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

“But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

newsletter.mollywhite.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 557 posts

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#341

Post by sebzim4500 »

scott_w wrote: post #334
sebzim4500 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if that same policeman happened to be speaking to parliament and was asked whether going 150 mph was legal he would be able to give a clear answer.

Two things: 1. Firstly, if the law isn't settled, then no they wouldn't. 2. The SEC weren't being asked by Congress, they were being asked by Coinbase. So no, your attempt to torture the analogy doesn't work at all.

The head of the SEC was asked by congress if Eth was a security, and true to form he refused to answer.

I don't understand how anyone can believe these people act in good faith.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#342

Post by ceejayoz »

growse wrote: post #303
ETH_start wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in this case the agency that enforces the rules is also charged with creating them, and how the rules this agency creates apply to novel instruments with no centralized issuer, centralized operator or investment contract, is not at all clear.

No, Congress creates the rules. The SEC decides how to enforce them. A court then decides who's right in any given action.

No, in most cases, Congress makes laws that say things like “we delegate our rule making authority to the EPA with regards to air pollution” (Clean Air Act). The agencies then create the rules; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Federal_Regulations

Sometimes the court system decides the agency’s rules exceed the authority granted to them by Congress.

Other times Congress uses the Congressional Review Act or new legislation to say “that’s not what we meant”.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#343

Post by infinite8s »

roenxi wrote: post #328
arcticbull wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To extend that ridiculous analogy, it would be akin to FDA approving heroin based products (similar to how SEC approved Bitcoin ETF in 2021) and then going after heroin. So uh, you know you just described the opioid crisis in a nutshell right? Modern opioid painkillers are in fact generally if not entirely accurately, 'heroin based products.' Not just that, prior to the Narcotics Tax Act of 1914 it was kind of a fr…

I agree that you have an excellent point in relation to the thread ancestor, but to refocus the debate on the actual matter at hand: A key difference being that opioids have a very real potential to cause massive, undeniable and observable harm to casual users (like all mind altering drugs including alcohol). Crypto means that people can trade without having the regulators whitelist all the transactions. Historically…

> There are worrying signs about that we are about to repeat the 1920s, 1930s then the 1940s

The rest of this comment was not where I thought you'd go with this. You realize the creation of the SEC was a direct result of the stock market crash in 1929 ,due mainly to people's life savings being invested by commercial banks without regards for the underlying economics of the investments, exactly what the SEC is trying to prevent happening with crypto (by regulating it under the same doctrine)

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#344

Post by JumpCrisscross »

hbbio wrote: post #289
bb88 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TIL to stop reading the top voted comment if it appears to be outrage and just read the article for myself instead. Just FYI here's the quote in context. She's posing a hypothetical here and not actually comparing Coinbase to a heroin dealer. This is very much in the style of Matt Levine at Bloomberg, btw. If a company went to the FDA and said “hello, we’d like to start selling heroin to the public for recreational u…

Which is a completely flawed comparison, not because of the matter but because unlike the hypothetical heroin case, the SEC *did approve the listing*.

> a completely flawed comparison, not because of the matter but because unlike the hypothetical heroin case, the SEC did approve the listing

The SEC doesn't approve IPOs. In bold among Coinbase's S-1's cover pages: "Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense."

https://investor.coinbase.com/financials/sec-filings/sec-fil...

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#345

Post by bushbaba »

everfree wrote: post #13

I stopped reading the article when it started comparing cryptocurrency exchanges to the business of selling heroin. No matter your opinion on the issue, that's just alarmist nonsense. I agree that it's reasonable to apply existing securities laws to cryptocurrency, and I agree that "but they let us go public" is a bad argument, but Gensler's SEC has also been intentionally obtuse about how those securities laws shoul…

Idk many crypto firms did assist in the sale of heroin. Heck some even assisted money being transferred to known terrorists. With those funds used to kill civilians globally.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#346

Post by JumpCrisscross »

iterativ wrote: post #279
Dylan16807 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not "alarmist nonsense", it's just an example of something illegal. And it's not "cryptocurrency" being compared to illegal things, but unregistered security cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin, the biggest name in cryptocurrency, is fine.

Yes well, some claim it's "securities", there is no clear law for that. Can I give you, for example, Amazon shared and get a coffee or a pizza ? Directly, not liquidate it first. Let's find out how the Ripple lawsuit is going to end, there is good chance to win it. The woke up one day and they "hey this crypto is a threat to our dollar'. Gensler said "we don't need any more digital currencies, we have USD, EUR, YEN".…

> Can I give you, for example, Amazon shared and get a coffee or a pizza ? Directly, not liquidate it first.

No, this is specifically addressed by securities law. It's not impossible, but you have to do it properly.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#347

Post by KingOfCoders »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #193
KingOfCoders wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Commenting on a news article doesn't mean you care what happens to the subject of the article. Your comment is not only pointless and petty, it's wrong.

No, it's an adoption from "If you're reading it, it's for you" by The Last Psychiatrist. Not that I'm as clever as he is. Pointless seems in the eye of the beholder.

If you don't understand something, the easiest thing is to condemn it and call the person who made the comment stupid.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#348

Post by JumpCrisscross »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #255
hef19898 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without case law, authorities don't know neither. With the two law suites, Coinbase and Binance, we are goong to find out. Generally so, if a company works in, or close, to a highly regulated industry it is up to that company to do so in a compliant way. Or generally compliant, there isba tendency of start-ups in Germany complaining about how taxes apply to them as well. If said company is not comoliant, it is on the…

> Without case law, authorities don't know neither. Authorities are the ones who create the rules. If they tell you what the rule means, that's what the rule means, because it's their rule. That's the point of having them be the one to tell you.

> Authorities are the ones who create the rules

The Securities Act of '33, Exchange Act of '34 and Howey Test were not created by the SEC.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#349

Post by KingOfCoders »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #197
KingOfCoders wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see "Please don't post comments that don't contribute anything to the discussion." as highly relevant to the discussion.

Defending a bad meta comment is the worst option of all.

In my value system, killing people is the worst option of all, but defending bad meta comments is close second.

Re: “But the SEC let us go public” and other flawed arguments in Coinbase's defense

#350

Post by KingOfCoders »

everfree wrote: post #254
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> better be very sure of its irrelevancy before sending it all to the UK Why? We’re allies and economically connected. > the USA risks losing their position as the world's financial superpower Wat. > US is itself planning a version of the US dollar with a design inspired by distributed ledger technology This project, thankfully, was dropped by the Fed after preliminary study.

> Wat. The USA is the world's finance hub because it has the most reliable systems for trading financial assets, and because it has the most reliable currency. But Ethereum network transactions are pretty damn reliable too, even more reliable than wire transfers in some ways (if a bit costly at the moment). Trading on Uniswap is generally more reliable than trading stocks in my brokerage account, and I like how I can…

"The USA is the world's finance hub because it has the most reliable systems for trading financial assets"

Because there is regulation. You seem to get cause and effect mixed up.

Post reply on HN