Jabanga

13 ms·

61.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Ether does not represent any "other rights" that would put it within the definition of a security.
62.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Ether tokens have a clear use-value. They don't provide holders with any passive income from profits earned by a common enterprise. I am not a lawyer, but in my opinion, the idea that they're securities is ridiculous. This is a go
63.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Ultimately we are in dire need of regulation of these substances, especially where there is food contact. We don't need regulation. We need consumer education (and in this gov funded programs can help) and entrepreneurship to provi
64.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Mastering Ethereum is coming out Feb 2018
65.
by Jabanga 9y ago
The Tweet I cited links to an article that goes into detail on this point. A third of babies born will not have their births registered.
66.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>I need to at least mention that, well, this project is probably a bomb and you should be really careful with it. I, at least, wouldn't want to be the next DAO dev (e.g. project takes off quickly, unseen exploit exists, I lose some
67.
by Jabanga 9y ago
This would have all been avoided if MtGox had transferred its coins to a new wallet after the 2011 breach. I guess they assumed that any attacker that got access to the private keys would have immediately emptied the wallet, and the fact th
68.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Possibly Ethereum after it gets pre-compiled contracts for elliptic curve point addition and scalar multiplication in the Metropolis upgrade, which will enable zk-SNARKs. Among the many applications enabled by succinct zero-knowledge proof
69.
by Jabanga 9y ago
So you're suggesting that instead of Slock.it developing the smart contract, an LLC should have? How do the token buyers qualify as members of an LLC when they're anonymous buyers with no legal affiliation to a LLC? Or are you say
70.
by Jabanga 9y ago
I think the blind spot in your analysis is that you assume the rest of the financial industry is not like this. Cryptocurrencies are just doing rapidly what other stores of value did gradually over the course of centuries. Gold for example
71.
by Jabanga 9y ago
A couple examples: restricting them from soliciting investment without going through a $6 million compliance process for gaining approval to do an IPO. Restricting people from engaging in anonymous securities transactions with each other.
72.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Everyone is not worse off. We have seen rapid innovation in the Bitcoin market, toward far better risk management and security practices, in the absence of regulatory restrictions. Some speculative claim that everyone is worse off if they&#
73.
by Jabanga 9y ago
No, there are market mechanisms that address this as well. Government restrictions are not market mechanisms.
74.
by Jabanga 9y ago
So it's the shareholders who are responsible for forming an LLC? How can they prevent non-members from becoming partners in the DAO, given the software is autonomous and has no permission controls?
75.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>I gave one example of many of the ways in which we absolutely do restrict the rights of the entire population to engage in voluntary interactions to preempt crime. Yes I can see how you interpreted my comment that way. I meant we should
76.
by Jabanga 9y ago
Case law defines each of those points. This elaborates more on that: http://coinbase.com/legal/securities-law-framework.pdf
77.
by Jabanga 9y ago
It's a decentralized and autonomous application. How could an autonomous application on the blockchain be an LLC?
78.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>You realize that's not in the slightest bit true, don't you? What isn't true? >For example: Under contract law, there are certain rights that _you are legally not permitted to give away_. You can't actually sell y
79.
by Jabanga 9y ago
The Howey Test defines an investment contract more narrowly than you imply. People lose absolutely staggering amounts of money each year on bad investments. Money is like water. It flows around these regulations. The detours just add fricti
80.
by Jabanga 9y ago
It's not intellectually dishonest, because I'm commenting on the net effect. If people are getting scammed just as much, but from other sources, then "all they do" is the net effect on the negative side. But fair enough:
81.
by Jabanga 9y ago
There are hundreds of projects that have held token sales. The vast majority have not imploded. For what it's worth, I think the majority will fail to produce a profit. That's okay. A high failure rate is fine in an emerging indus
82.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>it turns out that having no rules on speculation is a bad idea. Source?
83.
by Jabanga 9y ago
>Maybe moral right, but that depends on highly subjective morals and might therefore still get you into legal trouble. We're intelligent human beings. We should be able to arrive at some kind of consensus on what our moral rights ou
84.
by Jabanga 9y ago
People are going to make bad investments, no matter how much the SEC restricts. There are a huge number of non-securities investments available, and people pour huge amounts of money in them. A government is never going to be able to protec
85.
by Jabanga 9y ago
You're not even representing my view accurately. My view is that scammers should be punished, not the entirety of the population on the premise of preempting crime. Rejecting a person's argument on the grounds that it's &quot
86.
by Jabanga 9y ago
That's not an externality. An honest business is not entitled to any customer's business. If the customer wants to squander their money away at the casino, leaving them with no money to spend at the honest business, they have that
87.
by Jabanga 9y ago
People, left to their own devices, manage complexity effectively. For example, most people don't understand how microprocessors work. But this is addressed through an effective and spontaneous process of delegating responsibility. The
88.
by Jabanga 9y ago
I don't believe all taxes are an infringement on freedom. A tax on natural resource consumption, and to a lesser extent, immovable property within a state's jurisdiction, can be morally justified in my opinion. I also don't
89.
by Jabanga 9y ago
You do not have a right to speed on public property because others share ownership in it, and thus have a legitimate right to contribute to the rules that govern its use. If you owned your own private track, you would have such a right.
90.
by Jabanga 9y ago
A case for mandatory vaccination can be made, as it addresses public health threats, which are negative externalities. Meat inspection cannot. You can choose to eat only government certified meat and not suffer any ill effects from non-cert

More ›