Conversation

Replying to
Sam. With respect. This absolutely sucks. You're saying DeFi should be OFACed. You're saying onchain freeze's should be normal. You're saying DeFi front-ends to register as a broker-dealer. No, this is not reasonable. This would eliminate the U.S. from the crypto race.
Image
Image
Image
175
3,009
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
Replying to
I totally agree! And I think it is, slowly, moving in that direction. The way we continue to do that is by working constructively. If we revolt, as an industry, against all regulation, the result won't be good.
30
73
Replying to
We’re not revoting against all regulation. We’re revolution against bad regulation. We very much want better regulation for crypto. But much of what you proposed for DeFi is a non starter. I pray to god nothing like this ends up in the DCCPA. We’d have to revolt.
10
303
I actually agree with most your points Sam. CT is filled with wannabe libertarians holding onto their little speck of the financial earth. When in reality, clear and concise legislation will lead to an expansion the world have never seen before.
2
3
There's no plausible scenario where funds in and out of DeFi won't be subject to OFAC. That's an unwinnable fight not worth fighting. But that needs be enforced at on ramp and off ramp. Forcing DeFi protocols to do AML, KYC and sanctions testing will kill DeFi as we know it.
22
Actual work like "Sanction all addresses that transfer sanctioned funds" 🙄 That's more of an overreach than current regulations on financial institutions (That are sanctioned for transfers unless criminal *intent* is found). Your proposal would sanction innocent people.
1
1