Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mad because some entrepreneurs makes the effort to build legitimate business entities, and what certain governments find to do is any scheme to keep them out of legitimity. Not that crypto fans would care all that much about these businesses, but there is a need to onramp and offramp given transactions are made in their vast majority in fiat. An exchange run as a business having at least a lot at stake in ensuring co…
> Mad because some entrepreneurs makes the effort to build legitimate business entities, and what certain governments find to do is any scheme to keep them out of legitimity. This isn't what it looks like to me. It looks to me like the entire point of cyptocurrency was to complete route around regulations that these people thought were too onerous. That's not building a "legitimate" business, that's taking a risk and…
Would you say the same about music streaming, as companies were launching services without all the due dues, but knew they would finally have leverage once they have a significant user base to negociate deals for legitimate offerings?
Anyhow those big risk takers are not losing because of the roulette factor here, they are hit by some political stance that wants to keep a statu quo, with crypto entering more mainstream at each cycle, legislators work hard at putting a stop to it.
Just read what the head of the SEC said, verbatim "the US does not need other digital currencies". As if it was the SEC to tell what the US need and doesn't need. This whole war against crypto isn't about unregistered securities being sold by unlicensed businesses, it's about using whatever they have to tame what has become a threatening industry, a competition to the traditional financial system. It's about keeping the statu quo.
Yesterday bitcoiners were drug dealers and terrorist, today they are illegitimate investors and exchanges are not following financial regulations, the law, abusing innocent uneducated investors. These laws are impossible to navigate, after countess demands from businesses and those competent in that tech along with the law: Provide clear direction and regulations for a legitimate crypto field. But no, let's sue businesses who insist to operate and keep the rules impossible to adhere to so that we can sue, shut down, after the demonising that stopped working so well after a while.
I would like to be less one sided but the simplistic views on the crypto situation can only make me more radical in the view that the whole thing will be, or should be some may say, absolutely not regulated. Those who get into it don't want some imposed pseudo protection, they just demand the freedom of money. If its the SEC or the danger of being rug pulled, more and more will chose the second.