Hacker News Reader

Comment by FabHK | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand. If you have regulation, you need people that interpret and enforce that regulation. In other words, you need trust. If your system is predicated on trust, you can dispense with the blockchain that does a lot of unnecessary busy work, and replace it by a few guys with an Excel spreadsheet or two, and regulate them. The environment will thank you.

View on HN

This is such a nonsensical argument. Crypto is a huge space with myriad benefits, which are not negated by having some elements regulated.

For example, perhaps you are in favor of crypto because it is (i) harder for a state to seize or (ii) impossible for a single state to inflate. Those are in part possible because of the distributed decentralized nature of cryptocurrency. Being in favor of those two things does not mean you cannot also be in favor of regulating people that manipulate crypto market by wash trading, in favor of arresting thieves and hackers, in favor of banning insider trading, etc. You can have a system with trustless elements and that still relies on the laws and regulations to enforce certain aspects.

So, you're saying, the government can arrest thieves and hackers, ban wash trading, ban insider trading (and, presumably, enforce that), but cannot ban or seize crypto itself?

I think this is the "have cake and eat it" scenario. Crypto fans want a fresh supply of dumb money into the system to keep their line going up. But also want the more complex scams that might catch them out regulated away.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com