I see lots of cheers, and fears, regarding the US "crackdown" on #crypto.
This is expected. #Gensler (#SEC chair) has been very vocal for a long time that most "crypto" are clearly #securities, and since they are, a lot of companies working with them are currently outside the law. "Don't wait for us to come knocking on your door" is one of the things he's said.
_Most_ "crypto". The thing is, this doesn't apply to #Bitcoin, at all. While absolutely every single *coin launched by people trying to get rich riding on the back of the Bitcoin invention is a scam, that isn't true for Bitcoin itself.
Even in the eyes of the law.
I'm very much looking forward to the whole shitcoinery bullshit being burnt down. It's a huge distraction to the real global benefit being brought by innovation made on top of the Bitcoin network.
How would regulations be written to practically differentiate between the two, though?
@volkris That's the most interesting part! SEC does not see the need for any new regulations regarding crypto. They apply the same Howey Test to them as for anything else, and what pops out is that "Bitcoin" never made any of the statements that would classify it as a security but all the other shitcoins ("crypto") have.
It's the difference between Bitcoin just existing, while other crypto peddlers talk about "investing", "gains", pre-mine tokens to keep for themselves etc.
Ethereum, while they pre-mined tokens (expectation of profit) might have passed as long as they were Proof of Work. The way they've implemented Proof of Stake means, IMHO, that they too are definitely classied as securities now.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/h/howey-test.asp