News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset, Were Securities. Parent comment

Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by tptacek on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:42PM (#14852131)
Is there some way we can just replace these kinds of threads with a link to some canonical thread about why the concept of security laws is fundamentally unjust or unwise? This discussion really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by sillysaurus3 on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @07:48PM (#14852815)
This discussion really has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

It's possible to veer off-topic in a substantive way. Some of the more interesting HN comments have been spawned that way.

Whether subsequent comments will be high-quality depends on the topic and the amount of energy thrown into the conversation, but fresh perspectives are good as long as people are introducing them productively.

Threads like this shouldn't be auto-collapsed. One of the main reasons people write quality responses in an off-topic conversation is because it will be seen. Take away the eyeballs and you take away the quality.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by PKop on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @08:37PM (#14852976)
Then go somewhere else. Why do you get to declare what is valid as discussion or isn't? If people are engaging in the discussion, obviously they value it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by SolarNet on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:47PM (#14852173)
Because not everyone agrees with you?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by kasey_junk on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:52PM (#14852207)
He's suggesting that arguing whether SEC law being just/constitutional/what have you. Regardless of your position, is largely off topic for these posts.

It would be better to just link to the argument somewhere else than derailing this one.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by SolarNet on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:52PM (#14852210)
Except he implied that the link should have a significant bias. Also there is a collapse button.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by tptacek on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:58PM (#14852255)
It should auto-collapse threads like the one upthread about whether the SEC is fundamentally unjust.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by tptacek on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:49PM (#14852186)
That's an answer to someone's question, but a non-sequitur answer to mine.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by SolarNet on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:50PM (#14852196)
> with a link to some canonical thread about why the concept of security laws is fundamentally unjust or unwise

Because not everyone agrees with that position.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by tedunangst on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @06:39PM (#14852473)
I suspect tptacek is aware that not everyone thinks security laws are fundamentally unjust.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by tptacek on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @05:58PM (#14852247)
You're still not there yet. Replace "canonical thread about" with "link to a debate about".
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:SEC Issues Report Concluding DAO Tokens, a Digital Asset,... by SolarNet on Tuesday July 25, 2017 @08:38PM (#14852980)
I'm quoting you... you are arguing with your own words!
[ Parent | on HN ]