4 ms·

Pretty idiotic that they can't make new categories for new tech and have to shoehorn it into the old.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> they can't make new categories for new tech and have to shoehorn it into the old Nobody is doing that. For all the new techiness of crypto, its popular failure modes of pumps and dumps, rug pulls and promoters lying through their teeth is identical to the pre-Securities Act securities landscape. So for those narrow problems these proven solutions should work.
- nathias 4y ago
  But as we can see from anything else, X when digital becomes completely different, it becomes at the same time possible to scale it, to automate it and it becomes international. I fear regulatory capture that will capture all the innovation and profits for US VCs (again).
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    Money is already digital, highly automated and internationally scaled. The American payments/settlement system is arguably more decentralised than blockchains. Crypto brings unique attributes to the table. But being digital, automatable and international aren’t major differentiators. To the degree we’re seeing a persistent class of winners in crypto, it’s not users. And it’s not VCs. It’s Wall Street. Because this is an old, dirty game. Some folks just gave it a new paint job.
    - nathias 4y ago
      There are two companies (Visa, MasterCard) that have a global oligopoly and full control. If you get on a blacklist for one you are done, your internet economic life is over (except crypto). I don't care if Wall Street is profiting by speculation if I'm not excluded myself, the problem is that WS is getting a lot of help with the US regulators that then regulate the global market in a way that excludes poor people.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > two companies (Visa, MasterCard) that have a global oligopoly and full control For one set of rails. Wires, ACH, and a number of other payment rails exist and outclass Visa + MasterCard. (Also, technically, Visa and MasterCard are analogous to SWIFT. They process payment messages. Not the transfer of dollars per se. If they chose, they could execute transactions in Bitcoin with the issuing bank and merchant bank then settling the trade on the blockchain or whatever offline.)
        nathias 4y ago
        whatever the details, they fully control online economy (except crypto)
gamblor956 4y ago
The SEC cannot make new categories until and unless Congress passes a law either making new categories or authorizing the SEC to do so.
oldgradstudent 4y ago
Why do you need new categories when the old ones fit? A Ponzi over Blockchain is still a Ponzi.
- nathias 4y ago
  You must be the smartest boy alive.
stonogo 4y ago
The only 'new tech' is essentially math-based anti-counterfeit protection. Aside from that, this is all firmly traditional financial footwork; "____, but with computers" doesn't really move the needle.

> they can't make new categories for new tech and have to shoehorn it into the old Nobody is doing that. For all the new techiness of crypto, its popular failure modes of pumps and dumps, rug pulls and promoters lying through their teeth is identical to the pre-Securities Act securities landscape. So for those narrow problems these proven solutions should work.

nathias 4y ago
But as we can see from anything else, X when digital becomes completely different, it becomes at the same time possible to scale it, to automate it and it becomes international. I fear regulatory capture that will capture all the innovation and profits for US VCs (again).
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  Money is already digital, highly automated and internationally scaled. The American payments/settlement system is arguably more decentralised than blockchains. Crypto brings unique attributes to the table. But being digital, automatable and international aren’t major differentiators. To the degree we’re seeing a persistent class of winners in crypto, it’s not users. And it’s not VCs. It’s Wall Street. Because this is an old, dirty game. Some folks just gave it a new paint job.
  - nathias 4y ago
    There are two companies (Visa, MasterCard) that have a global oligopoly and full control. If you get on a blacklist for one you are done, your internet economic life is over (except crypto). I don't care if Wall Street is profiting by speculation if I'm not excluded myself, the problem is that WS is getting a lot of help with the US regulators that then regulate the global market in a way that excludes poor people.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > two companies (Visa, MasterCard) that have a global oligopoly and full control For one set of rails. Wires, ACH, and a number of other payment rails exist and outclass Visa + MasterCard. (Also, technically, Visa and MasterCard are analogous to SWIFT. They process payment messages. Not the transfer of dollars per se. If they chose, they could execute transactions in Bitcoin with the issuing bank and merchant bank then settling the trade on the blockchain or whatever offline.)
      - nathias 4y ago
        whatever the details, they fully control online economy (except crypto)

gamblor956 4y ago

The SEC cannot make new categories until and unless Congress passes a law either making new categories or authorizing the SEC to do so.

oldgradstudent 4y ago

Why do you need new categories when the old ones fit? A Ponzi over Blockchain is still a Ponzi.

nathias 4y ago
You must be the smartest boy alive.

stonogo 4y ago

The only 'new tech' is essentially math-based anti-counterfeit protection. Aside from that, this is all firmly traditional financial footwork; "____, but with computers" doesn't really move the needle.