>>1441608Where have you been eating where the wait staff kisses your ass apparently? Furthermore, experience can vary. The point of system regulation is to implement a floor to that variance. Markets don't do that effectively when you have an unbounded ceiling, but a very bounded floor.
>on currencyCome back to me when those items can get cashed out. O wait...
>2008Yep. Would never ever happen with bitcoin...except 51% attacks, complexity bomb, etc. And your fascination with cryptocurrencies still completely ignore the fact that financial transactability is a soft power that will be reined in in time. I get you're drinking the kool-aid now, but it will last only as long as it takes for the right tools to be written by nation states for centralized auditing, and also for enough legislative pressure to get applied to entities that host exchanges, which is exactly where the trends are going. You still didn't address the lack of a Market disincentive to shitcoining.
>PEOPLE WONT DO BUSINESS WITH YOU IF YOU DONT HAVE CREDIBILITYLife imitating art, or art imitating life? The world may never know.
>AND OTHERWISE IF THEY DO THAT IS JUST SEPARATING A FOOL FROM THEIR MONEY LIKE A CASINOWhich are regulated, by the way.
>AND IT'S BETTER THAT THE SMARTER PERSON HAS IT BECAUSE THE DUMB FOOL WOULD JUST LOSE IT SOME OTHER WAY.Ah. There it is. Noted. Implied sense of superiority due to everyone else being a sucker, and the world being better off with "non-suckers" calling the shots. So which are you friend?
You're coming off as exactly the type of person that regulation is generally intended to be a hedge against. I have a sneaking suspicion that you may be mentally treating the use of regulatory capture as merely being a manifestation of the will of the Market, seeing as you've not suggested once a remedy to the issue. This is where we diverge. The Market is not Lord of all, but the landscape in which we organize our service offerings to each other.
