Trendaavat aiheet
#
Bonk Eco continues to show strength amid $USELESS rally
#
Pump.fun to raise $1B token sale, traders speculating on airdrop
#
Boop.Fun leading the way with a new launchpad on Solana.
Bill Hughes 🦊
Lawyer at Consensys / formerly DOJ, WH, S&C, UVA law, Vandy / Not legal advice - not your lawyer - tweets are mine.
Bo’s job, in a word, sucked. I’ve served in the White House before and I know.
He had to deal with all of us. Our demanding, pedantic, semi religious views on crypto and public policy. Internal industry quarreling. High maintenance personalities. On top of that he had to QB returning the administrative state to sanity on crypto.
It’s a job you don’t sign up for. It’s a job that once you realize you have you say aw crap whatdidido.
I’d like to think that I could do that job. But I know I simply couldn’t. I lack the tolerance. But Bo did it and did it better than I could’ve hoped anyone could do it.
We got the admin state marching in a productive direction - all smartly coordinating. We have a real crypto law on the books that will reshape the economy for decades to come. And another on the way. The US is becoming the home of crypto.
And he did it with a smile. He did it with good humor. He did it with grace and humility. He was kind and thoughtful. You looked forward to saying hi to him. And glad when you did.
It was too short in my view, but I’ll take what I can get. @BoHines thanks for your service. The best to you and your lovely wife and budding family. See you down the road.
10.8. klo 04.39
Serving in President Trump’s administration and working alongside our brilliant AI & Crypto Czar @DavidSacks as Executive Director of the White House Crypto Council has been the honor of a lifetime. Together, we have positioned America as the crypto capital of the world. I’m deeply grateful to the industry for its unwavering support — I love this community and all we’ve built together. As I return to the private sector, I look forward to continuing my support for the crypto ecosystem as it thrives here in the United States.
17,81K
So much of the debate about market structure is basically PTSD from an overzealous SEC that sneered with delight every time they found a new way to kick crypto in the ribs in public.
The current SEC is the polar opposite - where it seems like even without new legislation, there can be a real path to a coherent, sensible regime.
But can the current agency atmosphere persist? This market structure debate presumes it won't, and that agency hands should be (appropriately) tied to specific, appropriately detailed policy prescriptions. They can't just make it up as they go.
But the point remains - we have policy PTSD and both sides of the digital commodity/ancillary asset debate will have its doomsday scenario if their position doesn't come out on top.
My contrarian take is that - and hear me out - it may not really matter that much. Under either regime, regulations must be promulgated which set the actual rules which people like software devs must comply with. There is no perfect here, and either regime will permit a path forward, but a path with administrative peril as well.
My main point is, people like me are very employable in perpetuity. :)
663
Where everyone agrees: a boundless Howey doctrine is the necessary ingredient to administrative overreach and caprice, and it is no way to set the table for an innovative market plaec.
Where there is disagreement: how to replace that malleable, eye-of-the-beholder, status quo-maxi regime? That two of the major VCs in the space appear to stand athwart each other tells you all you need to know about the status of the discussion.
Which way western man: digital commodities or ancillary assets?
Gotta figure this out quick, folks. the window is closing.
8.8. klo 00.59
unfortunately this is pure race to the bottom stuff that makes no sense from a policy perspective
the fewer rights people have, the less regulated something is?
it should be the opposite--if they have more rights, they are more protected under general contract law and there is less need for regulation. . .
this is how you get pure memecoin mania forever, equity/token conflict of interest forever, etc.. . .
the House approach is far superior
5,46K
1) the BRCA must become law.
2) if Ross got a pardon then it’s hard to say Roman doesn’t deserve one too.
7.8. klo 01.43
Coin Center’s Seven Takeaways from the Storm Verdict:
▪️ 1. The sole conviction—unlicensed money transmission (18 U.S.C. § 1960)—turns mainly on legal/regulatory interpretation (“does this count as money transmission?”), not jury fact-finding.
▪️ 2. The court, at the motion-to-dismiss stage, discounted FinCEN’s stated guidance on what counts as “money transmission” in crypto and treated the category as broader than “control of customer funds.”
▪️ 3. With “money transmission” defined that broadly, the jury’s room to decide facts was narrow; the court’s interpretation largely dictated the outcome.
▪️ 4. DOJ’s prior “end regulation by prosecution” memo didn’t fully resolve §1960 issues left things open for continued prosecution; the DOJ dropped the failure-to-register theory but not the “knowingly transmitting criminal funds” theory. Coin Center’s view: both hinge on “transmitting” and are improper against developers excluded by FinCEN guidance.
▪️ 5. The BRCA (Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act), now attached to CLARITY and passed by the House, would confirm that non-controlling developers aren’t money transmitters. It can’t help Roman retroactively, but the Senate should pass it in upcoming market-structure debates.
▪️ 6. Coin Center fellow Michael Lewellen is suing DOJ for a declaration that publishing/maintaining his software isn’t unlicensed money transmission. Coin Center will continue supporting this effort to correct the legal interpretation.
▪️ 7. Coin Center is sorry Roman faces sentencing on a theory that contradicts the regulator’s guidance. He should appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss; Coin Center will assist however possible.
1,17K
1) the BRCA must become law.
2) if Ross got a pardon then it’s hard to say Roman doesn’t deserves one too.
7.8. klo 01.43
Coin Center’s Seven Takeaways from the Storm Verdict:
▪️ 1. The sole conviction—unlicensed money transmission (18 U.S.C. § 1960)—turns mainly on legal/regulatory interpretation (“does this count as money transmission?”), not jury fact-finding.
▪️ 2. The court, at the motion-to-dismiss stage, discounted FinCEN’s stated guidance on what counts as “money transmission” in crypto and treated the category as broader than “control of customer funds.”
▪️ 3. With “money transmission” defined that broadly, the jury’s room to decide facts was narrow; the court’s interpretation largely dictated the outcome.
▪️ 4. DOJ’s prior “end regulation by prosecution” memo didn’t fully resolve §1960 issues left things open for continued prosecution; the DOJ dropped the failure-to-register theory but not the “knowingly transmitting criminal funds” theory. Coin Center’s view: both hinge on “transmitting” and are improper against developers excluded by FinCEN guidance.
▪️ 5. The BRCA (Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act), now attached to CLARITY and passed by the House, would confirm that non-controlling developers aren’t money transmitters. It can’t help Roman retroactively, but the Senate should pass it in upcoming market-structure debates.
▪️ 6. Coin Center fellow Michael Lewellen is suing DOJ for a declaration that publishing/maintaining his software isn’t unlicensed money transmission. Coin Center will continue supporting this effort to correct the legal interpretation.
▪️ 7. Coin Center is sorry Roman faces sentencing on a theory that contradicts the regulator’s guidance. He should appeal the denial of his motion to dismiss; Coin Center will assist however possible.
265
Johtavat
Rankkaus
Suosikit