3 ms·
Its a prisoner's dilemma, the SEC's mission of protecting investors is impossible if their only response to compliance are enforcement actions that will hurt in
by vmception 5y ago
Its a prisoner's dilemma, the SEC's mission of protecting investors is impossible if their only response to compliance are enforcement actions that will hurt investors
In the past, this meant that exchanges won't list the token to trade (or delist, with traders panic selling before the delisting events), as any asset notified as being a security requires a broker-dealer to trade it ONLY IF it is registered. But for the past 2 years, centralized exchanges aren't involved in the liquidity. The network has innovated a way to incentivize liquidity with a fundamentally different model of exchange called AMMs (automated market markers, the acronym tells you nothing about why it is different though, but thats the term to look up). AMMs let people pool liquidity onchain and there is practically zero consequence anymore from SEC action - with regard to globally accessible liquidity. And sure, maybe the numerous liquidity providers can be sanctioned but they don't care, it is extremely easy to mix your legitimate funds with Tornado Cash and come out the other side and make a liquidity pool anonymously with mixed funds. It is up the regulator to figure out who to sanction and in this case the mixer's use isn't criminal and the clean funds on the ensuing anonymous side are only a civil issue. Also, even if you want to argue the cat and mouse game favoring the government's omnipotence, liquidity can be burned making that liquidity permanent no matter what happens to the human. I would actually argue a significant bullish thesis is based on how many assets are intentionally burned in liquidity pool bearer shares. Its pretty much perfect right now (with room for improvement in the liquidity pool technology). Between permissionless AMMs and permissionless bridges, and 3 trillion USD already within the crypto ecosystem outside of exchanges, its just not really the same game as it was 3 years ago.
The SEC regulates the intermediaries and now those intermediaries have been disintermediated.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- riffraff 5y agoYou're missing the part where this interfaces with the classical finance system. The whole organization that wants to buy an NBA team exists in the US legal system, and that is the point that will be regulated, the fact they get funded with USD via a bank or crypto through a pool is irrelevant.
- vmception 5y agoI was answering in general, these DAOs are dime a dozen and most never try to do something with the classical financial system
- gamblor956 5y agoThe SEC regulates companies that publicly issue stock and the intermediaries like stock exchanges on which that stock can be traded. The company bit of the equation has not been disintermediated. In fact, that's the whole point of this transaction: to create a publicly traded company.
- vmception 5y agoyes they regulate both I was mostly talking about the other daos that exist which dont attempt to do anything in meat space