DeFi websites will never be prohibited or require a broker/dealer license to operate

they are just information about what is on a blockchain and what commands you can separately send to unrelated third parties to perform transactions on that blockchain
if creating/owning/operating such a website makes you a broker/dealer, then so does writing/publishing this article

it would break the internet and the 1st amendment

nerdwallet.com/article/invest…
at most there should be / could be some regulations designed to punish people who provide the information in a misleading way; these are called consumer protection laws and antifraud laws, and they already exist
think about it--all the same things you can do with a "DeFi website", you can do with etherscan through its "write contract" feature

are the owners/operators of etherscan unregistered securities broker/dealers? block explorers must be run by securities pros? absurd! impossible!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with _gabrielShapir0

_gabrielShapir0 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @lex_node

26 Oct
If you talk to lawyers in the space who are working on SEC defenses for DeFi projects, one of the biggest issues is that internal chats/communications (discoverable by SEC) lapse into talking about the project as if it were any tech start-up instead of a FOSS project
if you talk like you're running a business, there is a high risk that you will be regulated like you're running a business
people like to poke holes in how XRP has been treated vs. how ETH has been treated, but one of the biggest distinctions between them is that Vitalik and others are very disciplined--communicating that they basically research & develop network clients & designs for network clients
Read 8 tweets
24 Oct
I simultaneously agree that algo stablecoins like UST are very risky and experimental and disagree that USDC and DAI (which is also USDC) are categorically safer. Just different kinds of risks they expose you to.

A better comparison would be between UST and RAI.
USDC (and now by proxy DAI) expose you to counterparty risk, censorship risk, classic info asymmetries, classic agency problems and certain regulatory risk (I think both are securities or securities swaps).
UST and RAI present different kinds of risks around game theory, the adequacy of the incentives people are expected to respond to, etc.
Read 7 tweets
24 Oct
Had a chance to review this "Tractatus" by @judge_jowday this morning. . . very interesting.

It appears to be a sort of gnomic, Wittegenstein-style philosophy of cryptolaw, intended to reconcile the two paradigms of "law is law" and "code is law".
There is no 'color commentary' provided on what the 'Tractatus' is supposed to mean or do, who would use it, whether it's meant to be descriptive or prescriptive, etc.

@judge_jowday 's intentions are open to interpretation.
The first few sections (1-3) are pretty boring, and appear to just be setting the stage for how to talk about law. They define law as an enforceable and enforced governance system consisting of rules, rights, duties and canons. (Debatable definitions).
Read 22 tweets
12 Oct
Well, today we got two very different statements on crypto/DeFi/tokens from two SEC commissioners, Hester Pierce and Caroline Crenshaw.
I will probably write something longer about this soon, but for moment what really strikes me--and that I hope everyone in crypto will understand--is that regardless of where they land on the issues, their respective takes are *extremely* well informed.
These two commissioners have, directly as well as through very informed advisors, taken a keen interest in studying DeFi & grappling with the issues it presents.
Read 11 tweets
11 Oct
Neurosis Token ($NEUR) is an insecurity.

Simply collateralize or wrap your existing tokens with $NEUR and they will be converted from non-compliant overconfident securities into fully compliant self-hating insecurities.
$NEUR will be airdropped only to U.S. persons.
Some people are asking about other $NEUR features:
--> stagflationary
--> aleatory (1M $NEUR randomly re-distributed every block)
-->negative 100,000% APY (drains all other tokens in your wallet--even your other wallets (thanks to our amazing partnership with @chain_analysis))
Read 4 tweets
11 Oct
good points from @stephendpalley

a smart gov't wouldn't "regulate devs" but would offer devs who do agree to be regulated certain safe harbors--e.g., 'get this license and we'll keep SEC away from you; otherwise, go take your chances with them'
@stephendpalley his key point is this & one I fully agree with--DeFi lacks both the traditional separation between ownership and control and 'counterparty' risk that most regulatory regimes are premised on

it has other sources of risk, but they are not addressed by those regulations:
@stephendpalley -->game theory risk (the risk that incentives designed into the system are inadequate to produce the desired outcomes)
-->tech implementation risk (the game theory is sound but implemented incorrectly)
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(