4 ms·
Putting the contract on the blockchain allows it to be traded like, but not as, a security while the SEC et al. drag their feet on classifying crypto-tokens as
by bsanr2 6y ago
Putting the contract on the blockchain allows it to be traded like, but not as, a security while the SEC et al. drag their feet on classifying crypto-tokens as securities. Something like that.
- joosters 6y agoSo it's a way to dodge the law? (while ruining the environment, of course)
- meowkit 6y agoNo. What law is being dodged here? Again, no. Brute force Nakamoto consensus is bad for the environment, but lumping all crypto into that bucket is ignorant/intellectually dishonest.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- jkhdigital 6y agoProof of work uses a lot of energy. There are a few steps between that and “bad for the environment”, and you probably also need to explain why any other economic activity which uses a lot of energy is not also bad for the environment. All human production processes use energy, and therefore all economic activity is “bad for the environment” in the exact proportion of its energy use.
- bsanr2 6y agoIt's a way to engage in activity that is superficially distinct enough that the law has not yet caught up with it, like driving for Uber or owning an AirBNB. It remains to be seen if the "innovation" in question is tangential to the main purpose (skirting an existing activity whose lawful bounds are already well-defined), or if it isn't, and the tech is instead truly transformative. You may think you know, but nothing really matters until a court, regulatory body, or legislature weighs in. Also Proof of Stake.