I think I got the gist in my simplification but nothing beats the original for the clarity. They've highlighted the primary points that hold significance although they mention that these are merely inclusive and not exhaustive. Things will probably becomes clearer in the future as more and more cryptos are put under the scrutiny.
It is for sure a trial by fire and the path for some of the cryptos is going to be rocky but I am really hoping that this'll prove beneficial in the long term
I think Hinman misunderstands the technical fundamentals of ether. Ether is not decentralized if you can point to a single individual wielding as much influence as Vitalik. Anyone remember The DAO? Also he is describing future plans for sharding etc. This drives the value of ether - value from the efforts of another.
Oh that's for sure. They are only accounting for the technicalities and not for the implications of the human perspective on the real market. That's why I keep in mind that they mention the idea of list not being exhaustive. What they really want is a wiggle room for now.
Once they get their act together they can add as much as they need to this and we can even see clauses that might contradict the present ones, resulting in them being altered in the name of congruity. I am hoping that it wouldn't come to this.
I think I got the gist in my simplification but nothing beats the original for the clarity. They've highlighted the primary points that hold significance although they mention that these are merely inclusive and not exhaustive. Things will probably becomes clearer in the future as more and more cryptos are put under the scrutiny.
It is for sure a trial by fire and the path for some of the cryptos is going to be rocky but I am really hoping that this'll prove beneficial in the long term
I think Hinman misunderstands the technical fundamentals of ether. Ether is not decentralized if you can point to a single individual wielding as much influence as Vitalik. Anyone remember The DAO? Also he is describing future plans for sharding etc. This drives the value of ether - value from the efforts of another.
Oh that's for sure. They are only accounting for the technicalities and not for the implications of the human perspective on the real market. That's why I keep in mind that they mention the idea of list not being exhaustive. What they really want is a wiggle room for now.
Once they get their act together they can add as much as they need to this and we can even see clauses that might contradict the present ones, resulting in them being altered in the name of congruity. I am hoping that it wouldn't come to this.
I agree. This is one potential lesson from if ether is determined not to be a security.