Replies (48)
Gensler says he does not classify Bitcoin as a security (he apparently reiterated this today), but that doesn't mean that the next administration won't. It also doesn't keep devs working on comms protocols safe that people may use to negotiate trades. You know, like the one we're chatting on now.
P2P Privacy #Bitcoin Prohibition
Bootlege Bitcoin
What happened in the past will happen agian in a different way
Prohibition was about who could create and distribute alcohol
Now, it's about digital networks
Fuck Gary with a pineapple.
SECURITIES and Exchange Commission has minimal authority over non-securities.
“Non-securities may fall under its jurisdiction if they are part of a securities transaction or if they are part of a company's assets that are publicly traded. Additionally, the SEC has authority over investment advisors, broker-dealers, and mutual funds, which may involve non-security assets.” -Dolphin 72B LLM
O estado fará tudo para criminalizar cryptomoeda.
Quando o governo crymanikizar BTC, seu preço cairá drasticamente assim como aconteceu com Monero.
No entanto, vamos pra guerra.
E guerra significa não acatar as leis tiranicas estatais.
Seen.
#Nostr & #Bitcoin conferences are honeypots. Stop attending kyc conferences.
Several congresspeople think Gary is a hack and a joke. Including internal SEC people such as Hester Peirce. Hopefully he keeps digging them into a hole of irrelevance or gets himself fired.
Hey
@npub1tsgw...htk4 , what court cases has the SEC lost during Gary Gensler’s term?
Dammit Dave. Here’s a manually fetched answer:
Some notable cases where the SEC has faced setbacks include:
Ripple Labs Inc.: The SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple Labs in December 2020, alleging that the company conducted an unregistered securities offering through the sale of its XRP token. While the case is ongoing, a significant ruling in July 2023 determined that XRP is not a security when sold on exchanges, which was seen as a partial victory for Ripple.
Grayscale Investments: In August 2023, a federal court ruled in favor of Grayscale, allowing the company to convert its Bitcoin Trust into an exchange-traded fund (ETF). The court found that the SEC had acted arbitrarily in denying Grayscale's application.
Other ETF Applications: The SEC has faced criticism and legal challenges regarding its handling of various cryptocurrency ETF applications. While not all cases have resulted in formal losses, the agency has been challenged on its decision-making processes.
To me this comes down to whether we view financial exchanges as an expression of speech or something else. It feels like Bitcoin is a way to tip the scales in favor of financial transactions being recognized as speech which is a really good thing. if we let the government decide they are not speech... well that's a long road to hell.
?????
So we no longer need the FCC.
Good to know.
Satoshi already knew that... That's why I believe freedom software developers should adopt pseudonyms for the sake of their own safety and freedom.
o futuro não é libertário. o futuro é isso aí embaixo, daí pra pior, e o zucka faz e vai fazer parte disso, e quem ficar panguando à espera do grande líder salvador do estado libertário vai tomar na tarraqueta em vez de ter se preparado BEM LONGE das smart cities, dos social scores etc. mas enfim bora dormir.
That’s the neat part: they’re capricious liars.
"¿Tornado Cash? Necesitaba una licencia bancaria. ¿Samourai Wallet? Necesitaba una licencia bancaria. WhatsApp, Apple, X, probablemente todos también necesiten licencias. ¿No tiene sentido? Correcto. Por eso la SEC ha propuesto una norma para formalizar los requisitos de licencia para los protocolos de comunicación.
En un discurso en la Conferencia anual del Mercado del Tesoro de Estados Unidos, Gensler anunció que decidirá sobre las enmiendas propuestas a la Ley de Intercambio en noviembre, que amplían la definición del término "intercambio" para significar "sistemas que reúnen a compradores y vendedores de valores [...] (es decir, "protocolos de comunicación")".
Los críticos argumentan que la norma puede utilizarse como arma para acusar penalmente a los desarrolladores de software en un entorno ya hostil para los desarrolladores de criptomonedas y privacidad."
And it will the charade of them letting us know what they’re “proposing” just means it’s already a done deal These are murdering criminal entities, and we have to continue regardless because we’re ignoring them and getting along with the parallel system. There will be a fight and we have the numbers hopefully 
It's time for http to start paying for its license
how to spot a tyrant
the disjoint of federal government and middle america will get even worse... what happens when states decide to become data havens and find themselves having to spend a lot of resources repelling feds stepping over their juris my diction? the situation with immigration is already out of control
Crazy but one way to circumvent this madness is by not incorporating in the US of A or by not attaching a name to the product. Probably one reason why Satoshi decided to disappear. He removed himself from the equation.
this sounds funny, but exporting sw doing https already used to require license in the past.
there was even a psychopath that wanted to ban certain mathematical operations on finite fields. his name was Joe Biden.
he probably does not remember it, but it was super ridiculous even back then.
I hope you're right.
"the proposed rule, as drafted, would not withstand constitutional scrutiny," as "the proposed definition directly describes the publication of speech as a necessary and sufficient condition for the registration requirement. Merely “making available” a “communications protocol” can, by the SEC’s own admission, trigger an obligation to register. A communications protocol is commonly understood as a set of rules. “Making available” a set of rules is an awkward linguistic construction that must, at the very least, include publishing and speaking, which are core First Amendment activities."
I like the idea of a future where all the most important technologies are unowned protocols that can't be control and on top of which people can build capitalistic enterprises.
It’s unconstitutional for USA.
Anyway even if they do this it means another 5-10 years of stackable prices
Can’t stop this train
It's not crazy at all. Game theory. It is now clear that the U.S. constitution isn't going to prevent this. Even if it does, do you really want to sit around and wait until these issues are eventually decided by the Supreme Court? Time to move on to more welcoming jurisdictions.
Aww, look at the authoritarians attempting to get more control over uncontrollable things. Adorable.
I work in telecom. I’ve hated the FCC for well over 20 years.
We don’t need them.
Such initiatives, whether passed or not, will make anonymous FOSS development a norm. Just like we do it already 😉.
All the more reason to run a relay
clown world
"me to move on to more welcoming jurisdictions"
this. The US is not the world financials police same as they aren't the world peace corps. People think to "national" when it comes to Bitcoin. The US represents 5% of the world population of which only a few percent is exposed to Bitcoin. In other words 95% of the world doesn't care about the SEC or Trump or any other shenanigans the US comes up with.
Need license now for the 1st amendment
If laws like these end up passing, wouldn't it mean that the Constitution is not working in practice?
View quoted note →At least one of the Samourai dev was not in US (in portugal) and still got arrested. It's open sourvêce software you cannot really prevent people from just some countries to us it, so they arrest the dev even outside their juridiction. That's the main issue IMO.
How to prevent that?
I'm going to apply for my banking license just to be safe
O controle será pesado.
Glas is half full. I like this kind of thinking
Gary,
I fart in your general direction.
Fuck 'rules'. I barely can bring myself to give a shit about 'laws'...
I've been saying, if a kid can't memorize the whole law, its tyranny.
If I call someone on the phone and say 12 specific words to them, does that make me a money transmitter, or my mobile carrier, or both? What if I do it in person?
Above all, it's about not being able to conceal or disguise income. I don't know what's so difficult to understand about that. If everyone thought like that, there would be no more zoos, schools, roads and bridges. Unbelievable.
They can only arrest people if they can tie a real life name to the project. Look at Bitcoin.
