Conversation

I could be wrong, but i think this drives a big gap in their recommendations:

have very different *TIME FRAMES* they seek solutions by. SBF seeks near-term, immediately practical resolution. Voorhees has infinite runway to get this right. Thoughts?

Quote Tweet

Christian Limon

@cplimon

Oct 29

Highly recommend the full discussion bw @SBF_FTX & @ErikVoorhees. My prior was more/less aligned w SBF's on regulatory compromise, but Eric's analogies to the open internet & our responsibility to these liberties were very compelling. It's clear, we have more to think through twitter.com/BanklessHQ/sta…

Replying to

and

I think the alternative to imperfect regulation isn't no regulation. It's terrible regulation. That's what I'm concerned we'd end up with if we were not willing to work constructively in DC. Hopefully I'm wrong.

9:22 PM · Oct 29, 2022Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

This is absolutely a legit worry. We want a seat at the table as regulation comes upon us. Regulation is happening no matter what.

Replying to

and

That is very valid and fair to our circumstances. We help choose the imperfect we want or it's chosen for us, without our feedback.

Replying to

and

yup that's the worry

Show replies

Replying to

and

All regulation is terrible regulation because it's inefficient and always lagging. Any regulation that's implemented will continue to be superficial and not have the desired impact on the intended classes.

Replying to

and

If you compromise with what you are suggesting, you will become the most hated man in crypto as you showed your hand and it you indeed play thats hand, defi will be unusable. How do you not get that? Or do you want that because it competes with centralized protocols?