https://warpcast.com/vitalik.eth/0xda1c0058"The main challenge with crypto regulation (esp in the US) has always been this phenomenon where if you do something useless, or something where you're asking people to give you money in exchange for vague references to potential returns at best, you are free and clear, but if you try to give your customers a clear story of where returns come from, and promises about what rights they have, then you're screwed because you're "a security". The incentive gradient that this "anarcho-tyranny" creates ends up worse for the space than either plain anarchy _or_ plain tyranny.
I would much rather see us move to the opposite situation, where issuing a token _without_ giving a clear long-term story for why it will maintain or increase in economic value is the riskier thing, and if you _do_ give such a long-term story and follow basic best practices then you're safe. Actually getting to this will require good-faith engagement, both from regulators and from industry."
__
I will refrain from commenting for now, because on the one hand the thoughts are very simple, but on the other hand they are not entirely simple.
