AMA: SEC's William Hinman's Comments on Ether.
I am not qualified to offer professional legal services. Perhaps in the future there will be steem lawyers but that's not the subject of today's post. I read a transcript of Hinmans speech and listened to this entire marathon session:
Ask me anything.
Full transcript of Hinman's comments - https://www.sec.gov/news/speech/speech-hinman-061418)
A week ago @louisthomas made a video after the Hinman's statement came out. I was starting to look into the matter and found that the video could be a good starting point. Remember that I wrote this points from the video as I understood them so there might be a few things missing but I think I have simplified it a bit so they are even more easy to understand. Take a look:
I think it'd be better if the points are directly read from the Hinman's statement but if this help...........
@hash-cash Thanks for finding that summary.
Full verbatim Hinman also in replies - but I like this simplification.
Factors for evaluating ether (and other cryptoassets) as a security.
I think I got the gist in my simplification but nothing beats the original for the clarity. They've highlighted the primary points that hold significance although they mention that these are merely inclusive and not exhaustive. Things will probably becomes clearer in the future as more and more cryptos are put under the scrutiny.
It is for sure a trial by fire and the path for some of the cryptos is going to be rocky but I am really hoping that this'll prove beneficial in the long term
I think Hinman misunderstands the technical fundamentals of ether. Ether is not decentralized if you can point to a single individual wielding as much influence as Vitalik. Anyone remember The DAO? Also he is describing future plans for sharding etc. This drives the value of ether - value from the efforts of another.
Oh that's for sure. They are only accounting for the technicalities and not for the implications of the human perspective on the real market. That's why I keep in mind that they mention the idea of list not being exhaustive. What they really want is a wiggle room for now.
Once they get their act together they can add as much as they need to this and we can even see clauses that might contradict the present ones, resulting in them being altered in the name of congruity. I am hoping that it wouldn't come to this.
I agree. This is one potential lesson from if ether is determined not to be a security.
It seems the US government is determined to apply laws to decentralised systems. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Good: Protect people from risks they cannot adequately foresee or assess.
Bad: Misunderstand technology and inhibit growth.
Even the gov't itself does not want to do the bad, but it is possible because the situation is very complex.
Yeah.. I think crypto is still complex to most of its developers.. how much more the government. The involvement of government truly might retard growth of most coins. Before you know, people might have resorted back to centralised systems.
With this rapid change from centralized to decentalized exchange do you suppose is it a good things? Considering the pros and cons
Good for somethings and bad for others perhaps.
My friend, I am quite ignorant about cryptos. I read Hinman article but could not grasp much of what he talked. I will not watch 6 hours of video.
So, I ask you: could you summarise what they talked about?
Hey man,
The link @john-robert gave at the end of the post takes you to the main write up. At the end of the article 13 points (7+6) have been mentioned which might be what you are looking for.
(I have also summarized it from a video of @louisthomas and I'll put them here as soon as I find them)
To tell the truth, I quit reading at about half the article.:=(
I will go back to read the end of it.
Agree with you man ..
The fundamental issue is about drawing a distinction between a token and an investment. They can exist individually so the issue is not the token itself. But considering the factors above the technical details can influence the interpretation. A dangerous path of reasoning is examining a sufficient level of decentralization.
you are right but I think you should give opinion about something after complete that course. It is simple you cannot know about that because you are not agree to see that video. but I think that is the main writeup which @john-robert shared..
Thank you for your continued support of SteemSilverGold
Congratulations @john-robert! You have received a personal award!
Click on the badge to view your Board of Honor.
Do not miss the last post from @steemitboard!
Participate in the SteemitBoard World Cup Contest!
Collect World Cup badges and win free SBD
Support the Gold Sponsors of the contest: @good-karma and @lukestokes