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

341–350 of 598 posts

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

#341

Post by 0xedd »

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…

The banking industry makes 25 times more profit than all other industries around the world combined. It has no competition and abuses this fact. Isn't it interesting how little awareness this issue has?

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

#342

Post by Nursie »

testacct22 wrote: post #228
Nursie wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the exchanges, buying and selling for 'real' currency would be next to impossible. Without access to 'real' money, the get rich quick crowd (and probably a lot of the scam crowd, and probably a lot of the dark market crowd) move on. With them gone... there's probably not very much left of a cryptocurrency user base.

Seems like there's two ways of looking at exchanges: using it to buy/sell, then immediately transferring to a personal wallet. Or using it as some kind of investment. I'm criticizing the latter Wrt to the get rich quick crowd, things were fine before they showed up. They should go somewhere

> I'm criticizing the latter

I think if you remove the latter there won't be many people left playing with cryptocurrency. Which would be fine from my perspective (a lot fewer people being ripped off in what appears to basically be a huge unregulated casino). And it sounds like from yours too.

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

#343

Post by nroets »

flangola7 wrote: post #333
nroets wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

And many countries are moving in that direction, so what's your point?

For millennia governments survived with cash in circulation. Crypto is no real threat to their existence.

Regulating it with a heavy hand will do more harm than good. Those innovators will just move offshore.

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

#344

Post by eru »

FpUser wrote: post #305
eru wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which government would come after them? There are lots of different governments around the world, with different views and different laws. > How is refusing to serve legal sex workers different? As far as I can tell, in the US discrimination is forbidden against certain protected groups / along certain protected differences only. But you are free to discriminate on all other grounds. Eg a restaurant can legally discr…

I understand and am sort of aware of the laws. It seems however very hypocritical to discriminate base upon profession. IANAL but I suspect that if for example airline will not let passenger to board a plane citing that they work "shitty low paying job" as a reason said airline might get in trouble anyways.

They would get in trouble with the general public. Which seems fine with me.

(And if the general public doesn't care, why should laws in a democratic country care?)

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

#345

Post by kamaal »

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 solves this.

Bitcoin also loves this. Lots of people will use the coming fall to make money shorting this. Then eventually as BTC stabilises they will make money going long as well.

In short a lot of BTC doomers will celebrate, and BTC mooners will celebrate as well. Except for different reasons.

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

#346

Post by eru »

rawoke083600 wrote: post #310
eru wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Different jurisdictions generally have their own lawmakers (mostly democratically elected in 'sane' places), and they can decide what they want or don't want to ban. I'm not really in favour of bans here, because just as no one forces you to enter a casino, no one forces you to trade on a cryptocurrency exchange (or hold any cryptocurrencies at all). Matt Levine's Money Stuff reported a lot on people losing money in…

Yea funny story: My bank won't allow me to buy crypto with my credit card. BUT I am allowed to gamble online with my credit card, those they let through :D

Since I brought up Singapore:

We have casinos here. Our government is an interesting mix between laissez-faire and paternalistic with a strong Puritan streak. (I don't think it's actually of Puritan origin, but a parallel evolution from Chinese culture? Would be interesting to look into the origins.)

The result is that foreigners can enter the casinos willy-nilly, and lose all their money as they please. But as a local you have to pay an entry levy of 150 Singapore dollars, just to remove any illusion that you might be come out ahead when you visit.

You can also tell that government that they should ban you from entry completely (if you know you have a gambling problem). Curiously enough, your relatively can also do that for (or rather, to) you.

See https://www.mha.gov.sg/docs/default-source/media-room-doc/an... for sources.

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

#347

Post by eru »

emodendroket wrote: post #323
eru wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Many states in the US have legalised buying and selling of marijuana. Many payment processors don't want to touch this, on neither the buying nor selling side.

You might declare marijuana vaguely shady, but as far as I can tell, it's a legitimate product that consenting adults might want to trade in.

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

#348

Post by whatever1 »

jojobas wrote: post #330
whatever1 wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

In any system you aim to stabilize you don’t want unregulated factors with exponential effects.

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

#349

Post by eru »

emodendroket wrote: post #320
cmcaleer wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most customers weren't willing to enter their CC information online in the late 90s and early 00s. It took horny trailblazers to get us to where we are today, to the overall benefit of e-commerce. Comparatively, putting CC info in to Coinbase and putting an address to withdraw the crypto in is far safer than what horny people did back then.

Real quick, how do I challenge a transaction I made with Bitcoin?

On the one hand, in general with raw bitcoin, you can't.

On the other hand, you can only lose the bitcoins you actually have.

With a credit card you can go into debt.

Post reply on HN