5 ms·

Just because the current system sucks doesn't mean a replacement will be better. Its the responsibility of people advocating for a replacement system to explain

Just because the current system sucks doesn't mean a replacement will be better. Its the responsibility of people advocating for a replacement system to explain and demonstrate why it will be better. Banks suck. But that doesn't mean crypto companies should have free reign to do whatever they want for the sake of "innovation."

wslh 3y ago
The point of my comment is about a political issue in financial systems. I don't specially care if the replacement is crypto or whatever other decentralized or centralized technologies move things forward.
- paledot 3y ago
  Then why make that comment on an article about a crypto company in hot water?
  - wslh 3y ago
    Did you read my other comments? Could you be more explicit about your question?
everfree 3y ago
> that doesn't mean crypto companies should have free reign to do whatever they want for the sake of "innovation." As a company, you're allowed to do anything that is not illegal. Law is not a whitelist of what you're allowed to do, it's a blacklist of what you're not allowed to do. And while it makes sense to create laws that protect consumers, it doesn't make sense to create laws that blanket ban experimentation with a new system until someone "explains and demonstrates why it will be better" to the satisfaction of some authority figure. > Its the responsibility of people advocating for a replacement system to explain and demonstrate why it will be better. No, it's society's responsibility to not create and to repeal laws that drive innovation offshore. Because ultimately it's a country's citizens, not the innovators, who lose out if a valuable piece of technology moves offshore. If Steve Jobs had to "explain and demonstrate" why the iPhone would be better than flip phones and blackberries to the satisfaction of Congress before being allowed to experiment with its design, Apple probably would have just moved their HQ to China, and Americans would be the ones missing out. So just because Binance is committing fraud and breaking the law doesn't mean that in general we should be blocking the ability of companies from experimenting with new technology, whether or not you personally believe a particular technology will amount to anything.
- ARandumGuy 3y ago
  > If Steve Jobs had to "explain and demonstrate" why the iPhone would be better than flip phones and blackberries to the satisfaction of Congress before being allowed to experiment with its design, Apple probably would have just moved their HQ to China, and Americans would be the ones missing out. Apple had to comply with a ton of regulations and laws when making the iPhone. Off the top of my head, they had to comply with various product safety laws, FCC frequency allocations, and consumer protection rules. The US (and most other countries) have a lot of regulations for managing money and investments. These apply regardless of the underlying technology being used. Legally, the only thing cryptocurrencies brought is that they didn't obviously fit into any existing legal framework. This was mostly due to a lack of judicial precedence, not because cryptocurrencies were fundamentally different. This isn't writing laws to stifle innovation. This is using laws that already exist to actually regulate companies that have managed to avoid it before now.
- JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago
  > > So just because Binance is committing fraud and breaking the law doesn't mean that in general we should be blocking the ability of companies from experimenting with new technology, whether or not you personally believe a particular technology will amount to anything. This is not new technology, it's moving the money around under the guise of new technology. And all the same crypto-bros are very proud of the valuation of the company they are at the helm of ....and they always tout it expressed in US Dollars...not bitcoin, not ethereum, not Binance coin. And the same crypto-bros are very proud of their net worth expressed in US Dollars While you are here writing "let them experiment with technology dude" they concern with technology is zero, it's all about driving up the valuation and driving up the net worth (always expressed in US Dollars)
  - everfree 3y ago
    Gatekeeping which widely-used new software counts as “technology” and which doesn’t seems like a strange hill to die on.
rodgerd 3y ago
> Banks suck. Banks in Singapore provide 5 minute inter-bank settlement. Banks in NZ provide multiple intra-day settlements seven days a week. Australia's NPP settles within one minute as a typical target. Banks are perfectly capable of this. US banks may not be.

wslh 3y ago

The point of my comment is about a political issue in financial systems. I don't specially care if the replacement is crypto or whatever other decentralized or centralized technologies move things forward.

paledot 3y ago
Then why make that comment on an article about a crypto company in hot water?
- wslh 3y ago
  Did you read my other comments? Could you be more explicit about your question?

everfree 3y ago

> that doesn't mean crypto companies should have free reign to do whatever they want for the sake of "innovation." As a company, you're allowed to do anything that is not illegal. Law is not a whitelist of what you're allowed to do, it's a blacklist of what you're not allowed to do. And while it makes sense to create laws that protect consumers, it doesn't make sense to create laws that blanket ban experimentation with a new system until someone "explains and demonstrates why it will be better" to the satisfaction of some authority figure. > Its the responsibility of people advocating for a replacement system to explain and demonstrate why it will be better. No, it's society's responsibility to not create and to repeal laws that drive innovation offshore. Because ultimately it's a country's citizens, not the innovators, who lose out if a valuable piece of technology moves offshore. If Steve Jobs had to "explain and demonstrate" why the iPhone would be better than flip phones and blackberries to the satisfaction of Congress before being allowed to experiment with its design, Apple probably would have just moved their HQ to China, and Americans would be the ones missing out. So just because Binance is committing fraud and breaking the law doesn't mean that in general we should be blocking the ability of companies from experimenting with new technology, whether or not you personally believe a particular technology will amount to anything.

ARandumGuy 3y ago
> If Steve Jobs had to "explain and demonstrate" why the iPhone would be better than flip phones and blackberries to the satisfaction of Congress before being allowed to experiment with its design, Apple probably would have just moved their HQ to China, and Americans would be the ones missing out. Apple had to comply with a ton of regulations and laws when making the iPhone. Off the top of my head, they had to comply with various product safety laws, FCC frequency allocations, and consumer protection rules. The US (and most other countries) have a lot of regulations for managing money and investments. These apply regardless of the underlying technology being used. Legally, the only thing cryptocurrencies brought is that they didn't obviously fit into any existing legal framework. This was mostly due to a lack of judicial precedence, not because cryptocurrencies were fundamentally different. This isn't writing laws to stifle innovation. This is using laws that already exist to actually regulate companies that have managed to avoid it before now.
JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago
> > So just because Binance is committing fraud and breaking the law doesn't mean that in general we should be blocking the ability of companies from experimenting with new technology, whether or not you personally believe a particular technology will amount to anything. This is not new technology, it's moving the money around under the guise of new technology. And all the same crypto-bros are very proud of the valuation of the company they are at the helm of ....and they always tout it expressed in US Dollars...not bitcoin, not ethereum, not Binance coin. And the same crypto-bros are very proud of their net worth expressed in US Dollars While you are here writing "let them experiment with technology dude" they concern with technology is zero, it's all about driving up the valuation and driving up the net worth (always expressed in US Dollars)
- everfree 3y ago
  Gatekeeping which widely-used new software counts as “technology” and which doesn’t seems like a strange hill to die on.

rodgerd 3y ago

> Banks suck. Banks in Singapore provide 5 minute inter-bank settlement. Banks in NZ provide multiple intra-day settlements seven days a week. Australia's NPP settles within one minute as a typical target. Banks are perfectly capable of this. US banks may not be.