4 ms·

I would make all of those arguments so I guess I’m intellectually coherent:)

tptacek 9y ago
That's totally fine. I do not even a little bit agree with you, but it's fine to be a hard libertarian or an ancap. But most people aren't ancaps, so a persuasive argument against ICO regulation is probably one that doesn't depend on your audience themselves being ancaps.
- malvosenior 9y ago
  I think you’re greatly overestimating the popularity of your opinion. If a ton of people didn’t agree with me the SEC wouldn’t need to step in and put a stop to it. It’s that so many people want to do this that they are now meddling.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    I absolutely agree that lots of non-ancaps think the SEC should stay out of ICO regulation. But so far as I can tell, they haven't these arguments through. I've seen only two forms of pro-free-ICO argument on this thread: (1) Special pleading arguments that suggest that despite the fact that tech startups have little to no inventory, trivially simple expenses, no financing obligations outside their equity raises, and, for the forseeable future, no significant revenue --- that is, despite the fact that tech startups have virtually none of the attributes that make producing audited financials expensive --- they should be exempt from SEC disclosure rules. (2) Arguments suggesting that adults should be free to enter into contracts without protections because regulations have been obsoleted by the Internet. Argument (2) I get, and acknowledge. I do not agree with it, but fine. Argument (1) though makes no sense, and if someone would take the time to pursue it carefully, I'd be thankful.
    - malvosenior 9y ago
      I agree with you. Argument 1 makes no sense.
wilg 9y ago
How does your argument handle the issue that it's not possible to ask every single person in the country to understand how cancer drug safety works, how food safety for poultry works, what makes a restaurant kitchen safe, and how to properly construct a building that won't fall on your head? All those in addition to the hundreds of thousands of other things I'd have to deeply understand in order to keep myself safe? It is not possible or reasonable to expect people to have enough information on all of these topics in their heads at every moment they might make a decision. Not only that, the people who want to open a restaurant in an unsafe building or sell you tainted meat have a clear incentive to hide that information from you and from everyone else. In this world, how could anybody make a good decision on the thousands of things we buy or use during daily life? Even with perfect information, which is strongly disincentivized? Regulations solve this issue by hiring the government to figure out and enforce the best way to prevent these issues so that every time we go out to dinner we don't have to ask the waiter "Which of these walls is load-bearing?".
- malvosenior 9y ago
  Reputation and expert advice cover this. Check Yelp to see if anyone got crushed to death before you dine and you should be fine. Snark aside, there’s a lot more transparency now than when these laws were designed. A lot more competition too. The market will weed out truly bad actors.

That's totally fine. I do not even a little bit agree with you, but it's fine to be a hard libertarian or an ancap. But most people aren't ancaps, so a persuasive argument against ICO regulation is probably one that doesn't depend on your audience themselves being ancaps.

malvosenior 9y ago
I think you’re greatly overestimating the popularity of your opinion. If a ton of people didn’t agree with me the SEC wouldn’t need to step in and put a stop to it. It’s that so many people want to do this that they are now meddling.
- tptacek 9y ago
  I absolutely agree that lots of non-ancaps think the SEC should stay out of ICO regulation. But so far as I can tell, they haven't these arguments through. I've seen only two forms of pro-free-ICO argument on this thread: (1) Special pleading arguments that suggest that despite the fact that tech startups have little to no inventory, trivially simple expenses, no financing obligations outside their equity raises, and, for the forseeable future, no significant revenue --- that is, despite the fact that tech startups have virtually none of the attributes that make producing audited financials expensive --- they should be exempt from SEC disclosure rules. (2) Arguments suggesting that adults should be free to enter into contracts without protections because regulations have been obsoleted by the Internet. Argument (2) I get, and acknowledge. I do not agree with it, but fine. Argument (1) though makes no sense, and if someone would take the time to pursue it carefully, I'd be thankful.
  - malvosenior 9y ago
    I agree with you. Argument 1 makes no sense.

wilg 9y ago

How does your argument handle the issue that it's not possible to ask every single person in the country to understand how cancer drug safety works, how food safety for poultry works, what makes a restaurant kitchen safe, and how to properly construct a building that won't fall on your head? All those in addition to the hundreds of thousands of other things I'd have to deeply understand in order to keep myself safe? It is not possible or reasonable to expect people to have enough information on all of these topics in their heads at every moment they might make a decision. Not only that, the people who want to open a restaurant in an unsafe building or sell you tainted meat have a clear incentive to hide that information from you and from everyone else. In this world, how could anybody make a good decision on the thousands of things we buy or use during daily life? Even with perfect information, which is strongly disincentivized? Regulations solve this issue by hiring the government to figure out and enforce the best way to prevent these issues so that every time we go out to dinner we don't have to ask the waiter "Which of these walls is load-bearing?".

malvosenior 9y ago
Reputation and expert advice cover this. Check Yelp to see if anyone got crushed to death before you dine and you should be fine. Snark aside, there’s a lot more transparency now than when these laws were designed. A lot more competition too. The market will weed out truly bad actors.