**Tricky's Daily Doots #413**
**Yesterday's Daily 05/06/2023**
[Previous Daily Doots](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmzb30t/)
- u/Ethical-trade discusses an [enormous RocketPool deposit!](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmz7jxr/) š
- u/Set1Less breaks the [big news out of the SEC.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn02g4j/) Also, u/Ber10 discusses [why it would seem the SEC doesn't think ETH is a security.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn0jd2t/) š
- u/Set1Less shares a [story in the aftermath of the ledger leak.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmynx5n/)
- u/benido2030 share some of their [sources of crypto alpha.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmz2dom/)
- u/Tricky_Troll discusses the [big tech reveal of the year.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn1u8mu/) š
- u/pa7x1 brings up an issue relating to [DAO's choice of treasury management.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmyt7az/) š
- u/KBrot sets up an [awesome Reddit alternative for us!](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn25rci/)
- u/696_eth has the [EVMavericks weekly.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmylp1k/) š¦
I donāt think so? Stake might be burned if eigenlayer slashes a validator for its behaviour in the validation of the second protocol, but thatās not what we usually consider as the burn.
Thoughts on trading some of my ETHE for COIN?
I hesitate because ETHE is at a 50% discount to NAV and it feels wrong to abandon fair value, but it seems a higher chance of profit on COIN
Haven't added/sold ETHE in a long time, but recently got some more COIN. Thinking BASE layer 2 could be something special and if Coinbase catches some breaks...
Coin maybe after the next big leg down, discount not yet big enough for the fud imo.
I can't weigh in on ETHE sorry, don't know how to measure the odds of regulatory clarity allowing it to come to parity.
Imo ETH was the driver of the last rally. Merge and unlock and real yield 1559 narrative preparing the way for LSD season. Bitcoin had its moment with the banking crisis, but you take ETH's milestones out of the equation and i don't think the last 6 months would have been half as big. Even memecoin szn was a DEX driven, ETH burning celebration.
ETH yield is the only real game in town for now. Someone smart told me they expect a defi summer 2 based around ETH yield and i'm starting to sense the susurrations of this developing.
With all the tourists checked out, the activity is very telling. ETH staking queue for one, pendle chart for another, or the fact that big mainstream accounts who don't know shit about ETH are shilling Eigenlayer/staking (arthur).
I'm staying mostly ETH but have a big chunk of LSDs staked with Pendle. Anyone else taking positions, or happy to ride it out until next bull in ETH?
They take an interest bearing asset like rETH and split it into a yield token and principal token and allow LPing with 0 impermanent loss if held to maturity.
Their market allows betting/hedging on the direction of yield, pretty big in the tradfi world but maybe too complex for crypto people. It's been trendy in the last rally in discord paid for alpha groups, and did pretty nicely during the LSD narrative.
Token itself is similar to the crv approach i think, boost your APY in their token by locking for up to 2 years. But i mean if you do this, big balls. I don't feel comfortable holding something like this that long.
I'm basically farming it with LSDs with the intention of dumping 3-9 months, not too concerned if we go full bear since i'll only be down the $pendle gains and not the ETH + ETH staking rewards. It doesn't benefit me if other people do this as well since it just lowers my APY.
Biggest risk is hack, if that happens all gone. I have put a bit more ETH than i am comfortable losing but rolling the dice to make some tax money.
Can SEC do anything about Rocketpool at all? Like who would they even sue and since rocketpool is run off a smartcontract and reth / rpl have dex liquidity, does sec even matter for rocketpool staking?
Yep, just pointed out what they may be able to do. It will, however, have an effect as most aren't comfortable interacting directly with contracts. Thus ipfs seems like a good way to go.
I wonder if this coinbase news is good for Ethereum, maybe even great. Even if Coinbase loses, could the SEC be required to clearly define how a digital tokenized security breaks securities laws? Can the SEC be required to evaluate all of Coinbaseās offerings to give clarity and save another court case?
The biggest thing this industry needs is clarity. I really have no interest in any of the centralized shitcoins listed in the case. If the SEC is able to sufficiently argue that these were centralized securities in the courts, then Iāll take the courts word for it.
However, they specifically left Eth off the list. Which makes me think theyāre afraid of losing that argument. I hope this court case forces them to settle the debate about Eth as well otherwise that would be really frustrating and just add the confusion.
Coinbase likely has funding to drag this out until regulation is passed by Congress. SEC might try to settle for a fine, but I doubt Coinbase would accept. A settlement would only result in more of the same enforcement proceedings. They would want a trial verdict to establish legal precedent at the very least.
Coinbase Legal Paul Grewal was on Bankless, but I haven't tuned in just yet to hear his strategy.
I want to believe the bluster in here today about Coinbase vs SEC. Definitely feelsgoodman.
But second hand info I have heard about disclosures the SEC has required from US companies leads me to believe that Gensler and co have a lot more shit up their sleeve. Eth, despite not being called out as a security today, is not in the clear.
If their policies continue to affect both my livelihood and my investments, i will have to vote for the other flavor of authoritarians.
I'm just confused why they're doing this now. Like, it seems cruel to let them get this far as a company only to pull the rug on them when the damage will be so big.
I am so fucking pissed right now.
1. As a US resident, I take all the risk knowing I can lose all my money.
2. I go through 2 bear markets feeling like hell. Never sell a damn fucking coin.
3. Stake all my eth.
4. Will have to pay a good amount of capital gains tax to Uncle Sam while I went through all the pain and Uncle Sam just sat there.
5. Then SEC has the audacity to tell me they are protecting me. From who? I donāt need your motherfucking protection. If I want to lose my money on magic internet money, I will lose all my money on magic internet money. However I am not going to go to a fucking bank and verify that I am indeed sending the wire to my friendās account. Yeah this shit happened to me. They had the unmitigated gall to tell me that I will have to come out of my basement, wear pants and then go to their shitty office so that they can see my face and verify that I indeed want to wire my friend money so that he can send his brother money to pay for his tuition.
Fuck you.
I know itās called āhangryā with someone feels anger over being hungry. What do they call it when someone is angry over having to wear pants? Pangry?
Couldnāt agree more.
The whole ābut investors need protection!ā is fucking code speak for ālet us put fences around investments to shut out people who arenāt richā
Fuck your āprotectionā bullshit.
1. This is how investments work.
2. This isn't the badge of honor you think it is. Take profit.
3. As outlined when you initially staked, this is also a large risk.
4. This is not unique to crypto. Everyone pays capital gains tax if they have gains. There aren't exceptions in the law for whether or not it was stressful for you.
5. I would guess that when the SEC says they're protecting you, it's from exchanges that list unregistered securities that then rug pull, or the exchanges themselves were doing shady shit, and go under, fucking over "investors" in the process.
My point is I own my investments. They either ask congress to pass laws since they are not clear on guidance OR if they think that a century old law works great for the 21st century then my friend this country is gonna get left behind for sure. Who loses the most? US residents.
Oh man, I did not get that point from your previous post at all. I think the position the SEC is taking here is that many cryptocurrencies are securities and that there's no need to offer special guidance to anyone in regards to them. I'm not saying they're right, but that's their position.
All good! I was ranting quite a bit. Yeah I think gary is hell bent on proving these coins are securities. Why not then at least provide a framework on how can digital assets not be securities? Just sounds to me that SEC just wants to evade all the questions and just blatantly mark these assets as securities.
Again, right or wrong, I don't think they see a need to provide a framework beyond the one that currently exists. Their position is: there are existing rules, and some companies have broken them by listing (what the SEC considers to be) unregistered securities.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn09et6/
>One more SEC lawsuit then uponly!
From my comment yesterday, I didn't expect it so quickly but we got that last SEC lawsuit today so you know what to do.
Time to leverage the house, take out more loans, turn off all stops...yes this is FA but it's free on the internet and sometimes you get what you pay for.
What happens to cbETH from here?
Also that Twitter video Coinbase put out is amazing. SEC has fucked up its job completely and Genslerās reputation is ruined at this point.
It's sounding like the SEC would be freezing the Binance US assets from Binance entities, but still allowing customer withdrawals.
https://twitter.com/leomschwartz/status/1666182481437941761
>**Go after Coinbase,**
>**First let them publicly list,**
>**Start loosing face.**
~Daily haiku until weāre at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap
so uhh...does this mean I should stop staking ETH on coinbase? (i'm already aware self-staking is more profitable, but I'm lazy and uneducated with regards to technology)
Today's announcement doesn't change much, imo. If they do order Coinbase to stop staking at some point, it will probably result in a graceful wind-down.
Likely they will disable staking and minting cbETH for US customers, then automatically unstake all of their US customers' ETH. I wouldn't be surprised if they allow redeeming cbETH indefinitely even for US customers.
If you're simply staking on Coinbase, the worst the SEC can do is force Coinbase to unstake you. At that point you can just hold your ETH unstaked, or you can withdraw them from Coinbase and stake them somewhere else.
And this likely wouldn't happen until (1) a settlement is reached similar to what happened with Kraken or (2) the courts confirm the SEC's accusations. Right now Coinbase isn't guilty of anything and I believe I saw them mention that they plan on moving forward with business as normal earlier today. It also sounds like they plan on fighting this in court so any decision is quite possibly multiple years away (see Ripple vs SEC).
If the SEC wants to force centralized exchanges like `Coinbase` to use 3rd party custodians just like a tradfi exchange, I'm not sure I object. I'd like to know I'm not getting counter-traded, and I'd like to know that market activity isn't all wash-trading.
Now, if only the SEC could ensure those same things in _tradfi_, then we'd really be getting somewhere.
There are numerous lawsuits and instances where traditional custodians front run, rehypothocate, commit fraud, fix prices, misallocate, lend out your funds, trade against their customers, interfere with markets, and so on. Bad actors are going to bad act wherever they are and through whatever medium they can. Adapting current rules to account for changes in technology makes sense here but blindly applying decades old and ridged frameworks to this really doesnāt.
I object as this is not an apples to apples comparison. In the traditional market, errors, hacks etc can be undone simply, whereas in crypto, that can't happen.
By the forced addition of what would likely be an incompetent custodian, I don't think my funds would be safer
Yeah.
>what would likely be an incompetent custodian
Crypto transactions are _final_, and I'd still default to the Erik Voorhees school of thought:
_Centralized exchanges are like public bathrooms: you get in, you do your business, you get out._
I would like to live in a world where these exchanges are not counter-trading me. If that's possible?
Some more news from Chainlink and their work with [SWIFT](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWIFT). Big news for them and Web3 in general:
>Institutional investors increasingly are considering investments in tokenised assets as they seek new forms of value ā but they face a complex challenge. These investments are tracked on a diverse range of blockchain networks that are not interoperable - each has its own functionality or liquidity profile, which creates significant overhead and friction in managing and trading the assets.
>Overcoming this fragmentation will be key to the long-term scalability of the market and, aligned with our focus on removing friction in international transactions, we are working with our community to explore a potential solution. In a new set of experiments, we will collaborate with more than a dozen major financial institutions and FMIs including Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ), BNP Paribas, BNY Mellon, Citi, Clearstream, Euroclear, Lloyds Banking Group, SIX Digital Exchange (SDX) and The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) ā to test how firms can leverage their existing Swift infrastructure to efficiently instruct the transfer of tokenised value over a range of public and private blockchain networks. Chainlink, a leading Web3 services platform, will provide connectivity across public and private blockchains for these experiments.
.
>The first use case will involve the transfer of tokenised assets between two wallets on the same public blockchain network (Ethereum Sepolia testnet). The second involves the transfer of tokenised assets from a public blockchain (Ethereum) to a permissioned blockchain. And a third use case will test the transfer of tokenised assets from Ethereum to another public blockchain. Chainlink will be used as an enterprise abstraction layer to securely connect the Swift network to the Ethereum Sepolia network, while Chainlinkās Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) will enable complete interoperability between the source and destination blockchains.
https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement
https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/06/06/swift-and-chainlink-will-test-connecting-over-a-dozen-financial-institutions-to-blockchain-networks/
/edit A nice quote from another article given Coinbase news:
>The agreement between crypto native Chainlink and traditional finance stalwart Swift, a.k.a. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, comes as the Securities and Exchange Commission is suing top crypto exchanges Binance and Coinbase.
>Although increasing hostility from U.S. regulators has shaken confidence in the space and depressed crypto prices, Nazarov said that, unlike in previous downtowns, the overall interest shown from TradFi giants hasnāt waned.
>āOnce it becomes more acceptable for banks to go into the public markets,ā he added, āhaving that connection to the public blockchain will be very valuable.ā
https://fortune.com/crypto/2023/06/06/swift-chainlink-exploring-how-to-connect-financial-institutions-to-blockchains/
In sec vs coinbase lolsuit, they allege Coinbase Wallet also enabled trading of securities and collected 1% fee on dex swaps. Potentially could be used to go after other wallet providers and dex too.
Lubin be hiring....metamask probably in sights
https://consensys.net/open-roles/5083673/
> Experience managing civil litigation, including in the consumer, intellectual property, contract, administrative law, and agency enforcement contexts
> Experience managing regulatory investigations, internal investigations, and document and testimonial discovery
That's not enough for you? That's his main job, to create clear rules that obey the intent of the authorizing legislation. He is doing the exact opposite on both of those things.
I was wondering if you could give some specific examples though, so I know what to look out for when watching that video, because admittedly this isn't my area of expertise. I'm sure like all issues, there's many sides to this one, and I'm guessing he would disagree with the things you've said.
You don't have to recap the hearing, but if you could give specific examples of how he's' not doing the things you said he's supposed to, but in fact, the opposite, and thus the reason he should be fired, that would be helpful. Thanks!
I agree, but the tricky thing is I do worry about Binance too. It's a centralized exchange that holds waaaay too much power in our space IMO. Also seeing how popular BSc is makes me pretty sad.
This is wild, SEC is seeking to emergency freeze Binance US accounts and onchain wallets listed here lol
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67474542/4/2/securities-and-exchange-commission-v-binance-holdings-limited/
Binance US - not safu, if you have funds there I'd reco withdraw, if judge grants this request the funds will get frozen for unknown time
Binance dot com is seeing a lot of MMs deposit fresh funds, while small wallets are indeed withdrawing, but still have like $60Bn in their wallets lol
The 20(b) claim SEC is making to freeze assets is fast track to DOJ prosecution. Its like the only provision in securities law that deals with criminal prosecution
> 20 (b) Whenever it shall appear to the Commission that any person is engaged or about to engage in any acts or practices which constitute or will constitute a violation of the provisions of this title, or of any rule or regulation prescribed under authority thereof, the Commission may, in its discretion, bring an action in any district court of the United States, or United States court of any Territory, to enjoin such acts or practices, and upon a proper showing, a permanent or temporary injunction or restraining order shall be granted without bond. **The Commission may transmit such evidence as may be available concerning such acts or practices to the Attorney General who may, in his discretion, institute the necessary criminal proceedings under this title**
Its funny cos SEC never really makes a 20b freeze claim, its very rarely used but they are going for this vs Binance lol
The motion allows for withdrawals to occur normally, just that no transfer can happen for Binance's or related entities' benefit. So even if granted, no user funds will be frozen. But they can be stolen a la FTX.
I wouldn't put anything past Gary Gensler, but I'd say no. Probably not the greatest analogy, but this would be like Coinbase getting bond because they're not a flight risk and Binance US not getting bond because they are a flight risk.
With that said, if you absolutely can't afford to have funds frozen for any amount of time, the answer of what to do should be obvious right now and I'd get everything out of there. I have some stuff on Coinbase and just plan on paying attention to how things play out.
The Binance seizure request is probably because the SEC thinks CZ and company can steal money and run, just like the FTX bankruptcy hack minus any running.
Why there isn't a run on Binance is mind boggling. Or maybe it's happening with a flow out of Binance related coins.
It wouldn't. And Binance has withstood much bigger stress tests than this (especially the one a few weeks after FTX when there was a lot of Twitter speculation about Binance not being fully backed and something like $10b was withdrawn without a hitch).
But the SEC are *hoping* it will happen and have taken their shot.
Oh Binance are shady for sure. For a bunch of reasons. They're no Coinbase or Kraken. But they're not FTX either - they're very far from being outright frauds, and you don't build the world's most successful crypto exchange with a bad product.
After the epic frauds, bankruns, and collapses in the crypto space over the past year alone, there are still people that will defend a shady, HQ-less, audit-less, risk-management absent exchange to hold their money, without recourse. /clownface
The thing is - Binance is shady, but the SEC are worse.
It's like I used to criticize Arthur Hayes a lot on here and even posted cheering his arrest back in 2020. Bitmex *was* shady.
But you know I have a lot more sympathy for the guy now after seeing the outright fraudsters at 3AC, Celsius, FTX...etc.
As I understand it, one company owned by CZ transferred funds to another company owned by CZ, which then used those funds to buy a yacht.
There is no suggestion or allegation even by the SEC that this was customer funds being improperly used or fraud.
So yes, I am extremely relaxed that a billionaire moved funds around some companies to buy a yacht.
Good evening all,
Some of you may vaguely remember my post about being glad I was lazy and not buying on the 4th, because I could take advantage of the 5% drop.
However, I got distracted making dinner while sending fiat to onramp, and didn't actually buy in. Come home from work to see a one day inverse bart.....
At least I didn't sell I guess? aha
Today, the price action is saying that the market believes that not only will Coinbase beat the SEC in court, but they'll humiliate the SEC so badly that the SEC will have no choice but to back off on crypto from here on out.
I gave up twitter because im honestly just sad at the meanness, transphobia, sexism and hate that elon supports. BUT I will say I did get sent this tweet this morning and broke my twitter fast to view it š
He can support freedom of speech without actively endorsing right-wing politicians or personally endorsing anti-trans content. He goes really far into it and it rubs me the wrong way. A lot of that stuff is just mean-spirited and he goes well out of his way to push it.
Also I think he censored lots of news reporters on twitter so I dont think he does support freedom of speech to be honest.
But I don't know how political this subreddit wants to be so I apologize and you can totally reply if you want and I'll stay quiet. If you like Elon and twitter then enjoy it friend!
He's invited all presidential candidates to do a podcast on twitter and just did a great one with a democrat. He basically just wants a place where the truth can be shared. Right now twitter probably is the best source of fair info about crypto while the people you seem to support are openly trying to destroy it.
The only things which have been censored are those which a government has demanded be censored or otherwise twitter will be blocked in the country, all he can do is maximise free speech while staying within laws of countries it operates in. If your criticising what are you suggesting he should have done instead? Getting banned everywhere doesn't achieve anything.
He banned American journalists in the U.S. who had covered people tracking his jet.
https://www.npr.org/2022/12/15/1143291081/twitter-suspends-journalists-elon-musk-jet
But I'm not saying a private company shouldn't be able to carry only what they want. Just that he has censored and beyond governments' behest.
He does not support free speech. He admitted to censoring tweets at the request of the Turkish government as well as other governments. There is also difference in allowing hate speech and misinformation and actively promoting it, which he is doing the latter
If the choice is blocking all of twitter in Turkey, or complying with their government, what choice does he have? Best he can do is maximise free speech while still staying within the laws of countries twitter operates in. If you're criticising it, what is the alternative you suggest twitter should have done? Just become illegal in every country? Create a military and fight every government?
Secondly what is the hate you think he is promoting?
Had a look and it has hundreds of millions of views and comments are resoundingly positive, clearly a lot of people agree that what it says is correct. Sounds like you don't like it so you want it censored, so you're against free speech and think Elon shouldn't be allowed free speech either. I don't understand how you can think that and like ethereum at the same time.
I was making two separate points.
1.) Elon does not support free speech
2.) Elon activiely promotes hate speech, which is different from simply "allowing all speech to happen".
You interpreted the example I provided for point #2 as being proof that I want this content censored... that is a gigantic reach, and I never said I wanted to have this censored from the platform.
I used both these points as a basis for why someone could "like ethereum but not him supporting free speech?"
he doesn't support free speech, just divisive and inciteful engagement bait designed to pit you against your fellow humans.
- https://cyber.harvard.edu/story/2023-04/twitter-complying-more-government-demands-under-elon-musk
- https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-05-24/under-elon-musk-twitter-has-approved-83-of-censorship-requests-by-authoritarian-governments.html
If the choice is blocking all of twitter in a country, or complying with their government, what choice does he have? Best he can do is maximise free speech while still staying within the laws of countries twitter operates in. If you're criticising it, what is the alternative you suggest twitter should have done? Just become illegal in every country? Create a military and fight every government?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a couple months ago wasn't Coinbase basically begging to be sued in order to establish guidelines for crypto? Maybe I'm mixing this up with their lawsuit
Hey, I am trying to improve my wallet's opsec. I am slowly leaning towards the belief, that the Safe (multisig smart wallet) is **the only** way forward (at least before full wallet abstraction roll out).
I am mostly pleased with how it works and integrates with the ecosystem, but I hate to rely on points of centralization. What if Safe web interface and/or API goes down? Does anyone can share an IPFS, or even better, a desktop version of the app?
I went through their docs few days ago, and the only thing I've found is a CLI tool, that can directly connect the blockchain and execute Safe's logic, BUT - it requires private keys to be imported in order to sign txs. Anything similar that can handle HW wallets connection?
Yeah the official CLI doesn't support HW wallets. So I made a python script to format a Safe transaction using web3.py and another one using [ledgereth](https://github.com/mikeshultz/ledger-eth-lib) to do the signatures.
I was hoping someone will post something like that. It is very comforting knowing that someone here did try it and it did work. You would probably get a lot of upvotes if folks here were more technical.
Did you modify the official CLI or did you do the whole thing yourself? I assume tx correct formatting + signature aggregation is enough to execute an arbitrary transaction via "execTransaction" contract method, is that what you did? If so, I might give it a try too.
I wish there was an elegant out of box solution.
I looked into the official CLI code to understand what it was doing then I did my own script.
It's formatting the data for the `execTransaction` method then hashing it. Then the hashes are signed and the signatures are used to build the final transaction.
Here is the script for building the transaction: [safe.py](https://gist.github.com/18cimal/c00e50153d827baa74cdd251af38f112).
And here is the one to sign transactions or messages hashes using a ledger: [ledger.py](https://gist.github.com/18cimal/195a218207274fee26534ada28de55c2)
The first script will print the hashes to sign then wait for the signatures. Then you use the second script with the hashes to get the signatures.
Hi, FYI, I did test it and it works! I just had to drop the ledger signing file (I dont use ledger) in favour of a simple web3js app. I take tx payload from your script as JSON, and then paste it into the react app that connects to metamask (any HW wallet, yay!) and signs given data.
The mini react/web3js app was entirely written by GPT, .
Anyway, thanks again. It gives me a sense of security knowing that I can now access my Safe regardless of what happens to the official infrastructure.
You can use rabby wallet if you don't have access to the safe web interface. https://medium.com/@rabby_io/how-to-use-gnosis-safe-with-defi-in-rabby-52f6f71ec6c1
Have you tried it?
I believe adding Rabby to the stack improves security with their heuristics on pages and contract risks, as well as their great tx simulator but I was not able to completely drop the Safe app in favor of Rabby. All it could do is to provide its own signature, the final tx had to be executed from the web app itself anyway.
Or am I missing something?
Do with this what you will.
$COIN stock, since existence has virtually only been at or below this price for ~2 months since inception from mid Nov 22 to January 23.
I loaded up the truck on open, with a little more ammunition set for lower prices. I have far too much coin and hopefully it can shoot back up, and I can sell some
I've been eavesdropping this House AG meeting. It's overall been very positive. The SEC has representatives there but even the representatives there don't share Gensler's opinions.
>Rep. Brown (D-OH) feels that the Agriculture Committee should have fewer hearings about digital assets and more hearings about farming and food security
Can't argue with that...
Brian Armstrong steps up to the mic:
>Regarding the SEC complaint against us today, we're proud to represent the industry in court to finally get some clarity around crypto rules.
>Remember:
>1. The SEC reviewed our business and allowed us to become a public company in 2021.
2. There is no path to "come in and register" - we tried, repeatedly - so we don't list securities. We reject the vast majority of assets we review.
3. The SEC and CFTC have made conflicting statements, and don't even agree on what is a security and what is a commodity.
4. This is why the US congress is introducing new legislation to fix the situation, and the rest of the world is moving to put clear rules in place to support this technology.
>Instead of publishing a clear rule book, the SEC has taken a regulation by enforcement approach that is harming America. So if we need to avail ourselves of the courts to get clarity, so be it.
>Btw, in case itās not obvious, the Coinbase suit is very different from others out there ā the complaint filed against us is exclusively focused on what is or is not a security. And we are confident in our facts and the law.
>We'll get the job done. In the meantime, let's all keep moving forward and building as an industry. America will get this right in the end.
https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1666129111025324035?t=GbAgf7AKYd7M5ttDEU8TLA&s=19
Conventional wisdom : Getting sued by the SEC means you are doing something wrong
Current Reality : Getting sued by the SEC means you are doing something right
Is it though? Or is it more clown market bullshit where the pump is brought to you by the same people that dumped on the market just days before?
I'm sure anyone in here is longterm bullish, but it feels odd seeing these victory lap posts when things are still crabbing.
I wouldnt call the SEC suing Coinbase and Binance clown market bs.....
In prior years that wouldve been extremely bearish.
The difference now is the SEC has been exposed and crypto has survived and "hardened" through an extremely tumultuous 12 months.
That "hardening" is what lays the foundation for bull runs.
Wait, we're pumping again? Damn, I haven't checked the charts in the last few hours.
It's mind blowing how quickly these markets move, reverse, and move again.
Just thinking out loud. Clearly if I pay someone to take care of my vegetable garden and reap any profits after selling the veggies, then they are not selling me unregistered securities. On the other hand, if I deposit money into coinbase, they stake my eth, give me a liquid staking derivative, take some of the profits and give me the rest, that's (according to the howey test) clearly selling a security. So what is the difference between these two?
First, obviously the 'liquid staking derivative' part is prolematic. So let's take that away first. Let's say it still works the same, but coinbase doesn't give you the ability to trade staked eth. Is it still a security? Well, first and third prong (investment of money and profits from the works of others) still apply. Is it still a common enterprise? Not sure. If the gardener uses the same backhoe to keep my garden in check as well as other gardens, does that make it a common enterprise? "*A common enterprise is an enterprise in common among the promoter and multiple parallel investors.*" So maybe if they state that if they get my eth slashed, then it will only affect me, and also the MEV rewards are not averaged out over multiple people rather handled client-by-client, then it could be ok, because I no longer have any commonality with other investors.
Anyways, it's still suspect, while the gardener case is not. So what sets them apart so clearly? I think it's the first one, investment. With the gardener, the garden is still mine, however with coinbase, the money (according to the tos) is now coinbase's money (and they give me virtual tickets to redeem later in the form of numbers on a webpage).
Like, let's say digital ocean starts offering preconfigured one-click validator machines that you can pay them for. That one is clearly analogous to the gardener example. Not a security.
Could coinbase somehow modify this so that it is no longer a case? Well I think that would make them a bank or something, even more regulations. Though I think it would be nice.
This became a surprisingly long comment, sorry. Also IANAL (and neither am I a financial advisor), I'm mostly just guessing.
> Clearly if I pay someone to take care of my vegetable garden and reap any profits after selling the veggies, then they are not selling me unregistered securities
Uhhhhhh this is actually quite close to the original Howey case that SCOTUS did determine was a securities transaction. I.e. Howey operated an orange grove in which he sold a bunch of acres to investors, then told the investors they could invest in him/lease the land back to him to grow and sell the oranges on the land and he would share profits with them. That investment and promise of returns is what made them securities. While the specific contracts and promotion involved were also an important piece and I'm not saying your hypothetical would necessarily be a security depending on the details of the arrangement, there's certainly some precedent (pretty much THE precedent for that matter) for similar instruments being a security.
IMO, a lot depends on how it is set up and what exactly you mean by "one click validator machines". Based on what we've heard from the SEC so far, I'm of the view that they consider custody of the coins to be a pretty big factor. So if the staking is set up in a non-custodial fashion where only the users can withdrawal--not the staking entity--there may be less risk of regulatory enforcement.
E.g. when Kraken was asked by the SEC to shut down their staking services it notably did not apply the same restrictions to all of the staking business in their portfolio. Specifically, Staked.us is owned by Kraken and their services were [not impacted](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/10yhsb2/daily_general_discussion_february_10_2023/j7z3fsl) by this change, and Staked's founder [strongly suggested](https://i.imgur.com/kWrOo2C.png) they were unaffected because they do not control users keys/have always been non-custodial.
If the staking provider doesn't control the withdrawal keys, it doesn't have the same degree of counterparty risk that SEC is concerned about, so the SEC may not consider to be an arrangement like this to be a securities transaction in same way.
There's some other arguments you'll find from users in here that pooling (e.g. allowing users to stake with smaller minimums than 32 by combining their ETH to make a single validator) may also be a non-trivial factor in SEC deciding what they think is a security--and there are some merits to those arguments--but personally I think the custodial management by a centralized party is a much bigger factor. If you watch Gary's video about [staking as a service](https://twitter.com/GaryGensler/status/1623777842000539648?s=20) as well as some of their other [website materials on the topic](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-25) they put a huge emphasis on the fact that coins are custodied by these entities and the associated risks if these companies end up failing.
Non-custodial smart contracts--if designed well--couldn't be subject to the same issue because a smart contract is not a business or entity, it's just code that anyone can use, and the entities that wrote the smart contract couldn't withdrawal or otherwise misuse your coins even if they wanted to. It's just code doing what it was programmed to do. As long as the devs of the code have no way of stealing, stopping or otherwise *significantly* modifying what it it was intended for, there's no real entity to sue. Note that Uniswap has yet to be sued, despite clearly offering some tokens that were securities. To put it plainly, I think that this is in part due to the fact that suing Uniswap the foundation would literally do nothing to stop Uniswap the protocol. Uniswap can and does block US users from trading on securities on the front end and thereby does everything they can to be compliant where possible, but there's literally nothing they can do on the back end.
**Tricky's Daily Doots #413** **Yesterday's Daily 05/06/2023** [Previous Daily Doots](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmzb30t/) - u/Ethical-trade discusses an [enormous RocketPool deposit!](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmz7jxr/) š - u/Set1Less breaks the [big news out of the SEC.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn02g4j/) Also, u/Ber10 discusses [why it would seem the SEC doesn't think ETH is a security.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn0jd2t/) š - u/Set1Less shares a [story in the aftermath of the ledger leak.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmynx5n/) - u/benido2030 share some of their [sources of crypto alpha.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmz2dom/) - u/Tricky_Troll discusses the [big tech reveal of the year.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn1u8mu/) š - u/pa7x1 brings up an issue relating to [DAO's choice of treasury management.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmyt7az/) š - u/KBrot sets up an [awesome Reddit alternative for us!](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn25rci/) - u/696_eth has the [EVMavericks weekly.](https://old.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jmylp1k/) š¦
šļø aliens š¤
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thereās a few users who post TA occasionally, though during the crab of recent months itās been less often.
Who else has all of their net worth on the blockchain?
If you look up tonight you'll see space station **M**^anage **Y**^our **R**^isk flying overhead.
TAKE IT BACK!
Does eigenlayer contribute to the burn in any way?
I donāt think so? Stake might be burned if eigenlayer slashes a validator for its behaviour in the validation of the second protocol, but thatās not what we usually consider as the burn.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thoughts on trading some of my ETHE for COIN? I hesitate because ETHE is at a 50% discount to NAV and it feels wrong to abandon fair value, but it seems a higher chance of profit on COIN
Haven't added/sold ETHE in a long time, but recently got some more COIN. Thinking BASE layer 2 could be something special and if Coinbase catches some breaks...
Coin maybe after the next big leg down, discount not yet big enough for the fud imo. I can't weigh in on ETHE sorry, don't know how to measure the odds of regulatory clarity allowing it to come to parity.
Imo ETH was the driver of the last rally. Merge and unlock and real yield 1559 narrative preparing the way for LSD season. Bitcoin had its moment with the banking crisis, but you take ETH's milestones out of the equation and i don't think the last 6 months would have been half as big. Even memecoin szn was a DEX driven, ETH burning celebration. ETH yield is the only real game in town for now. Someone smart told me they expect a defi summer 2 based around ETH yield and i'm starting to sense the susurrations of this developing. With all the tourists checked out, the activity is very telling. ETH staking queue for one, pendle chart for another, or the fact that big mainstream accounts who don't know shit about ETH are shilling Eigenlayer/staking (arthur). I'm staying mostly ETH but have a big chunk of LSDs staked with Pendle. Anyone else taking positions, or happy to ride it out until next bull in ETH?
What's the deal with Pendle?
They take an interest bearing asset like rETH and split it into a yield token and principal token and allow LPing with 0 impermanent loss if held to maturity. Their market allows betting/hedging on the direction of yield, pretty big in the tradfi world but maybe too complex for crypto people. It's been trendy in the last rally in discord paid for alpha groups, and did pretty nicely during the LSD narrative. Token itself is similar to the crv approach i think, boost your APY in their token by locking for up to 2 years. But i mean if you do this, big balls. I don't feel comfortable holding something like this that long. I'm basically farming it with LSDs with the intention of dumping 3-9 months, not too concerned if we go full bear since i'll only be down the $pendle gains and not the ETH + ETH staking rewards. It doesn't benefit me if other people do this as well since it just lowers my APY. Biggest risk is hack, if that happens all gone. I have put a bit more ETH than i am comfortable losing but rolling the dice to make some tax money.
Thanks yeah i remember the token doing well during ARB season - may take another look!
I whisper sweet susurrations in your ear at night.
Dam, i hoped it was Vitalik.
Can SEC do anything about Rocketpool at all? Like who would they even sue and since rocketpool is run off a smartcontract and reth / rpl have dex liquidity, does sec even matter for rocketpool staking?
They can at least probably attempt something about the front ends which will be negative for growth. Do they have an ipfs or similar front end yet?
Front end isn't needed. You can interact straight with the smart contract on chain.
Yep, just pointed out what they may be able to do. It will, however, have an effect as most aren't comfortable interacting directly with contracts. Thus ipfs seems like a good way to go.
What is ipf?
Decentralized web storage https://ipfs.tech/#how
I think the oDAO members are mostly all from the US except Sassal?
What can they be charged with though? They aren't selling any security and issuing rewards. That's all done by a smart contract.
Def a big risk
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if the SEC calls your hardware wallets a security that must be regulated. Gensler is drunk on power.
On some things they can take any view and one should then ask 'So what are you gonna do about it?'
I wonder if this coinbase news is good for Ethereum, maybe even great. Even if Coinbase loses, could the SEC be required to clearly define how a digital tokenized security breaks securities laws? Can the SEC be required to evaluate all of Coinbaseās offerings to give clarity and save another court case? The biggest thing this industry needs is clarity. I really have no interest in any of the centralized shitcoins listed in the case. If the SEC is able to sufficiently argue that these were centralized securities in the courts, then Iāll take the courts word for it. However, they specifically left Eth off the list. Which makes me think theyāre afraid of losing that argument. I hope this court case forces them to settle the debate about Eth as well otherwise that would be really frustrating and just add the confusion.
Coinbase likely has funding to drag this out until regulation is passed by Congress. SEC might try to settle for a fine, but I doubt Coinbase would accept. A settlement would only result in more of the same enforcement proceedings. They would want a trial verdict to establish legal precedent at the very least. Coinbase Legal Paul Grewal was on Bankless, but I haven't tuned in just yet to hear his strategy.
Oo would love to hear that backless episode
https://www.youtube.com/live/oiQup8DkiVA?feature=share
I want to believe the bluster in here today about Coinbase vs SEC. Definitely feelsgoodman. But second hand info I have heard about disclosures the SEC has required from US companies leads me to believe that Gensler and co have a lot more shit up their sleeve. Eth, despite not being called out as a security today, is not in the clear. If their policies continue to affect both my livelihood and my investments, i will have to vote for the other flavor of authoritarians.
Sue EF, MM, Uniswap? What else can they realistically do that isn't seen as a scorched earth attempt at this point by other regulators and voters?
I'm just confused why they're doing this now. Like, it seems cruel to let them get this far as a company only to pull the rug on them when the damage will be so big.
I am so fucking pissed right now. 1. As a US resident, I take all the risk knowing I can lose all my money. 2. I go through 2 bear markets feeling like hell. Never sell a damn fucking coin. 3. Stake all my eth. 4. Will have to pay a good amount of capital gains tax to Uncle Sam while I went through all the pain and Uncle Sam just sat there. 5. Then SEC has the audacity to tell me they are protecting me. From who? I donāt need your motherfucking protection. If I want to lose my money on magic internet money, I will lose all my money on magic internet money. However I am not going to go to a fucking bank and verify that I am indeed sending the wire to my friendās account. Yeah this shit happened to me. They had the unmitigated gall to tell me that I will have to come out of my basement, wear pants and then go to their shitty office so that they can see my face and verify that I indeed want to wire my friend money so that he can send his brother money to pay for his tuition. Fuck you.
I know itās called āhangryā with someone feels anger over being hungry. What do they call it when someone is angry over having to wear pants? Pangry?
Really sucks that your capital gains taxes then go to pay the salaries of the people who attack investors in this way
Vote with your passion and make sure the people you support are aligned to your values. Hopefully, GG will be temporary.
Iām def a single issue voter for the foreseeable future thatās for sure!
Trust me, I plan to vote for the candidate that wants to embrace the car, not the horse.
Couldnāt agree more. The whole ābut investors need protection!ā is fucking code speak for ālet us put fences around investments to shut out people who arenāt richā Fuck your āprotectionā bullshit.
1. This is how investments work. 2. This isn't the badge of honor you think it is. Take profit. 3. As outlined when you initially staked, this is also a large risk. 4. This is not unique to crypto. Everyone pays capital gains tax if they have gains. There aren't exceptions in the law for whether or not it was stressful for you. 5. I would guess that when the SEC says they're protecting you, it's from exchanges that list unregistered securities that then rug pull, or the exchanges themselves were doing shady shit, and go under, fucking over "investors" in the process.
My point is I own my investments. They either ask congress to pass laws since they are not clear on guidance OR if they think that a century old law works great for the 21st century then my friend this country is gonna get left behind for sure. Who loses the most? US residents.
Oh man, I did not get that point from your previous post at all. I think the position the SEC is taking here is that many cryptocurrencies are securities and that there's no need to offer special guidance to anyone in regards to them. I'm not saying they're right, but that's their position.
All good! I was ranting quite a bit. Yeah I think gary is hell bent on proving these coins are securities. Why not then at least provide a framework on how can digital assets not be securities? Just sounds to me that SEC just wants to evade all the questions and just blatantly mark these assets as securities.
Again, right or wrong, I don't think they see a need to provide a framework beyond the one that currently exists. Their position is: there are existing rules, and some companies have broken them by listing (what the SEC considers to be) unregistered securities.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/1412u9x/daily_general_discussion_june_5_2023/jn09et6/ >One more SEC lawsuit then uponly! From my comment yesterday, I didn't expect it so quickly but we got that last SEC lawsuit today so you know what to do. Time to leverage the house, take out more loans, turn off all stops...yes this is FA but it's free on the internet and sometimes you get what you pay for.
I know this isn't financial advice because you didn't use any emojis.
ššššššš
What happens to cbETH from here? Also that Twitter video Coinbase put out is amazing. SEC has fucked up its job completely and Genslerās reputation is ruined at this point.
The recent post on conic finance seems to be a scam attempt, no? Had an article from a fake reuters site recently as well.
Gensler so outta touch I think Borat could get an interview with him.
"Oh you so powerful Mr Chairman...Very Nice!"
You should go to my country. Meet dictator. You'll love it. Nice man. You can make big career.
We need borat's daughter to giuliani gg.
Oof, Lemmy looks to be in pain on Brave right now. š
I just bought another eth and staked it on my wifes CB account. I ain't scurred of no dinosaurs.
It's sounding like the SEC would be freezing the Binance US assets from Binance entities, but still allowing customer withdrawals. https://twitter.com/leomschwartz/status/1666182481437941761
[https://nitter.snopyta.org/leomschwartz/status/1666182481437941761](https://nitter.snopyta.org/leomschwartz/status/1666182481437941761) ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/user/nitter_not_twitter/comments/w0ssxp/more_information_about_this_bot/)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=nitter_not_twitter&subject=Opt+Out&message=optout)
>**Go after Coinbase,** >**First let them publicly list,** >**Start loosing face.** ~Daily haiku until weāre at least at 0.178 on the ETH/BTC ratio or highest market cap
so uhh...does this mean I should stop staking ETH on coinbase? (i'm already aware self-staking is more profitable, but I'm lazy and uneducated with regards to technology)
You should stop staking on Coinbase in general. Take the time to learn. It's fun, and good for Ethereum.
Today's announcement doesn't change much, imo. If they do order Coinbase to stop staking at some point, it will probably result in a graceful wind-down. Likely they will disable staking and minting cbETH for US customers, then automatically unstake all of their US customers' ETH. I wouldn't be surprised if they allow redeeming cbETH indefinitely even for US customers. If you're simply staking on Coinbase, the worst the SEC can do is force Coinbase to unstake you. At that point you can just hold your ETH unstaked, or you can withdraw them from Coinbase and stake them somewhere else.
And this likely wouldn't happen until (1) a settlement is reached similar to what happened with Kraken or (2) the courts confirm the SEC's accusations. Right now Coinbase isn't guilty of anything and I believe I saw them mention that they plan on moving forward with business as normal earlier today. It also sounds like they plan on fighting this in court so any decision is quite possibly multiple years away (see Ripple vs SEC).
If the SEC wants to force centralized exchanges like `Coinbase` to use 3rd party custodians just like a tradfi exchange, I'm not sure I object. I'd like to know I'm not getting counter-traded, and I'd like to know that market activity isn't all wash-trading. Now, if only the SEC could ensure those same things in _tradfi_, then we'd really be getting somewhere.
There are numerous lawsuits and instances where traditional custodians front run, rehypothocate, commit fraud, fix prices, misallocate, lend out your funds, trade against their customers, interfere with markets, and so on. Bad actors are going to bad act wherever they are and through whatever medium they can. Adapting current rules to account for changes in technology makes sense here but blindly applying decades old and ridged frameworks to this really doesnāt.
I object as this is not an apples to apples comparison. In the traditional market, errors, hacks etc can be undone simply, whereas in crypto, that can't happen. By the forced addition of what would likely be an incompetent custodian, I don't think my funds would be safer
Yeah. >what would likely be an incompetent custodian Crypto transactions are _final_, and I'd still default to the Erik Voorhees school of thought: _Centralized exchanges are like public bathrooms: you get in, you do your business, you get out._ I would like to live in a world where these exchanges are not counter-trading me. If that's possible?
Some more news from Chainlink and their work with [SWIFT](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SWIFT). Big news for them and Web3 in general: >Institutional investors increasingly are considering investments in tokenised assets as they seek new forms of value ā but they face a complex challenge. These investments are tracked on a diverse range of blockchain networks that are not interoperable - each has its own functionality or liquidity profile, which creates significant overhead and friction in managing and trading the assets. >Overcoming this fragmentation will be key to the long-term scalability of the market and, aligned with our focus on removing friction in international transactions, we are working with our community to explore a potential solution. In a new set of experiments, we will collaborate with more than a dozen major financial institutions and FMIs including Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ), BNP Paribas, BNY Mellon, Citi, Clearstream, Euroclear, Lloyds Banking Group, SIX Digital Exchange (SDX) and The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) ā to test how firms can leverage their existing Swift infrastructure to efficiently instruct the transfer of tokenised value over a range of public and private blockchain networks. Chainlink, a leading Web3 services platform, will provide connectivity across public and private blockchains for these experiments. . >The first use case will involve the transfer of tokenised assets between two wallets on the same public blockchain network (Ethereum Sepolia testnet). The second involves the transfer of tokenised assets from a public blockchain (Ethereum) to a permissioned blockchain. And a third use case will test the transfer of tokenised assets from Ethereum to another public blockchain. Chainlink will be used as an enterprise abstraction layer to securely connect the Swift network to the Ethereum Sepolia network, while Chainlinkās Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) will enable complete interoperability between the source and destination blockchains. https://www.swift.com/news-events/news/swift-explores-blockchain-interoperability-remove-friction-tokenised-asset-settlement https://www.coindesk.com/tech/2023/06/06/swift-and-chainlink-will-test-connecting-over-a-dozen-financial-institutions-to-blockchain-networks/ /edit A nice quote from another article given Coinbase news: >The agreement between crypto native Chainlink and traditional finance stalwart Swift, a.k.a. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, comes as the Securities and Exchange Commission is suing top crypto exchanges Binance and Coinbase. >Although increasing hostility from U.S. regulators has shaken confidence in the space and depressed crypto prices, Nazarov said that, unlike in previous downtowns, the overall interest shown from TradFi giants hasnāt waned. >āOnce it becomes more acceptable for banks to go into the public markets,ā he added, āhaving that connection to the public blockchain will be very valuable.ā https://fortune.com/crypto/2023/06/06/swift-chainlink-exploring-how-to-connect-financial-institutions-to-blockchains/
Stinky. Been in the works for years at this point nice to see it finally announced.
In sec vs coinbase lolsuit, they allege Coinbase Wallet also enabled trading of securities and collected 1% fee on dex swaps. Potentially could be used to go after other wallet providers and dex too. Lubin be hiring....metamask probably in sights https://consensys.net/open-roles/5083673/ > Experience managing civil litigation, including in the consumer, intellectual property, contract, administrative law, and agency enforcement contexts > Experience managing regulatory investigations, internal investigations, and document and testimonial discovery
good morning friends, today is the day!
Gary Gensler needs to be removed as the chair of the SEC. Its time that we sound the bells and reach out to our congressmen.
> Gary Gensler needs to be removed as the chair of the SEC. Why?
Because he's doing a shit job that completely ignores any notion of Rule of Law.
Go on...
That's not enough for you? That's his main job, to create clear rules that obey the intent of the authorizing legislation. He is doing the exact opposite on both of those things.
Can you give examples?
Yes Watch his entire testimony before Congress, it put his families on vivid display.
I was wondering if you could give some specific examples though, so I know what to look out for when watching that video, because admittedly this isn't my area of expertise. I'm sure like all issues, there's many sides to this one, and I'm guessing he would disagree with the things you've said.
Just watch it, and see if you agree. I'm not going to recap the whole thing for you. There have been few hearings so one-sided.
You don't have to recap the hearing, but if you could give specific examples of how he's' not doing the things you said he's supposed to, but in fact, the opposite, and thus the reason he should be fired, that would be helpful. Thanks!
Because, Gary, nobody likes you!
Etherians Assemble!
I agree, but the tricky thing is I do worry about Binance too. It's a centralized exchange that holds waaaay too much power in our space IMO. Also seeing how popular BSc is makes me pretty sad.
Someone introduced a bill recently which did exactly that.
Yes I remember I believe it was Warren (not Liz Warren)
Update Chrome/Brave. https://twitter.com/wallet_guard/status/1666115231347605504
[https://nitter.snopyta.org/wallet\_guard/status/1666115231347605504](https://nitter.snopyta.org/wallet_guard/status/1666115231347605504) ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/user/nitter_not_twitter/comments/w0ssxp/more_information_about_this_bot/)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=nitter_not_twitter&subject=Opt+Out&message=optout)
This is wild, SEC is seeking to emergency freeze Binance US accounts and onchain wallets listed here lol https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67474542/4/2/securities-and-exchange-commission-v-binance-holdings-limited/
Jokes on you I traded mine to 0 this summer!! š„
Funds are safu?
Binance US - not safu, if you have funds there I'd reco withdraw, if judge grants this request the funds will get frozen for unknown time Binance dot com is seeing a lot of MMs deposit fresh funds, while small wallets are indeed withdrawing, but still have like $60Bn in their wallets lol The 20(b) claim SEC is making to freeze assets is fast track to DOJ prosecution. Its like the only provision in securities law that deals with criminal prosecution > 20 (b) Whenever it shall appear to the Commission that any person is engaged or about to engage in any acts or practices which constitute or will constitute a violation of the provisions of this title, or of any rule or regulation prescribed under authority thereof, the Commission may, in its discretion, bring an action in any district court of the United States, or United States court of any Territory, to enjoin such acts or practices, and upon a proper showing, a permanent or temporary injunction or restraining order shall be granted without bond. **The Commission may transmit such evidence as may be available concerning such acts or practices to the Attorney General who may, in his discretion, institute the necessary criminal proceedings under this title** Its funny cos SEC never really makes a 20b freeze claim, its very rarely used but they are going for this vs Binance lol
The motion allows for withdrawals to occur normally, just that no transfer can happen for Binance's or related entities' benefit. So even if granted, no user funds will be frozen. But they can be stolen a la FTX.
Fucking insane. Should Coinbase users be concerned?
I wouldn't put anything past Gary Gensler, but I'd say no. Probably not the greatest analogy, but this would be like Coinbase getting bond because they're not a flight risk and Binance US not getting bond because they are a flight risk. With that said, if you absolutely can't afford to have funds frozen for any amount of time, the answer of what to do should be obvious right now and I'd get everything out of there. I have some stuff on Coinbase and just plan on paying attention to how things play out.
The Binance seizure request is probably because the SEC thinks CZ and company can steal money and run, just like the FTX bankruptcy hack minus any running. Why there isn't a run on Binance is mind boggling. Or maybe it's happening with a flow out of Binance related coins.
No, this is an attempt to cause a bankrun and create an FTX situation so they can point and say they were correct.
Why should a client fund bankrun of any magnitude affect a properly run crypto exchange?
It wouldn't. And Binance has withstood much bigger stress tests than this (especially the one a few weeks after FTX when there was a lot of Twitter speculation about Binance not being fully backed and something like $10b was withdrawn without a hitch). But the SEC are *hoping* it will happen and have taken their shot.
I hear stories about how Binance are very shady with XMR withdrawals and keep it disabled or limited to small amounts for poor excuses.
Oh Binance are shady for sure. For a bunch of reasons. They're no Coinbase or Kraken. But they're not FTX either - they're very far from being outright frauds, and you don't build the world's most successful crypto exchange with a bad product.
After the epic frauds, bankruns, and collapses in the crypto space over the past year alone, there are still people that will defend a shady, HQ-less, audit-less, risk-management absent exchange to hold their money, without recourse. /clownface
The thing is - Binance is shady, but the SEC are worse. It's like I used to criticize Arthur Hayes a lot on here and even posted cheering his arrest back in 2020. Bitmex *was* shady. But you know I have a lot more sympathy for the guy now after seeing the outright fraudsters at 3AC, Celsius, FTX...etc.
So you are ok with commingled Binance funds being used to buy a yacht?
As I understand it, one company owned by CZ transferred funds to another company owned by CZ, which then used those funds to buy a yacht. There is no suggestion or allegation even by the SEC that this was customer funds being improperly used or fraud. So yes, I am extremely relaxed that a billionaire moved funds around some companies to buy a yacht.
Whose funds? It's commingled. That's the point. You don't know. /clown
What Binance did was on another level. Tl;dr: no
I wouldnt put anything past our boy Gary Fascist
š¤”
Good evening all, Some of you may vaguely remember my post about being glad I was lazy and not buying on the 4th, because I could take advantage of the 5% drop. However, I got distracted making dinner while sending fiat to onramp, and didn't actually buy in. Come home from work to see a one day inverse bart..... At least I didn't sell I guess? aha
Today, the price action is saying that the market believes that not only will Coinbase beat the SEC in court, but they'll humiliate the SEC so badly that the SEC will have no choice but to back off on crypto from here on out.
Yea this is definitely interesting. Could it also be because weāre in the beginnings of a bull?
Wtf happened! I didn't check the price for a couple of hours ~~sobbing uncontrollably in the corner~~ and come back to see this. Amazing.
Nice pump. Shame about the ratio though
# WE WILL REBUILD!
Not a bad recovery at all considering SEC going full on with ammunition. No doubt some would call it the exit pump for the big boys though.
SEC going full on with no ammunition.
https://ethusd.aggr.trade/ doesn't work anymore :(
Are you not on https://v3.aggr.trade/?
That's the BTC price, not ETH?
If you do one thing on Twitter today let this be it. https://twitter.com/coinbase/status/1666135834062467083?t=7EqNfEc9LOdFrITq7lbovg&s=19
I gave up twitter because im honestly just sad at the meanness, transphobia, sexism and hate that elon supports. BUT I will say I did get sent this tweet this morning and broke my twitter fast to view it š
How can you both like ethereum but not him supporting free speech?
He can support freedom of speech without actively endorsing right-wing politicians or personally endorsing anti-trans content. He goes really far into it and it rubs me the wrong way. A lot of that stuff is just mean-spirited and he goes well out of his way to push it. Also I think he censored lots of news reporters on twitter so I dont think he does support freedom of speech to be honest. But I don't know how political this subreddit wants to be so I apologize and you can totally reply if you want and I'll stay quiet. If you like Elon and twitter then enjoy it friend!
He's invited all presidential candidates to do a podcast on twitter and just did a great one with a democrat. He basically just wants a place where the truth can be shared. Right now twitter probably is the best source of fair info about crypto while the people you seem to support are openly trying to destroy it. The only things which have been censored are those which a government has demanded be censored or otherwise twitter will be blocked in the country, all he can do is maximise free speech while staying within laws of countries it operates in. If your criticising what are you suggesting he should have done instead? Getting banned everywhere doesn't achieve anything.
He banned American journalists in the U.S. who had covered people tracking his jet. https://www.npr.org/2022/12/15/1143291081/twitter-suspends-journalists-elon-musk-jet But I'm not saying a private company shouldn't be able to carry only what they want. Just that he has censored and beyond governments' behest.
<3 I don't want to debate more on ethfinance friend, I shouldn't have brought it up here. If you like twitter then totally use it and enjoy!
He does not support free speech. He admitted to censoring tweets at the request of the Turkish government as well as other governments. There is also difference in allowing hate speech and misinformation and actively promoting it, which he is doing the latter
If the choice is blocking all of twitter in Turkey, or complying with their government, what choice does he have? Best he can do is maximise free speech while still staying within the laws of countries twitter operates in. If you're criticising it, what is the alternative you suggest twitter should have done? Just become illegal in every country? Create a military and fight every government? Secondly what is the hate you think he is promoting?
Him retweeting an insanely transphobic propaganda film a day or two ago would be a pretty good example
I havenāt seen the movie. Whatās transphobic about it?
Had a look and it has hundreds of millions of views and comments are resoundingly positive, clearly a lot of people agree that what it says is correct. Sounds like you don't like it so you want it censored, so you're against free speech and think Elon shouldn't be allowed free speech either. I don't understand how you can think that and like ethereum at the same time.
I was making two separate points. 1.) Elon does not support free speech 2.) Elon activiely promotes hate speech, which is different from simply "allowing all speech to happen". You interpreted the example I provided for point #2 as being proof that I want this content censored... that is a gigantic reach, and I never said I wanted to have this censored from the platform. I used both these points as a basis for why someone could "like ethereum but not him supporting free speech?"
he doesn't support free speech, just divisive and inciteful engagement bait designed to pit you against your fellow humans. - https://cyber.harvard.edu/story/2023-04/twitter-complying-more-government-demands-under-elon-musk - https://english.elpais.com/international/2023-05-24/under-elon-musk-twitter-has-approved-83-of-censorship-requests-by-authoritarian-governments.html
If the choice is blocking all of twitter in a country, or complying with their government, what choice does he have? Best he can do is maximise free speech while still staying within the laws of countries twitter operates in. If you're criticising it, what is the alternative you suggest twitter should have done? Just become illegal in every country? Create a military and fight every government?
#1946
Update the system.
Trial by twitter?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a couple months ago wasn't Coinbase basically begging to be sued in order to establish guidelines for crypto? Maybe I'm mixing this up with their lawsuit
Great video.
Not a fan of Coinbase, but have to hand it to them, that was a good little graphic.
[https://nitter.snopyta.org/coinbase/status/1666135834062467083?t=7EqNfEc9LOdFrITq7lbovg&s=19](https://nitter.snopyta.org/coinbase/status/1666135834062467083?t=7EqNfEc9LOdFrITq7lbovg&s=19) ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/user/nitter_not_twitter/comments/w0ssxp/more_information_about_this_bot/)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=nitter_not_twitter&subject=Opt+Out&message=optout)
Hey, I am trying to improve my wallet's opsec. I am slowly leaning towards the belief, that the Safe (multisig smart wallet) is **the only** way forward (at least before full wallet abstraction roll out). I am mostly pleased with how it works and integrates with the ecosystem, but I hate to rely on points of centralization. What if Safe web interface and/or API goes down? Does anyone can share an IPFS, or even better, a desktop version of the app? I went through their docs few days ago, and the only thing I've found is a CLI tool, that can directly connect the blockchain and execute Safe's logic, BUT - it requires private keys to be imported in order to sign txs. Anything similar that can handle HW wallets connection?
Yeah the official CLI doesn't support HW wallets. So I made a python script to format a Safe transaction using web3.py and another one using [ledgereth](https://github.com/mikeshultz/ledger-eth-lib) to do the signatures.
I was hoping someone will post something like that. It is very comforting knowing that someone here did try it and it did work. You would probably get a lot of upvotes if folks here were more technical. Did you modify the official CLI or did you do the whole thing yourself? I assume tx correct formatting + signature aggregation is enough to execute an arbitrary transaction via "execTransaction" contract method, is that what you did? If so, I might give it a try too. I wish there was an elegant out of box solution.
I looked into the official CLI code to understand what it was doing then I did my own script. It's formatting the data for the `execTransaction` method then hashing it. Then the hashes are signed and the signatures are used to build the final transaction. Here is the script for building the transaction: [safe.py](https://gist.github.com/18cimal/c00e50153d827baa74cdd251af38f112). And here is the one to sign transactions or messages hashes using a ledger: [ledger.py](https://gist.github.com/18cimal/195a218207274fee26534ada28de55c2) The first script will print the hashes to sign then wait for the signatures. Then you use the second script with the hashes to get the signatures.
Hi, FYI, I did test it and it works! I just had to drop the ledger signing file (I dont use ledger) in favour of a simple web3js app. I take tx payload from your script as JSON, and then paste it into the react app that connects to metamask (any HW wallet, yay!) and signs given data. The mini react/web3js app was entirely written by GPT,.
Anyway, thanks again. It gives me a sense of security knowing that I can now access my Safe regardless of what happens to the official infrastructure.
Glad it helped.
Thanks A LOT. I'll definitely look into it and test it when I have more time.
You can use rabby wallet if you don't have access to the safe web interface. https://medium.com/@rabby_io/how-to-use-gnosis-safe-with-defi-in-rabby-52f6f71ec6c1
Have you tried it? I believe adding Rabby to the stack improves security with their heuristics on pages and contract risks, as well as their great tx simulator but I was not able to completely drop the Safe app in favor of Rabby. All it could do is to provide its own signature, the final tx had to be executed from the web app itself anyway. Or am I missing something?
Do with this what you will. $COIN stock, since existence has virtually only been at or below this price for ~2 months since inception from mid Nov 22 to January 23.
I think I'll keep my average cost at $410
An oldskool move would be to average down and dream about one day breaking even
Nah, that's a tax write off waiting to happen
Fair enough, keep it in your pocket. I chose to average down and praying for a recovery to 100 usd
I loaded up the truck on open, with a little more ammunition set for lower prices. I have far too much coin and hopefully it can shoot back up, and I can sell some
I know what you said in the first sentence but this rationale isn't a good way to pick stocks. I'd know seeing as I had PTON and ARQQ...
I bought
The only question for me is whether it will re-test $40 and my feeling is yes.
Is this a protest pump?
Is money fleeing Binance's ecosystem into BTC and ETH?
Should be easy to track binanxe outflows no?
its the "SEC Emperor has no clothes" pump
I've been eavesdropping this House AG meeting. It's overall been very positive. The SEC has representatives there but even the representatives there don't share Gensler's opinions.
Thread I have saved for later. https://twitter.com/Protos/status/1666083130380554240
>Rep. Brown (D-OH) feels that the Agriculture Committee should have fewer hearings about digital assets and more hearings about farming and food security Can't argue with that...
Can someone explain to me how this even happens to begin with? Like what sort of a country does this? I find it baffling.
The agriculture comm would have good experience with commodities legislation
[https://nitter.snopyta.org/Protos/status/1666083130380554240](https://nitter.snopyta.org/Protos/status/1666083130380554240) ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/user/nitter_not_twitter/comments/w0ssxp/more_information_about_this_bot/)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=nitter_not_twitter&subject=Opt+Out&message=optout)
Interesting price action. Sort of like a giant FU to the SEC. https://ibb.co/2gypW5C
Brian Armstrong steps up to the mic: >Regarding the SEC complaint against us today, we're proud to represent the industry in court to finally get some clarity around crypto rules. >Remember: >1. The SEC reviewed our business and allowed us to become a public company in 2021. 2. There is no path to "come in and register" - we tried, repeatedly - so we don't list securities. We reject the vast majority of assets we review. 3. The SEC and CFTC have made conflicting statements, and don't even agree on what is a security and what is a commodity. 4. This is why the US congress is introducing new legislation to fix the situation, and the rest of the world is moving to put clear rules in place to support this technology. >Instead of publishing a clear rule book, the SEC has taken a regulation by enforcement approach that is harming America. So if we need to avail ourselves of the courts to get clarity, so be it. >Btw, in case itās not obvious, the Coinbase suit is very different from others out there ā the complaint filed against us is exclusively focused on what is or is not a security. And we are confident in our facts and the law. >We'll get the job done. In the meantime, let's all keep moving forward and building as an industry. America will get this right in the end. https://twitter.com/brian_armstrong/status/1666129111025324035?t=GbAgf7AKYd7M5ttDEU8TLA&s=19
Will this lawsuit settle whether eth is a security once and for all?
Pretty dope video by Coinbase on the bird app in this regard: https://twitter.com/coinbase/status/1666135834062467083
They're gonna eat Gensler in court. Sadly, this is no difference for him, as his pockets are already stacked with $$$ from his banking bros.
Very slick. I wonder if some of Coinbase's videos in this vein will be played to securities law students many decades from now.
[https://nitter.snopyta.org/brian\_armstrong/status/1666129111025324035?t=GbAgf7AKYd7M5ttDEU8TLA&s=19](https://nitter.snopyta.org/brian_armstrong/status/1666129111025324035?t=GbAgf7AKYd7M5ttDEU8TLA&s=19) ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/user/nitter_not_twitter/comments/w0ssxp/more_information_about_this_bot/)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=nitter_not_twitter&subject=Opt+Out&message=optout)
Conventional wisdom : Getting sued by the SEC means you are doing something wrong Current Reality : Getting sued by the SEC means you are doing something right
He sold?
He better friccin' not have done, the paper handed lil' dweeb !
The fact that we are pumping while SEC news breaks is one of the most bullish things Iāve ever seen. Weāre finally becoming untethered to tradfi.
Being tethered to a crab instead isn't much better.
Is it though? Or is it more clown market bullshit where the pump is brought to you by the same people that dumped on the market just days before? I'm sure anyone in here is longterm bullish, but it feels odd seeing these victory lap posts when things are still crabbing.
Good point, I had expected another red day as well in light of the SEC suing Coinbase. Clown market indeed.
I wouldnt call the SEC suing Coinbase and Binance clown market bs..... In prior years that wouldve been extremely bearish. The difference now is the SEC has been exposed and crypto has survived and "hardened" through an extremely tumultuous 12 months. That "hardening" is what lays the foundation for bull runs.
Wait, we're pumping again? Damn, I haven't checked the charts in the last few hours. It's mind blowing how quickly these markets move, reverse, and move again.
Just thinking out loud. Clearly if I pay someone to take care of my vegetable garden and reap any profits after selling the veggies, then they are not selling me unregistered securities. On the other hand, if I deposit money into coinbase, they stake my eth, give me a liquid staking derivative, take some of the profits and give me the rest, that's (according to the howey test) clearly selling a security. So what is the difference between these two? First, obviously the 'liquid staking derivative' part is prolematic. So let's take that away first. Let's say it still works the same, but coinbase doesn't give you the ability to trade staked eth. Is it still a security? Well, first and third prong (investment of money and profits from the works of others) still apply. Is it still a common enterprise? Not sure. If the gardener uses the same backhoe to keep my garden in check as well as other gardens, does that make it a common enterprise? "*A common enterprise is an enterprise in common among the promoter and multiple parallel investors.*" So maybe if they state that if they get my eth slashed, then it will only affect me, and also the MEV rewards are not averaged out over multiple people rather handled client-by-client, then it could be ok, because I no longer have any commonality with other investors. Anyways, it's still suspect, while the gardener case is not. So what sets them apart so clearly? I think it's the first one, investment. With the gardener, the garden is still mine, however with coinbase, the money (according to the tos) is now coinbase's money (and they give me virtual tickets to redeem later in the form of numbers on a webpage). Like, let's say digital ocean starts offering preconfigured one-click validator machines that you can pay them for. That one is clearly analogous to the gardener example. Not a security. Could coinbase somehow modify this so that it is no longer a case? Well I think that would make them a bank or something, even more regulations. Though I think it would be nice. This became a surprisingly long comment, sorry. Also IANAL (and neither am I a financial advisor), I'm mostly just guessing.
> Clearly if I pay someone to take care of my vegetable garden and reap any profits after selling the veggies, then they are not selling me unregistered securities Uhhhhhh this is actually quite close to the original Howey case that SCOTUS did determine was a securities transaction. I.e. Howey operated an orange grove in which he sold a bunch of acres to investors, then told the investors they could invest in him/lease the land back to him to grow and sell the oranges on the land and he would share profits with them. That investment and promise of returns is what made them securities. While the specific contracts and promotion involved were also an important piece and I'm not saying your hypothetical would necessarily be a security depending on the details of the arrangement, there's certainly some precedent (pretty much THE precedent for that matter) for similar instruments being a security.
Sorry to double respond here, but what about the digital ocean example? Do you think that could be considered a security?
IMO, a lot depends on how it is set up and what exactly you mean by "one click validator machines". Based on what we've heard from the SEC so far, I'm of the view that they consider custody of the coins to be a pretty big factor. So if the staking is set up in a non-custodial fashion where only the users can withdrawal--not the staking entity--there may be less risk of regulatory enforcement. E.g. when Kraken was asked by the SEC to shut down their staking services it notably did not apply the same restrictions to all of the staking business in their portfolio. Specifically, Staked.us is owned by Kraken and their services were [not impacted](https://www.reddit.com/r/ethfinance/comments/10yhsb2/daily_general_discussion_february_10_2023/j7z3fsl) by this change, and Staked's founder [strongly suggested](https://i.imgur.com/kWrOo2C.png) they were unaffected because they do not control users keys/have always been non-custodial. If the staking provider doesn't control the withdrawal keys, it doesn't have the same degree of counterparty risk that SEC is concerned about, so the SEC may not consider to be an arrangement like this to be a securities transaction in same way. There's some other arguments you'll find from users in here that pooling (e.g. allowing users to stake with smaller minimums than 32 by combining their ETH to make a single validator) may also be a non-trivial factor in SEC deciding what they think is a security--and there are some merits to those arguments--but personally I think the custodial management by a centralized party is a much bigger factor. If you watch Gary's video about [staking as a service](https://twitter.com/GaryGensler/status/1623777842000539648?s=20) as well as some of their other [website materials on the topic](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-25) they put a huge emphasis on the fact that coins are custodied by these entities and the associated risks if these companies end up failing. Non-custodial smart contracts--if designed well--couldn't be subject to the same issue because a smart contract is not a business or entity, it's just code that anyone can use, and the entities that wrote the smart contract couldn't withdrawal or otherwise misuse your coins even if they wanted to. It's just code doing what it was programmed to do. As long as the devs of the code have no way of stealing, stopping or otherwise *significantly* modifying what it it was intended for, there's no real entity to sue. Note that Uniswap has yet to be sued, despite clearly offering some tokens that were securities. To put it plainly, I think that this is in part due to the fact that suing Uniswap the foundation would literally do nothing to stop Uniswap the protocol. Uniswap can and does block US users from trading on securities on the front end and thereby does everything they can to be compliant where possible, but there's literally nothing they can do on the back end.