Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Two things popped out to me, under the disclosure requirements section:

> c. Digital tokens that are earlier in the life cycle, and not yet decentralized, should have a minimum set of disclosures.

This seems odd to me, because aren't tokens "earlier in the life cycle" full of scams and dishonesty? Shouldn't the disclosure requirements be higher?

> d. Asset-backed tokens, like stablecoins [...] require a different type of disclosure. The disclosures should be appropriate to how they are being used, which is inherently different from money market funds.

Disclosures "appropriate to how they are being used" seems like it could easily be interpreted as "whatever the stablecoin provider thinks is appropriate." In any case, since stablecoin providers promise a specific amount of value in assets for every coin, they should require full transparency to ensure that value actually exists.

Overall, this piece seems like a clear attempt at bypassing regulation, instead of actually trying to obey the existing regulations. The question I have is "what problems do you have with the existing regulations", and I suspect the answer is "because we would be caught doing shady shit."



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: