5 ms·

Meanwhile Hong Kong is rolling out the the red carpet https://www.wsj.com/articles/hong-kong-banks-are-netting-crypto-customers-as-citys-push-gains-steam-ccb581

Meanwhile Hong Kong is rolling out the the red carpet https://www.wsj.com/articles/hong-kong-banks-are-netting-crypto-customers-as-citys-push-gains-steam-ccb5811f?mod=markets_lead_pos5 https://www.wsj.com/articles/hong-kong-banks-are-netting-cry... The crypto industry is extremely adept at moving across borders, and as power politics between nations dictate different priorities, crypto will make its home base where ever the doors open. Right now China and Russia are in a West vs. East struggle, and anything they can do to reduce the power of the US Dollar and banking system will be supported.

VWWHFSfQ 4y ago
Hasn't the CCP been pretty adversarial to cryptocurrency?
- DANmode 4y ago
  Depends on if you mean officially or unofficially, from what I can gather.
- snacktaster 4y ago
  China has outright banned it at various times. USA has taken legal stances against things like tornado cash, but never anything close to the broad strokes of banning that the Chinese government has done. If anything the slowness and deliberateness of USA regulators to respond has enabled the entire worldwide crypto economy to flourish. So China is now going to "roll out the red carpets" for crypto exchanges? Yeah right.
  - wnevets 4y ago
    > So China is now going to "roll out the red carpets" for crypto exchanges? Yeah right. The "this is good for bitcoin" crowd never ceases to entertain.
- cherioo 4y ago
  CCP doesn’t want crypto due to risk from capital flight and monetary control in China. Hong Kong has no such risks given its freer capital control. The only thing non-free that CCP care is speech.
  - bobthepanda 4y ago
    Well, HK is also a conduit of money entering and leaving China, so if people start using crypto for that then China will crack down, the same way they cracked down on the Macanese money-laundering via casinos.
- anonymouskimmer 4y ago
  When used by their own citizens.
jjtheblunt 4y ago
Since Russia has lots of energy, maybe they can use it to settle transactions? Meanwhile Visa keeps on clearing incomparably more (by “several orders of magnitude”) encrypted transactions per second globally for miniscule energy?
- robcohen 4y ago
  I’d be very surprised if Visa can clear transactions with less energy than Ethereum Proof of Stake requires. https://ethereum.org/en/energy-consumption/ https://ethereum.org/en/energy-consumption/ The energy argument is correct for proof of work, not proof of stake.
  - thisgoesnowhere 4y ago
    Bit odd to see the comparison of ethereum to YouTube and netflix. What is that supposed to show?
    - robcohen 4y ago
      It’s supposed to show relative power consumption. Which it does. What would you like to compare it to?
      - thisgoesnowhere 4y ago
        Other payment networks? Stripe, square, interac? One is a streaming service and the other is a payment network. It's like comparing a construction site to a restaurant in terms of fuel consumption.
      - crote 4y ago
        I could also compare it to the power consumption of the lightbulb in my garage. It is apples-to-oranges to compare a payment network to a video streaming platform, the only useful comparison is to another payment network.
  - kodah 4y ago
bobthepanda 4y ago
Hong Kong may not be a great place to invest long term given that China has a far more precarious legal system and is willing to override Hong Kong’s on a whim.
- nostrademons 4y ago
  For a technology that seeks to replace the legal & financial system, this is the perfect place to invest. It's like how Uber couldn't have gotten started anywhere other than SF, because the transportation system there is so bad that people will hop into cars with strangers instead. You don't found a startup in places where your competition is strong, you found it in places where it's nonexistent.
  - bobthepanda 4y ago
    HK is a fairly mature financial sector (HSBC is literally HongKong and Shanghai Banking Corporation) and is also well integrated into both Chinese and international financial systems, I would hardly call the competition “nonexistent.” HKD is probably the largest dollar peg. The legal system also exists; it’s British-descended common law unless the CCP decides to use its authoritarian instinct.
  - bandrami 4y ago
    > hop into cars with strangers instead I'm pretty sure every city has taxis?
LapsangGuzzler 4y ago
After the collapse of Silvergate and Signature, I say “let them have it”. The crypto industry may be adept at moving across borders, but so are seasoned criminals. That shouldn’t automatically qualify them to operate with impunity. Millions of people lost savings in the wake of FTX, and we’re all just supposed to pretend that it was some singular, isolated incident? Their name was on an NBA arena, they spent millions on celebrity endorsements and ads, and were touted among what many consider to be one of the top tier venture firms in the world. The SEC had every right do this.
- PretzelPirate 4y ago
  > Millions of people lost savings in the wake of FTX, FTX...which was a regulated exchange in the US and failed because the SEC wasn't regulating. The issue with expanding the SEC's reach is that they're refusing to do their job and they're asking for more work that they aren't going to do. Commissioner Hester Peirce has a great statement on this: https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/peirce-rendering-inovation-2023-04-12 https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/peirce-rendering-inovatio... We also see this statement in the article: > The officials estimated about dozen crypto firms would fall under the expanded definition, but declined to provide any more specifics about which firms. Which means that the SEC isn't creating clarity about their proposed changes and the effects that they will have. They need to create clarity before asking the public to comment on something. If the SEC had been doing their job all this time and regulating the industry which they claim falls under their jurisdiction, people probably would have been saved from a lot of scams and loss of assets while still enabling blockchain products to be built by people who enjoy working on them.
  - zefalt 4y ago
    Pretty sure FTX was not a US corporation and catered to non-US customers. FTX.us, which was a minor branch that catered to US customers, was thought to be relatively solvent but ultimately collapsed like most things associated with FTX. Not saying that the SEC would have prevented anything in the fallout, but blaming them for failing to regulate seems somewhat incorrect. Though, I am unclear why FTX filed bankruptcy in Delaware. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Gigachad 4y ago
Not sure why the SEC would care if people from other countries are being scammed. As long as the local citizens are protected.

VWWHFSfQ 4y ago

Hasn't the CCP been pretty adversarial to cryptocurrency?

DANmode 4y ago
Depends on if you mean officially or unofficially, from what I can gather.
snacktaster 4y ago
China has outright banned it at various times. USA has taken legal stances against things like tornado cash, but never anything close to the broad strokes of banning that the Chinese government has done. If anything the slowness and deliberateness of USA regulators to respond has enabled the entire worldwide crypto economy to flourish. So China is now going to "roll out the red carpets" for crypto exchanges? Yeah right.
- wnevets 4y ago
  > So China is now going to "roll out the red carpets" for crypto exchanges? Yeah right. The "this is good for bitcoin" crowd never ceases to entertain.
cherioo 4y ago
CCP doesn’t want crypto due to risk from capital flight and monetary control in China. Hong Kong has no such risks given its freer capital control. The only thing non-free that CCP care is speech.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  Well, HK is also a conduit of money entering and leaving China, so if people start using crypto for that then China will crack down, the same way they cracked down on the Macanese money-laundering via casinos.
anonymouskimmer 4y ago
When used by their own citizens.

jjtheblunt 4y ago

Since Russia has lots of energy, maybe they can use it to settle transactions? Meanwhile Visa keeps on clearing incomparably more (by “several orders of magnitude”) encrypted transactions per second globally for miniscule energy?

robcohen 4y ago
I’d be very surprised if Visa can clear transactions with less energy than Ethereum Proof of Stake requires. https://ethereum.org/en/energy-consumption/ https://ethereum.org/en/energy-consumption/ The energy argument is correct for proof of work, not proof of stake.
- thisgoesnowhere 4y ago
  Bit odd to see the comparison of ethereum to YouTube and netflix. What is that supposed to show?
  - robcohen 4y ago
    It’s supposed to show relative power consumption. Which it does. What would you like to compare it to?
    - thisgoesnowhere 4y ago
      Other payment networks? Stripe, square, interac? One is a streaming service and the other is a payment network. It's like comparing a construction site to a restaurant in terms of fuel consumption.
    - crote 4y ago
      I could also compare it to the power consumption of the lightbulb in my garage. It is apples-to-oranges to compare a payment network to a video streaming platform, the only useful comparison is to another payment network.
- kodah 4y ago

bobthepanda 4y ago

Hong Kong may not be a great place to invest long term given that China has a far more precarious legal system and is willing to override Hong Kong’s on a whim.

nostrademons 4y ago
For a technology that seeks to replace the legal & financial system, this is the perfect place to invest. It's like how Uber couldn't have gotten started anywhere other than SF, because the transportation system there is so bad that people will hop into cars with strangers instead. You don't found a startup in places where your competition is strong, you found it in places where it's nonexistent.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  HK is a fairly mature financial sector (HSBC is literally HongKong and Shanghai Banking Corporation) and is also well integrated into both Chinese and international financial systems, I would hardly call the competition “nonexistent.” HKD is probably the largest dollar peg. The legal system also exists; it’s British-descended common law unless the CCP decides to use its authoritarian instinct.
- bandrami 4y ago
  > hop into cars with strangers instead I'm pretty sure every city has taxis?

LapsangGuzzler 4y ago

After the collapse of Silvergate and Signature, I say “let them have it”. The crypto industry may be adept at moving across borders, but so are seasoned criminals. That shouldn’t automatically qualify them to operate with impunity. Millions of people lost savings in the wake of FTX, and we’re all just supposed to pretend that it was some singular, isolated incident? Their name was on an NBA arena, they spent millions on celebrity endorsements and ads, and were touted among what many consider to be one of the top tier venture firms in the world. The SEC had every right do this.

PretzelPirate 4y ago
> Millions of people lost savings in the wake of FTX, FTX...which was a regulated exchange in the US and failed because the SEC wasn't regulating. The issue with expanding the SEC's reach is that they're refusing to do their job and they're asking for more work that they aren't going to do. Commissioner Hester Peirce has a great statement on this: https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/peirce-rendering-inovation-2023-04-12 https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/peirce-rendering-inovatio... We also see this statement in the article: > The officials estimated about dozen crypto firms would fall under the expanded definition, but declined to provide any more specifics about which firms. Which means that the SEC isn't creating clarity about their proposed changes and the effects that they will have. They need to create clarity before asking the public to comment on something. If the SEC had been doing their job all this time and regulating the industry which they claim falls under their jurisdiction, people probably would have been saved from a lot of scams and loss of assets while still enabling blockchain products to be built by people who enjoy working on them.
- zefalt 4y ago
  Pretty sure FTX was not a US corporation and catered to non-US customers. FTX.us, which was a minor branch that catered to US customers, was thought to be relatively solvent but ultimately collapsed like most things associated with FTX. Not saying that the SEC would have prevented anything in the fallout, but blaming them for failing to regulate seems somewhat incorrect. Though, I am unclear why FTX filed bankruptcy in Delaware. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Gigachad 4y ago

Not sure why the SEC would care if people from other countries are being scammed. As long as the local citizens are protected.