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

SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

forum.sushi.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 71 posts

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#61

Post by Kretinsky »

dvt wrote: post #54
Kretinsky wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the crime here? Crypto trading is done by willing individuals, no one is forcing you to participate in this market. Moreover, “regulation” is not a synonym of “good and righteous”, especially in the US, where things are quite shady when you look from the outside. FTX was the dear of the regulators, and ended us as a massive scam. The recurrent crises in the banking sector show that regulation is, frankly, qui…

> What is the crime here? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/securities_act_of_1933 But you bring up great points, and that's exactly why we use a political system called a "representative democracy" where if you don't like the laws, you can vote for those that align with your worldview, you can run for office yourself, or you can lobby your politicians to change them. (Breaking the law is unfortunately not on that list…

Thinking that the federal state, in the USA, is a representative democracy is delusional. It's an oligarchy, where power is shared between different interests coalition, such as the war industry, the financial sector, the ruling families, and so on.

"Vote for those who align your worldviews" in a bipartisan political system is laughable, same as "lobbying". JPMorgan can indeed lobby to protect its interests, regular citizens can't, or have to waste an amount of energy so high, for results so meaningless while doing it that it's useless in the end. Hence, the real citizens are the ones who have access to the system, be them corporations or oligarchs.

But to go back to the original argument, what's the problem here? All of this is virtual and doesn't affect the real world. Unlike the US banking system that needs taxpayer's money to bail itself out every 15 years like clockwork, the crypto space lives on its own.

Truth is, this crackdown is quite beneficial to the ecosystem, as all devs are leaving the US, or will have to. In the end we'll have a much more balanced tech sector, unlike now where the USA imposes its cultural norms and practices on the rest of the world.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#62

Post by Kretinsky »

klyrs wrote: post #55
Kretinsky wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the crime here? Crypto trading is done by willing individuals, no one is forcing you to participate in this market. Moreover, “regulation” is not a synonym of “good and righteous”, especially in the US, where things are quite shady when you look from the outside. FTX was the dear of the regulators, and ended us as a massive scam. The recurrent crises in the banking sector show that regulation is, frankly, qui…

> What is the crime here? Offering unregistered securities, in apparent violation of the Securities Exchange Act. It's astounding how people think they can skirt the law without even familiarizing themselves with the law.

Crypto didn't exist when securities laws were created.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#63

Post by Kretinsky »

sumeno wrote: post #58
Kretinsky wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the crime here? Crypto trading is done by willing individuals, no one is forcing you to participate in this market. Moreover, “regulation” is not a synonym of “good and righteous”, especially in the US, where things are quite shady when you look from the outside. FTX was the dear of the regulators, and ended us as a massive scam. The recurrent crises in the banking sector show that regulation is, frankly, qui…

> The recurrent crises in the banking sector show that regulation is, frankly, quite useless. Car accident related deaths show that seat belts are, frankly, quite useless.

There is a clear causation and correlation between belts and accidents. As for regulation and crises, the current one shows that it's quite unclear.

What's happening, however is that, since the Patriot act, financial freedoms and the right to privacy became a meme. The state and the banking sector has more and more to say about how you spend your money and earn it. Fact is that a totalitarian regime would have to vote very few laws to enforce itself.

Crypto is a backstop against this.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#64

Post by [deleted] »

ejanus wrote: post #48
dvt wrote: post #18

Honestly, I'm also flabbergasted when the guy is basically running an unregulated exchange that offers what are almost certainly unregistered securities[1] ( definitionally , the value of $SUSHI LP tokens goes up when people trade other projects' tokens, so the Howey Test is clearly violated) and freely chooses to live in the US. The SEC is shooting fish in a barrel. [1] https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/sushiswap…

But uni is also into irregular exchange. So, why are they not subpoenaed?

[deleted]

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#65

Post by sneak »

dvt wrote: post #60
sneak wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The laws don't expire; we are mostly ruled by laws that we were not in any way represented for. Everyone who was of voting age who could have voted for senators who ratified the income tax amendment is dead now. There is no person now living under the sixteenth amendment that was involved in its passage. None of us alive today were voting for congressional reps back in '33; correspondingly the securities act appl…

Are you trying to argue that, under your proposed system of laws, we would need to re-litigate (for example) murder or arson for every new generation? Seems a bit silly. Either way, precedent can be freely overturned, so the Securities Act isn't immutable. It's just that most people still think it's a good idea.

Most people aren't aware of securities regulation at all.

Note that I didn't propose any alternate system, I just pointed out that the majority of the laws we live under were not a result of our being represented in any way.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#66

Post by alphanullmeric »

dvt wrote: post #54
Kretinsky wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the crime here? Crypto trading is done by willing individuals, no one is forcing you to participate in this market. Moreover, “regulation” is not a synonym of “good and righteous”, especially in the US, where things are quite shady when you look from the outside. FTX was the dear of the regulators, and ended us as a massive scam. The recurrent crises in the banking sector show that regulation is, frankly, qui…

> What is the crime here? https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/securities_act_of_1933 But you bring up great points, and that's exactly why we use a political system called a "representative democracy" where if you don't like the laws, you can vote for those that align with your worldview, you can run for office yourself, or you can lobby your politicians to change them. (Breaking the law is unfortunately not on that list…

Should an individual be allowed to choose the risks they want to take with their own money? Yes or no. “But we voted for it” doesn’t change the fact that I don’t consent to something on the basis that enough people disagree with me.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#67

Post by WXLCKNO »

Kretinsky wrote: post #62
klyrs wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is the crime here? Offering unregistered securities, in apparent violation of the Securities Exchange Act. It's astounding how people think they can skirt the law without even familiarizing themselves with the law.

Crypto didn't exist when securities laws were created.

lawyers hate this one simple trick! they apparently can't craft laws that are not made immediately obselete by new things.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#68

Post by throw101010 »

soared wrote: post #56
throw101010 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if it's funny, but in a DAO often anyone can make a proposal (usually following a certain process and holding a small amount of thr governance token). They are calling for the token holders to give their opinion or approval for a transaction. It will be funny if the vote reveals the founder has a majority of the tokens and can vote himself these funds from the DAO's treasury. But if the token is well distrib…

My point is more so that if someone asked for a couple million (or potentially unlimited millions), you’d expect clear breakouts of how it would be spent, how they’d prove to be spending it on the states purpose, what law firm they’re using, what needs to occur for another million to be pulled out, what needs to occur for millions to stop being pulled out, how often they’ll report out on what they’re spending it on,…

Agreed, the terms were not clear, and as I've guessed the proposer has updated it based on the community input.

Sometimes when you write these things it's hard to nail down everthing and you can miss a scope creep because you assume honesty on your end for example. I think that it shows a healthy governance process if people can give their interpretation and desires and the proposer updates their proposal accordingly.

The fact he is unwilling to share more data in public about the case is problematic though, I get the issues with talking about an open case. One possibility would be to get the community to vote to elect a comittee of contributors who have demonstrated their care for the DAO to review the documents under NDA, same for reviewing the fees and they would vote on the relevance of such a fund (and its extent) to protect the DAO or not instead.

Re: SushiDAO served with subpoena by SEC

#70

Post by johngladtj »

dvt wrote: post #60
sneak wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The laws don't expire; we are mostly ruled by laws that we were not in any way represented for. Everyone who was of voting age who could have voted for senators who ratified the income tax amendment is dead now. There is no person now living under the sixteenth amendment that was involved in its passage. None of us alive today were voting for congressional reps back in '33; correspondingly the securities act appl…

Are you trying to argue that, under your proposed system of laws, we would need to re-litigate (for example) murder or arson for every new generation? Seems a bit silly. Either way, precedent can be freely overturned, so the Securities Act isn't immutable. It's just that most people still think it's a good idea.

Yes, all laws should have expiration dates built in, and the more controversial the law is the shorter that expiration should be.

A law passed 51-49 should not persist after that legislative period has passed.

A law passed 100-0 may be reasonable to persist for 50 years.

Post reply on HN