Let's be really clear... My suggestion to Sam wasn't to take an absolutist, purist position. That's a strawman.
My suggestion was highly pragmatic and prudent: don't include defi in a bill that intends to regulate BSA-registered financial intermediaries.
Conversation
hm so I think you and I have fairly different priors on what would be interpreted in DC as 'absolutist' and 'purist'
but idk maybe you're right! I'm guessing you've spent a bunch of time talking to lawmakers and regulators from both parties and gotten positive feedback?
9
3
34
Purist = free-market capitalism. No regulations of voluntary transactions between consenting adults.
Anything less than that is already a compromise.
I have no doubt a great many compromises will be in the DCCPA. Nobody should accept targeting defi as one of them.
5
8
177
don't think it does target DeFi, do you? If so, where/why? (Also what does 'targeting' mean?)
I hear you on free markets! I think DC is more complex right now, but again, I'm probably just off-base here--how have your conversations with politicians gone?
13
3
45
Good to define "targetting" = mandatory behavior imposed on individuals, corps, validators/miners, developers in relation to how they write or read to smart contracts or otherwise decentralized protocols.
Language regarding how BSA-governed entities may interact with defi = fine
3
5
67
And I haven't had "conversations" with federal politicians.
They prefer subpoenas to civil discourse, and I don't appreciate being approached under duress.
8
5
68
huh
so, uh, how do you think they would respond to your arguments, and what's your evidence for that?
I'd love you to fight the good fight! And I'd love you to be as impactful as possible--which I would guess means message testing on the relevant audience in DC and adapting.
10
1
33
idk if people would want me to, or if would want to--I assume he thinks I'm net negative
And FWIW I would be very concerned about strategies that might backlash and don't wan to be the one to shoot the industry in the foot
but doesn't matter--it's his call
12
4
15
I literally said you were a net positive
twitter.com/ErikVoorhees/s
If I can be helpful in *any* way with DCCPA, just ask.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @dytfin and @ctaggr
It's Erik with a fuckin' K!!!! 
Regardless, @SBF_FTX has built one of the most important exchanges in crypto's history, serving millions of happy customers and has helped bring crypto mainstream. He deserves massive credit for that and he is absolutely a net good for crypto.
Regardless, @SBF_FTX has built one of the most important exchanges in crypto's history, serving millions of happy customers and has helped bring crypto mainstream. He deserves massive credit for that and he is absolutely a net good for crypto.2
2
69
ah sorry <3
I guess I meant -- positive *on engagement in DC*
We should get him in DC. The eloquence of his arguments and mad debating skillz are a huge benefit.
(...Apologies, but debating does not seem like your strongest suit...)
18
So, are you gonna ask for help on DCCPA / get him in the room with you for convos with politicians?
5
Honestly crypto is f*** if this is how we shape regulation
1
How can an industry of 1trillion be dependent on what Erik and Sam think we should do (no disrespect)
3
Show replies
crowdfundinsider.com/2018/10/139717 purely from a political perspective, I fear things like this would be used against him and make the message harder to get across
Why not invite Erik along to the discussions with lawmakers you’ve been having? If you’re truly willing to work with him, put your words into action.
I believe engaging with lawmakers is important and necessary, Sam. I think it is positive that you are doing so. 1/2
1
However, you seem so willing to give up on keeping DeFi permissionless— e.g., you’re willing to sacrifice DeFi front ends— in order to avoid what you deem to be bigger problems for crypto. Permissioned DeFi is no different than TradFi with extra steps. 2/2
1
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
Show