Finally someone has spoken out, regulation is not a flood monster, the key is not to follow that formalism.
查看原文回復0
Frontrunner
· 01-17 08:00
這事兒說得在理啊，但真正的問題是誰來定義"sensible"？
查看原文回復0
椰子丝半仙
· 01-16 06:46
就說這話吧，監管不是洪水猛獸，關鍵看怎麼監。有些國家就搞不明白這個度
查看原文回復0
BlockchainTherapist
· 01-15 04:05
這話說得對，但現實呢？監管者根本聽不進去
查看原文回復0
幸存者谬误
· 01-15 04:03
說得沒錯，就是要找個平衡點啊，別一刀切把整個行業搞死了
查看原文回復0
PriceOracleFairy
· 01-15 04:01
nah see the thing is... "light-touch" is such a statistical anomaly rn. nobody actually knows what that means until the sec decides to redefine it at 3am on a friday lol. market inefficiency at its finest, tbh.
回復0
闪电钱包
· 01-15 03:58
就怕監管部門根本聽不進去，還是照著老套路來，最後把整個賽道搞死
查看原文回復0
灰度搬砖工
· 01-15 03:54
Finally someone said it out loud, really don't do that bloated and innovation-killing thing.
加密貨幣行業的矛盾：我們並不是不想有規則，我們希望有合理的監管——那種不扼殺創新，同時又能保護用戶的規範。輕觸式的監管，講得通，而不是以合規為名的官僚過度管理。