The Explicit Choice by the SEC Not to Regulate Crypto
stephendiehl.com
stephendiehl.com
Since many even believe that his own absolute arguments about the 'collapse' of every crypto project, it somehow refuses to completely go away and all of them getting totally shut down. After all these years it is still 'alive'.
But at the same time, not all of these crypto projects will survive in the long term. Not even his own blockchain venture 'Adjoint Inc.' survived either as they shutdown all their commercial projects.
No wonder he not only doesn't want to disclose that failure, but wants to be the most vocal and very absolute critic of the cryptocurrency industry and have it totally destroyed (good luck with that).
The problem is that the only absolute is that there are none and making absolute arguments age very poorly.
Regulating it would have simply confirmed this core, misguided thesis.
Not regulating it provided an expensive but much needed "hands off" teaching experience for the would be anarchists and crypto cultists --- many of whom now hypocritically try to blame government for not protecting them from their own ignorance and misguided distrust.
Regulations exist for a reason. If they didn't exist, one of the first things people would do is re-create them. Without regulation, capitalism quickly degenerates into exploitation. And crypto just proved it.
Learn from the experience --- or not. The choice is yours.
What do people really expect? Corporate bailouts like we do it in the old world?