I'll point out the obvious, just to get the discussion going: it's reasonable to suspect that the motivation is not consumer protection but subversion of technology which presents a challenge to the FIRE economy, which has a tragic stranglehold on NY (my home state). How will we know the difference? What will we do if indeed it's the latter?
> it's reasonable to suspect that the motivation is not consumer protection but subversion of technology which presents a challenge to the FIRE economy No, it isn't. It's only reasonable within the tiny fantasy world of True Believers where the whole world is conspiring to keep the glory of cryptocurrency down. This is the exact same action that would be taken against any other unauthorized, unregistered securities t…
Let's not give them the benefit of the doubt here. They're shills. They have a vested financial interest in twisting logic and reason to convince the world that a secret cabal of bureaucrats and bankers are conspiring against this particular technology.
This is the primary problem with discussing anything crypto-related online. In a technical discussion about the merits of Linux and free software, you can be reasonably sure that whomever you are engaging with does not have a financial interest in pushing their particular stance. It seems like in any crypto-related discussion, it is impossible to find honest, impartial debate.