Live data from Hacker News

SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

twitter.com

231–240 of 518 posts

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike the long history of price manipulation in traditional markets?

Crypto guys will never stop whataboutery..

That isn't whataboutery. Every market has its insiders, and it is manipulated.

This event is no different.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tomorrow your bank could cut you off from your own money because you protested the government[1], and what could you possibly do? Having the freedom to truly own your own money and investments is valuable in and of itself, no matter how much crypto "devolves" towards traditional finance in other regards. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-pro...

Instead, you can lose access to your money just because you forgot your secret key.

Yes, like you can lose your treasure by forgetting where you buried it. Or you can lose your silver when an accidental fire melts your palace into slag. Or you can lose your wheat harvest to mold! Self-storage is the default way of holding wealth, not a new one. And it's a tradeoff that people will always choose to make as long as personal wealth exists.

Among the innumerable problems with cryptocurrency, this is not one of them.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We really really really need some legislation about governmental agencies using privately owned companies to announce things. What kind of legislation? There's a whole lot of existing law that applies in that domain (both statute and Constitutional case law), but if you think we need different laws, it probably helps to at least present the general shape of the law you want rather than just that it should in some w…

An example might be that the government sets up its own very basic one-way tweet-like notification service, something as simple as or simpler than an RSS feed, with the official content accessible directly via a .gov hosted web page. Whatever X is or becomes, as owned by private interests, is trusted with nothing more than scraping and rebroadcasting the original and authentic source. A solution with less developer a…

Your ideas are honestly great and both of the solutions you presented (RSS->.gov site and public keys) feel like great solutions. I think the problem is that both of those require the general public to have some amount of technical knowledge which is, apparently, a big ask. The first would be a lot easier to present and avoid confusion but it'd still require people to know to go to that site.

For what it's worth though, I think the solution to that is people should have some real amount of education about the function and potential dangers of the internet before getting on it.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#235
post #226

Why do government agencies even have accounts on proprietary walled-garden online platforms? Those are for purposes like celebrity publicists, influencer brand promotion, disreputable mob behavior, and astroturfing. The SEC doesn't need brand promotion, nor to be caught up in nastiness like pervades X/Twitter. The SEC already has the authority, they do their job with it, and presumably they value respectability. Earl…

There is value in government agencies engaging with people where they are. Even the SEC gets some value out of promoting their activities, even if it's just awareness of their existence and function and corresponding public support.

That said, now that the Fediverse exists, ideally all of those government agencies would self-host their accounts, either individually or via a server for many different agencies of the same government. It makes sense for the SEC to be @sec@sec.gov or @sec@usa.gov rather than example.com/SECGov . (Which, of course, does not prevent them from having security issues.)

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#236
post #53

The price of BTC initially jumped 3% on the hacked tweet. That's $25bn+ of market cap. The irony is the SEC itself is probably now responsible for the largest crypto pump and dump in history.

How is the SEC responsible for fraud committed on Twitter?

Because it's their account?

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#237
post #226

Why do government agencies even have accounts on proprietary walled-garden online platforms? Those are for purposes like celebrity publicists, influencer brand promotion, disreputable mob behavior, and astroturfing. The SEC doesn't need brand promotion, nor to be caught up in nastiness like pervades X/Twitter. The SEC already has the authority, they do their job with it, and presumably they value respectability. Earl…

While your point is perhaps valid for publishing information, it doesn’t (for me) extend to not even having an account.

Companies have cited that their Twitter account is an official source of company comms and that gives the SEC a reason to have an account and access that information as part of enforcing securities laws.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#238

I love watching crypto people obsess about the fabled Bitcoin ETF. You'd think it was some kind of religious movement. "Oh glorious SEC, once thou bestowest thine blessing, Crypto shall rise a thousandfold! Glory to Bitcoin!"

A lot of people are expecting to get rich off Bitcoin. They still think it's a ticket to financial freedom even though returns since late 2017 have been mediocre. Relative to volatility, they would be better off with 3x tech etfs like TQQQ or TECL, which have more upside and less risk compared to Bitcoin for the same amount of volatility.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain how web3 is responsible for all the crypto nonsense for a layman?

Web3 is the crypto nonsense. It was a rebrand attempt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web3

Its sad to think web 2.0 so long ago was a move towards more human centric websites, UI's, AJAXy sites, etc and now web3 is just a marketing term for fraudsters, exit scammers, shady VC's, and criminals. The late-stage capitalism of the internet is obvious to see.

Re: SEC has not approved Bitcoin ETFs [fixed]

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The old crypto chants were that crypto would lead us away from the ills of traditional markets/finance. Glad to see that it's been watered down to "just as bad as" arguments.

Tomorrow your bank could cut you off from your own money because you protested the government[1], and what could you possibly do? Having the freedom to truly own your own money and investments is valuable in and of itself, no matter how much crypto "devolves" towards traditional finance in other regards. [1]: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/22/world/americas/canada-pro...

> what could you possibly do?

Magical Amulets?

Fake your own death, move into a submarine?

Post reply on HN