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

321–330 of 598 posts

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

#321

Post by maxbond »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #311
maxbond wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Nevermind, ignore me, consider this a crank comment.) What risk do you think the market has been handsomely compensating Bitcoin investors for over the last year? Genuine question, I don't know the answer, but if the market were pricing in the risk of Bitcoin suddenly going to zero through regulatory action, it might make sense that the price goes up a lot as old investors compensate new investors to exit while the…

> if the market were pricing in the risk of Bitcoin suddenly going to zero through regulatory action, it might make sense that the price goes up a lot as old investors compensate new investors to exit while the music slows. I cannot make any sense of this.

Yeah, I got a wire crossed there for a moment, my bad. Thanks for helping uncross it. I've retracted the comment.

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

#322

Post by Gazoche »

raincole wrote: post #143
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'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…

There's also group 3: people who don't give a damn about crypto's actual use cases but see the line go up and think they can make a quick buck by buying at the right time.

I'd wager that group 3 is much larger than groups 1 and 2.

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

#323

Post by emodendroket »

eru wrote: post #145
emodendroket wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most customers are not willing to go to these lengths unless they’re doing something illegal.

You are right in practice. But it sounds an awful lot bit like the old "I have nothing to hide" argument against encryption, too? Many payment processors do restrict the business they want to deal with beyond what the letter of the law requires. (And that is their prerogative as a private business!)

Does it? It sounds like they have a credit card with fraud protection and they already understand how it works, and don't want to have to fiddle with some newfangled financial product that doesn't offer those protections and seems vaguely shady, to me.

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

#324

Post by nroets »

ryan_lane wrote: post #295
nroets wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tax evasion is rife: How many tradesmen fixing stuff around your house for cash will report that income on their return ? Governments can get most of their revenue with little economic distortion by taxing stuff where evasion is much harder: Fuel taxes and property taxes.

Tax evasion is people stealing from you, just in an indirect way. Just because some people already steal from us doesn't mean it's OK for other (richer) people to steal even more from us. You may believe there's a better way for the government to tax us, but that's not how the system works currently. Crypto being used for tax evasion is a good reason for it to be regulated out of existence.

You can make the same argument that governments should ban physical cash.

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

#325

Post by whatever1 »

roywiggins wrote: post #314
whatever1 wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can invest in oil companies instead. Why do you need leverage? Why do you have the expectation of making 100X from a 2X price increase?

They're a lot cheaper than buying the actual stock, because there's every chance they'll expire worthless- and when you're hedging, you think they will probably expire worthless, too.

Problem is that the person who sells the option to you literally cannot guarantee that they can pay you because there is an infinite downside to them.

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

#326

Post by rawoke083600 »

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.

Honestly, they probably are making more money being the market leader than trying to steal money.

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

#327

Post by thepasswordis »

LapsangGuzzler wrote: post #253
thepasswordis wrote: post #171

[flagged]

SBF: put your money in FTX and you'll get life-changing returns Me: OK SBF: * takes my money * doesn't write it down anywhere * puts it into a giant slush fund without any accounting controls * loans some of it to his investment fund * buys millions in beachfront real estate with my and other victims money * goes around to all these interviews lying about what he's doing * plays Dota during a fundraising meeting * ge…

Yeah, so punish SBF for that specific instance of fraud. No need for a “securities and exchange commission” to decide how they feel about numbers in a ledger.

The SEC should exist to help investors know what they’re buying, and should essentially be publishing due diligence reports and assisting in fraud cases. The idea that they get to essentially legislate via administrative fiat, with no input from congress, and certainly no input from American voters is absolutely an absurd overstep.

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

#328

Post by Zanfa »

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #270
lxgr wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> Crypto advocates misinterpret this as a technological failing or gap.

This is usually the problem with any crypto idea. They fail to distinguish between people problems and technology problems. Ticketmaster ain’t charging hidden bullshit fees because their database somehow forces them to.

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

#329

Post by nroets »

siwatanejo wrote: post #257
nroets wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Crypto is also used to evade taxes. You know what, this narrative is funny, because 99.999% of the time in which "crypto" is used to evade taxes, it's the kind of taxes that would need to be paid because of capital gains on the crypto assets because their value increased. But most of the time, they are unrealized gains, which means that tax evasion didn't actually happen. But anyway, let's now think of the cases wh…

I've never owned any crypto. I'm changing my tax residence for legitimate reasons. (Hardest thing I've done in my life!)

But I suppose some crypto owners are changing their tax residence without declaring their crypto i.e. no deemed disposal and exit tax.

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

#330

Post by jojobas »

whatever1 wrote: post #325
roywiggins wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a lot cheaper than buying the actual stock, because there's every chance they'll expire worthless- and when you're hedging, you think they will probably expire worthless, too.

Problem is that the person who sells the option to you literally cannot guarantee that they can pay you because there is an infinite downside to them.

A "person" can't sell a naked option, this can only be done by bigger companies with a margin account, and will be margin-called when the price approaches the strike price.

The point is, should call options used for hedging regulated as insurance?

Post reply on HN