Conversation

Replying to

Right now devs can’t write code in the US without fear of requiring a license they couldn’t possibly get, and you can’t launch a token without fear of prosecution for not completing a registration no one could complete. If the industry argues for no regs this is what we get.

135

218

fiskantes in his true form

Replying to

and

"If the industry argues for no regs this is what we get." This is a strawman, arguing against bad reg doesn't mean arguing for no reg

363

Replying to

and

Please tell me what set of regs you’d argue for?

Replying to

and

for DeFi there should be a detailed notice & disclosure regime--no permissioning/gating by regulators, no you can launch only if you follow "principles", etc. just disclose all material facts, file publicly, keep up to date, be liable for fraud if wrong

124

Replying to

and

high level I think that sounds reasonable but also I think actually legislating that would be a mess and extremely controversial -- mostly I think it's not time yet to solidify DeFi regimes

Replying to

and

agreed, but you see how aggro CFTC on Ooki protocol? we can't just hand over more blanket discretionary power to them--need a carve out at least that DeFi devs/deployers aren't ipso facto 'facilities'

Replying to

and

there do, I think, exist carveouts for devs and validators in the bill draft you posted?

Replying to

Those carve outs, if they were to even be adopted, are drafted very narrowly so, in practice, they would have little positive impact.

Replying to

how exactly would it make things *worse* that the status quo?

Replying to

It gives CFTC power to regulate spot digital commodity markets— a power it never had. DeFi projects would be classified as “digital commodity platforms” and DEXs would be “trading facilities”. We should focus our efforts on a non permissioned notice and disclosure regime.