Lawyer for “Blockchain Association” Whines on Twitter About Bitcoiners Not Defending Alts From The Mean Old SEC – Gets Roasted With Logic and Facts – Twitter Thread Worth Reading #Lawyer #Blockchain #Association #Whines #Twitter #Bitcoiners #Defending #Alts #SEC #Roasted #Logic #Facts #Twitter #Thread #Worth #Readingescodelrio
Right here is the tweet that kickstarted the discussion: [https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1630314678168563713](https://twitter.com/jchervinsky/status/1630314678168563713)
Some actually good replies to this and I advocate searching more than the replies, but listed here is a single that stands out:
[John W. Ratcliff](https://twitter.com/jratcliff/position/1630357705410969603):
>I believe you are missing what is really taking place right here. The cypherpunks who developed bitcoin did so acknowledging that it would usually be attacked.
>Enormous engineering work has absent into building the bitcoin community resilient to assault. We stimulate persons to operate their very own nodes. This, by itself, prevented the corporate attack of large blockers. We make positive that nodes can nevertheless operate in excess of TOR. We have the capacity to down load the blockchain from satellites.
>We combat hard to maintain the blocksize down so that we can retain decentralization and maintain bandwidth specifications minimal.
>Our reaction is much more akin to the squirrel who saved up his nuts for wintertime shaking his head at those who in no way bothered to prepare.
>Bitcoiners constantly be expecting attacks and often get ready for them.
>Meanwhile, most of these alt-cash do not have a cypherpunk ethos. They are really centralized. They tough-fork on a constant foundation. Nodes operate on AWS and blockchains are so large no a person absolutely validates them. They have centralized authority figures, foundations, firms, and even advertising and marketing departments.
>We invested a 10 years telling individuals they required to imagine defensively and they all laughed at us, self-assured in their technical superiority.
>This moment is a large “I advised you so”. If the SEC declares bitcoin a protection or the US governing administration declares it unlawful, bitcoiners would not treatment.
>We will address that as just an additional attack to overcome. Perhaps we all just move to El Salvador.
>Or we construct a mesh community to route website traffic.
I'm outdated ample to don’t forget when most bitcoiners thought in financial independence and open up market level of competition.
I can't feel the selection of self-professed bitcoiners now indicating some model of “I'm fine with the federal government picking winners and losers as long as the winner is my bag.”
— Jake Chervinsky (@jchervinsky) February 27, 2023
“Governments are good at cutting off the heads of centrally controlled networks. Pure P2P networks can hold their own” – Satoshi (2008)
[How about, cypherpunks write code in such a way that it is obviously not a security and there is no one to go after? But of course, there are no cypherpunks in the shitcoin industry](https://twitter.com/bamskki/status/1630249340001460224)
This guy Jake works for a shitcoin VC firm. Premine, ICO, VC shitcoins are silicon valley start ups hiding behind bitcoin to escape from silicon valley regulations through intellectually dishonest marketing and information and regulatory arbitrage. They’re a direct attack on the very founding principles of Bitcoin.
The stuff that’s happening with all these coins in cahoots with crypto exchanges today couldn’t be more antithetical to bitcoin. There’s [nothing innovative](https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/10ru70g/comment/j6xx8rr/) about them. It’s the same shenanigans that was happening in bucket shops in the early 20th century which led to the Martin Act of 1921 banning bucket shops and eventually The Securities Act of 1933.
What would you do in a financial market where there are no rules and unethical, dishonest behavior has gone from non existent to being the norm today? Who doesn’t want to print money for themselves without disclosures and [market it to the public as whatever they want](https://twitter.com/coryklippsten/status/1595564120782172160)?
You can have whatever opinion you want about securities law but regardless of whether or not you think securities law is effective or useful in the corrupt legacy system, asking whether or not securities law should apply to “crypto” is not the right question. The right question is whether “crypto” even belongs in the same class as bitcoin and the answer is absolutely not, they couldn’t be any further from bitcoin.
Securities law exists for a very simple reason, asymmetry of information. It applies for ANY investment where there is a group of insiders and outsiders. Every premine, ICO coin has a group of insiders who privately premined and sold tokens, marketed it without disclosures, hold licenses and trademarks, create roadmaps and do hard forks every six months. You’re literally waiting on these companies to unlock your tokens. They have complete control over the “project”. It doesn’t matter if you’re using a scroll, SQL or a blockchain for bookkeeping. If google or amazon issued shares on a blockchain, it wouldn’t make them decentralized.
Yes, some bitcoiners will go as far to say that the government shouldn’t regulate google or amazon stocks. But that’s not going to stop the government from doing so because they can. Bitcoin was built expecting to be attacked. It was built for adversarial environment. People got too comfortable creating centralized hypeware that cannot survive an adversarial regulatory environment.
Satoshi showed you how to do it. No company, foundation, premine, ICO, VCs, licenses, trademarks, branding or marketing teams, official website, code repo or even a formal specification. Bitcoin is not an investment, no one sold it to you. It’s an open protocol built upon 40 years of research to fix money by removing trust in humans, released to the world for free and built from the ground up by us, literally random people on the internet voluntarily supporting, securing and developing it.
None of these tokens have any use at all. What bitcoin solved was not just double spending, which is a problem old as time, but also the problem of counterfeiting money. Creating your own shitcoin is nothing but counterfeit. All you’re doing is trying to get around being unable to counterfeit bitcoin and recreating same old problems that bitcoin fixed and you’re dishonestly marketing it to people as decentralized when in reality the company which issued and sold the coins has complete control over the product.
Instead of building on bitcoin, you’re robbing millions of people shilling gambling contracts and air tokens as “innovation” and you have the nerve to ask bitcoiners to support all your blatant scamming.
> We fight hard to keep the blocksize down so that we can maintain decentralization and keep bandwidth requirements low
Actually, to keep RAM requirements low to keep node cost low, to maintain decentralization. That’s why SegWit is such an effective block size increase. The witness part of a transaction does not need to be cached in RAM
All that good stuff about centralization inviting attack. This is history repeating …
E-gold was founded in 1996, in recognition of the need to make on-line payments in the newly popular Internet. E-gold was centralized, and held real gold in a bank vault in Nevis, equal to the amount of e-gold issued
E-gold became popular. The founders requested guidance from regulators about registering as a money services business. They were told that e-gold didn’t fit the requirements for registration
In May 2007, a U.S. federal grand jury indicted e-gold, accusing the company of money laundering, conspiracy, and operating an unlicensed money transmitting business
At the same time, Satoshi Nakamoto began developing Bitcoin. In view of the fate of e-gold, he realized that any centralized Internet money system would be attacked by regulators. This is the reason Bitcoin is decentralized
The e-gold case was big news. Everybody in cryptocurrency should be aware of it. Every chancer who sets up a centralized Internet money system should know that his fate is the same as e-gold
People who try to lump Bitcoin and cRyPtO together are either ignorant or doing so because their job depends on it ✅
shitcoiners are always “we’re in this together” when government takes action against crypto. but when the government looks the other way crypto like ripple attack bitcoin and beg the government to take action against bitcoin energy fud and other bullshit.
2023 hopefully will be the great flushing the toxic toilet of shitcoins.
Speaking of this, just today, SEC chairman Gary Gensler said Bitcoin can’t be regulated.
Yep! 100% owned !
[Why does this remind me of Antitrust?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0zkD7uOyco&t=260s)
It’s happening. Something is up. All bitcoin maxi should be running a node about now. We need to ensure the utmost decentralization.
Participate in the bitcoin network, or don’t, you are free.
As are we, to concentrate on our own ideas, and not be beholden to the idea we ‘owe’ ‘crypto’ anything. The very concept of regulation is an utter irrelevance to a suitably decentralised, resilient project. Those that are affected by being designated as a security, are not worthy of being saved. Those not affected, need not care.
what a clown. i’m sorry if your shitcoin folded at the first whiff of real government pressure but state resistance is one of bitcoins fundamental selling points
Shitcoins are unethical and it’s just fiat in another form… let that shit die.