crypto, it seems, is simultaneously regulated as everything that is highly regulated and nothing that isn't
it's a security for all the parts of securities laws that require intermediation, but none that allow for P2P
it's a commodity, but only if that means the CFTC's authority is non-exclusive
it's currency if you're transmitting it, but if you're transacting in it for profit, it's a taxable sale of property
and now it's apparently a monetary instrument, unless you want to transport it or use it for prepaid access, in which case it's still just a virtual currency and you're still a money services business
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I'm actually disappointed SEC did not pursue a fraud claim against Kik. It was warranted--Kik never intended to build the promised Ethereum scaling solutions, and only mentioned them to induce ETH holders to invest.
I would never have invested if not for the representations about Ethereum scaling work, and I bet the same is true of many other KIN ICO buyers.
Believing that Kik 'changed its mind' about Ethereum requires believing that:
-they studied Ethereum enough to know it needed new scaling solutions & to promise building them
-they didn't study it enough to know that building those scaling solutions would be hard
little by little, the yearn community is figuring out this 'decentralized governance' thing, and I think the key was tightrope-walking without a safety net
if you have a VC-backed company as a safety net, the tokenholders are more likely to engage in dangerous antics
having one set of funds that comes from system fees both justifies the existence of a governance token and keeps its holders disciplined
the devs now answer directly to the token holders, can get hired and fired by token holders, and the governance matters
securities law arbitrage attempts have led to totally the wrong incentives--i.e., for devs at a VC-backed company to hide their token-value-increasing efforts, be coy about whether they will affect the token, and not take direction from the community to avoid duties
I don't get the UNI governance panic. As far as I can tell no one is even obligated to follow UNI voting results. This list of things UNI holders "own" (lol) is a combination of forkable things and meaningless things.
Basically, UNI govern a limited set of parameters of specific deployed bytecode. Uniswap could deploy v2.1 tomorrow and fork out any assholes, create a new treasury, etc. and there would be nothing anyone could do to stop them, legally or otherwise. So who cares?
"Omfg we can't lower quorum on the official uniswap token list, someone might add a shitcoin!"
To @ameensol 's point, anyone interested in this thread should read this, written by @ameensol, @pet3rpan_ and me. We've been working on these issues a long time.