May you elaborate.
I’m scared of this community reaction when a single person pops in with the aura of an expert. Aside of that the regulators and the whole crypto world have very different roots and political views. I’m worried about the whole scene following every guidelines without even putting on a (legal) fight.
I’m not questioning LegalZNN skills or knowledge here, but if crypto wants to carry more of what it was, there’s a need for more thinking about what we want and what we do.
This is a great comment, I’d love @LegalZNN to shine some of his opinion on why this could work, or backfire on a project. And does he have an example of success and failure stories.
@LegalZNN how do you see the long term sustainability of the loophole paths? What’s your outlook on this fight for the industry?
I have to agree with @dat_she_pepe here, regardless of the domain (dev/marketing/etc).
Like every other (big) industry.
Exactly: look at Coinbase now.
Well said, again.
Coinbase has irreparably damaged itself by going against regulators. The only thing we can and should do is to become as ungovernable as possible through decentralization.
In the purely digital sense I agree with this sentiment and Bitcoin fulfilling its fate as the global reserve currency.
But the world is more than just currency and requires interfacing with TradAPIs. Take the notion of “Bitcoin-Powered Network States” from the Zenon Org pages which I’m basically trying to create a version of at build_republic. This requires real estate. Unless we want to live in the metaverse it requires a lot of traditional interfacing.
Zooming out on the Coinbase situation they may have done damage in US but now they are playing jurisdictional arbitrage with other countries like UAE rolling out red carpets for them. It’s the same tactic a BTC miner would move their equipment around for cheaper electricity, Coinbase is instead just shuffling legal teams and jurisdictions for ease of business. CZ/Binance has been playing this game for ages and we all benefit from the service for liquidity.
This could, should, and will likely turn into a long-running debate and challenge but the way forward is going to be in the weeds. As long as we’re matching philosophical alignment with a pragmatic strategy, we’ll get there.
The real estate is still managed and owned by legal or natural persons/entities/DAOs that are subject to laws. But the consensus layer these assets are being transferred by (or where the ownership provenance of assets is being authenicated & recorded) is as trustless as bitcoin and should remain so.
CZ is a persona non grata in UAE and Coinbase has to be careful too because UAE doesn’t want to sour relationships with US over some crypto punks
CZ was in Dubai not so long ago.
So was my bald neighbour. You can take my word for it, it’s my job to know. Or don’t, idc
Why would he be banned from Dubai like hewwo from all alt rights TGs?
Same reason. He didn’t know his place lol
Do you have a source for this? Because really, a few weeks ago he was there.
Even if you’re trustable, you have your own biases.
I think there is room for both point of views, they seem very valid to me. I’m almost never in agreement with Chadasss, but he sounds particularly convincing in his arguments on this topic.
If we follow the bitcoin ethos, we truly care about the principles underpinning the base layer, but the products built on top can (and should) do whatever is necessary to bring them to market in a compliant fashion.
I encourage builders like vilkris to dig deeper and figure out their legal responsibilities. And I equally encourage the chadass type alien who does not want to package our base layer with said legislation and prefer finding the loopholes and workarounds that better fit their believe system.
Zenon should (like BTC) remain agnostic to any specific country legislation.