News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups by lawn on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @02:33PM (#18187649)
The obvious difference is transactions without a third party. You can also verify ICO token integrity on the blockchain yourself (via open source apps).
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups by notahacker on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @03:45PM (#18188228)
The obvious question is whether that actually matters all that much for securities, since the broker/exchange adds negligible risk and overhead for the buyer relative to the trust in the public company needed to buy a stake in it and the costs of meeting regulatory requirements for public companies.

Anybody who's more worried by the potential complications of T+2 settlement when purchasing blue chip stocks than the Wild West world of ICOs shouldn't be investing.

Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups by lawn on Thursday October 11, 2018 @04:41AM (#18191835)
That is indeed the right question to ask.

Maybe it's less about trust and more about permission. With token based securities I could trade with whomever I choose whenever I want.

Interesting to see how it turns out in the end.

Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups by asynchrony on Thursday October 11, 2018 @07:23PM (#18197839)
What happens if a trade that is illegal under the law of the country of the seller/buyer/exchange? The courts would be completely powerless to undo the transaction. Again it seems to me the main and only attraction is evading regulation.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups by hndamien on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @06:35PM (#18189552)
And you can maintain custody, so somebody isn't loaning out your shares.
Re:SEC tightens the noose on ICO-funded startups by wiredfool on Wednesday October 10, 2018 @03:53PM (#18188290)
There's a 95% accurate O(1) solution to determine if an ICO transaction has integrity.