto is used to circumvent capital controls: In other words to create a free market in foreign exchange for countries that ban it. Crypto is also used to evade taxes. I'm not saying it's a good thing, but it's not as bad as dealing drugs or scamming people.

Why is dealing drugs bad? Bringing hard to obtain product to customers who want and will pay for it.

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

#275

Post by unitg »

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.

Bitcoin has outperformed 97% of all S&P 500 companies in 2023. Bitcoin was also the best performing asset of the decade. https://imgur.com/a/7SB3MtL

FINES BY SEC: Merrill Lynch – $100 million Fine in 2002, Goldman Sachs- $550 million 2010, Eli Lilly & Co. – $1.42 billion 2009, UBS AG – $1.5 billion in 2012, Abbott Laboratories – $1.6 billion in 2012, Siemens $1.9 billion in 2008, HSBC Holdings – $1.9 billion in 2003, Pfizer – $2.3 billion in 2009, Bank of America – $3.6 billion in 2009, JP Morgan Chase – $13 billion in 2013

Did the SEC send a clear message? Are these company's dead? lol.. Are the industries they are in dead?

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

#276

Post by Eisenstein »

martinohansen wrote: post #242
glitchc wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do I get some Bitcoin? I can't afford to mine it anymore. What if I want to buy some more? Or sell some of what I have? What can I spend Bitcoin on? What does Bitcoin solve for me?

You trade it with people for something they want. You keep it or trade it yourself. Like you would do with gold.

And baseball cards, stamps, art work, comic books, and all sorts of other collectible things.

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

#277

Post by phire »

gpm wrote: post #199
phire wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Title appears to be correct: "Later on Tuesday, a filing from the United States District Court for the District Of Columbia showed that the court had agreed to grant the SEC’s demands."

I think the author of the article misunderstood. In the article the words "a filing" link to attachment 1 to docket entry 4, titled "Text of Proposed Order" Further the docket indicates that sometime today (Wednesday) the court scheduled a hearing on the 13th to consider this motion (docket entry 4). https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67474542/securities-and... As tedunangst says below, this is common and doesn't m…

Yeah, looks like you are correct.

I only checked that the title matched the contents of the article, not that the article was correctly researched.

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

#278

Post by olalonde »

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.

I feel like I might have heard this before: https://99bitcoins.com/bitcoin-obituaries/

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

#279

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

#280

Post by lolinder »

EscapeFromNY wrote: post #267
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,…

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.

Certainly Facebook alone, but that's why I included the "et al". For most of the world, "the internet" is interchangeable with "the few big platforms I regularly use". It's not technically accurate, but I don't begrudge them the usage because that is their internet.
Post reply on HN