4 ms·

Makes sense given how much attention the industry is getting in politics right now. Just look recent/upcoming briefings, not to mention Senator Lummis' planned

Makes sense given how much attention the industry is getting in politics right now. Just look recent/upcoming briefings, not to mention Senator Lummis' planned crypto bill--of course the crypto industry is going full offense now while the regulatory landscape is still being shaped. https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/149186/heres-a-full-draft-of-senator-cynthia-lummis-landmark-crypto-bill https://www.theblockcrypto.com/post/149186/heres-a-full-draf... https://homeland.house.gov/activities/hearings/terrorism-and-cryptocurrency-industry-perspectives https://homeland.house.gov/activities/hearings/terrorism-and... https://www.agriculture.senate.gov/hearings/examining-digital-assets-risks-regulation-and-innovation https://www.agriculture.senate.gov/hearings/examining-digita...

Animats 4y ago
They have to bribe their way out of jail. There is little question that many metaverse NFTs are investments, under the Howey Test. Pay now, maybe someday they build a metaverse. That's a speculative investment where success depends on the people you paid money to doing something. These things have become too big to escape the attention of regulators. Yuga Labs's BAYC raised half a billion dollars for their "Otherside" metaverse. It doesn't exist. The people they claim are building it, Animoca Brands, don't say they're building it. That gets the SEC's attention.
- Animats 4y ago
  Animoca Brands just mentioned partnering with Yuga Labs in an investor update.[1] [1] https://www.animocabrands.com/animoca-brands-investor-update-for-the-period-ended-on-30-april-2022 https://www.animocabrands.com/animoca-brands-investor-update...
- api 4y ago
  There has always been financial fraud, but the thing I find particularly gross here is the large scale participation of retail investors. That seems new to me, at least since the days of wildcat banks. It’s also an industry that seems to create virtually no value.
  - vkou 4y ago
    Most of the retailers are in it to dump onto a bigger fool. This makes them both perpetrators of, and victims of fraud.
    - api 4y ago
      Some are conscious of it but there are many people bowled over by either the supposed ideology or just a vague sense of it being a next big thing combined with FOMO.
      - vkou 4y ago
        Depends on the instrument. Something like Luna was people chasing yield. Something like NFTs, I'm pretty sure all the nuts know and treat it like a pump and dump.
  - Animats 4y ago
    > There has always been financial fraud, but the thing I find particularly gross here is the large scale participation of retail investors. Go back in financial history to the 1920s, and you'll see the same kinds of startup scams peddled to the public. Which is why most of them were criminalized in the US in the 1930s. There's not much originality in the financial fraud field. Most of the large-scale scams were developed in the 19th century [1]. You need some kind of mass medium to scam large numbers of people, so, while scams go back far further, scams at scale had to await the development of newspaper printing presses. If you know about Madoff, Enron, Milken, Amway, Florida real estate, Ponzi, the Mississippi Bubble, Tulip mania, and bucket shops, you can match most crypto schemes to one of those. This should be covered in schools. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusion...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - puranjay 4y ago
    I don’t disagree with you at all about the scammy nature of the industry at large. But the philosophical underpinnings of the crypto movement, especially the “hard money” idea at the heart of Bitcoin, feels very pertinent at a time when central banks have been doing exactly what the a Bitcoiners had been warning about: debauching money by printing it endlessly. You can consider crypto a scam and you’d be largely right. But its also true that the current financial system is wildly corrupt and increasingly serves only those at the top of the totem pole. Crypto might not be the answer but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t pose the right questions.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  The metaverse is already here. If you ignore the marketing, it’s just VR (and soon to be AR) online over the internet. Barely anyone has tried it because the only affordable and easily accessible model is from Meta, which is still a toxic brand for now. Every other current offering is both too expensive and too complicated for most of the population.
  - Stevvo 4y ago
    There are many reasons for low VR adoption, but Meta's brand image is not one of them. Most people really don't care.
    - chaostheory 4y ago
      It is one of them because it has the right capability at the right price at $299. Every other option ranges from $499 - $999 and requires a PC starting at $1699. Otherwise, there would be a growing amount of early adopters. Instead, we have many techies who refuse to even try it.
      - reflexco 4y ago
        It's not just a vague sense of the "brand image", it's that they literally demand you open a Facebook account to use the device. I'm sure if it was just the corporate connection with Meta but it was still an ethical device, most techies wouldn't care. After all, a lot of software engineer use their open-source libraries like PyTorch, React, GraphQL....
        chaostheory 4y ago
        You’re right. It was a huge mistake in hindsight
- gruez 4y ago
  >There is little question that many metaverse NFTs are investments, under the Howey Test Are we talking about bored ape NFTs or something else? If it's just an artwork NFT, I fail to see how they'd pass the Howey Test. Specifically, it lacks the "To be derived from the efforts of others" part. Moreover, if bored ape NFTs are securities, does that mean paintings and gold bars are securities?
  - reflexco 4y ago
    Bored Apes are not just "a jpeg". From the very launch of the project their ownership gave you access to a private Discord group, and you were being promised future perks like airdrops and access to "metaverse" worlds. Almost all popular NFT collections are that way.
    - Animats 4y ago
      "Promised ... access to "metaverse" world" means "investment". Sell the present, fine. Sell the future, you need to file with the SEC.

Animats 4y ago

They have to bribe their way out of jail. There is little question that many metaverse NFTs are investments, under the Howey Test. Pay now, maybe someday they build a metaverse. That's a speculative investment where success depends on the people you paid money to doing something. These things have become too big to escape the attention of regulators. Yuga Labs's BAYC raised half a billion dollars for their "Otherside" metaverse. It doesn't exist. The people they claim are building it, Animoca Brands, don't say they're building it. That gets the SEC's attention.

Animats 4y ago
Animoca Brands just mentioned partnering with Yuga Labs in an investor update.[1] [1] https://www.animocabrands.com/animoca-brands-investor-update-for-the-period-ended-on-30-april-2022 https://www.animocabrands.com/animoca-brands-investor-update...
api 4y ago
There has always been financial fraud, but the thing I find particularly gross here is the large scale participation of retail investors. That seems new to me, at least since the days of wildcat banks. It’s also an industry that seems to create virtually no value.
- vkou 4y ago
  Most of the retailers are in it to dump onto a bigger fool. This makes them both perpetrators of, and victims of fraud.
  - api 4y ago
    Some are conscious of it but there are many people bowled over by either the supposed ideology or just a vague sense of it being a next big thing combined with FOMO.
    - vkou 4y ago
      Depends on the instrument. Something like Luna was people chasing yield. Something like NFTs, I'm pretty sure all the nuts know and treat it like a pump and dump.
- Animats 4y ago
  > There has always been financial fraud, but the thing I find particularly gross here is the large scale participation of retail investors. Go back in financial history to the 1920s, and you'll see the same kinds of startup scams peddled to the public. Which is why most of them were criminalized in the US in the 1930s. There's not much originality in the financial fraud field. Most of the large-scale scams were developed in the 19th century [1]. You need some kind of mass medium to scam large numbers of people, so, while scams go back far further, scams at scale had to await the development of newspaper printing presses. If you know about Madoff, Enron, Milken, Amway, Florida real estate, Ponzi, the Mississippi Bubble, Tulip mania, and bucket shops, you can match most crypto schemes to one of those. This should be covered in schools. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusion...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- puranjay 4y ago
  I don’t disagree with you at all about the scammy nature of the industry at large. But the philosophical underpinnings of the crypto movement, especially the “hard money” idea at the heart of Bitcoin, feels very pertinent at a time when central banks have been doing exactly what the a Bitcoiners had been warning about: debauching money by printing it endlessly. You can consider crypto a scam and you’d be largely right. But its also true that the current financial system is wildly corrupt and increasingly serves only those at the top of the totem pole. Crypto might not be the answer but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t pose the right questions.
chaostheory 4y ago
The metaverse is already here. If you ignore the marketing, it’s just VR (and soon to be AR) online over the internet. Barely anyone has tried it because the only affordable and easily accessible model is from Meta, which is still a toxic brand for now. Every other current offering is both too expensive and too complicated for most of the population.
- Stevvo 4y ago
  There are many reasons for low VR adoption, but Meta's brand image is not one of them. Most people really don't care.
  - chaostheory 4y ago
    It is one of them because it has the right capability at the right price at $299. Every other option ranges from $499 - $999 and requires a PC starting at $1699. Otherwise, there would be a growing amount of early adopters. Instead, we have many techies who refuse to even try it.
    - reflexco 4y ago
      It's not just a vague sense of the "brand image", it's that they literally demand you open a Facebook account to use the device. I'm sure if it was just the corporate connection with Meta but it was still an ethical device, most techies wouldn't care. After all, a lot of software engineer use their open-source libraries like PyTorch, React, GraphQL....
      - chaostheory 4y ago
        You’re right. It was a huge mistake in hindsight
gruez 4y ago
>There is little question that many metaverse NFTs are investments, under the Howey Test Are we talking about bored ape NFTs or something else? If it's just an artwork NFT, I fail to see how they'd pass the Howey Test. Specifically, it lacks the "To be derived from the efforts of others" part. Moreover, if bored ape NFTs are securities, does that mean paintings and gold bars are securities?
- reflexco 4y ago
  Bored Apes are not just "a jpeg". From the very launch of the project their ownership gave you access to a private Discord group, and you were being promised future perks like airdrops and access to "metaverse" worlds. Almost all popular NFT collections are that way.
  - Animats 4y ago
    "Promised ... access to "metaverse" world" means "investment". Sell the present, fine. Sell the future, you need to file with the SEC.