Featured
Following
4 hours ago•••
01d0bbf9...0d4c replied 4 hours ago
1
6 hours ago•••
Interesting analysis. Two shitcoiner shenanigans in particular:
1. Attack ads against candidates that don't mention crypto at all (and obfuscating the crypto connection by how they named the PACs). This wasn't some broader cultural push either, they would support radically opposed candidates.
2. Mostly supporting candidates that were likely to win anyway
Molly assesses that this was done to impress / intimidate politicians to pay attention to their demands moving forward, even if it's against the interests of their constituents.
A big goal of the industry is to get rid of SEC enforcement against them. Regardless of your opinion about the SEC, I think it's fair to say they're mostly a problem for "crypto", not for Bitcoin. The ETFs are there, that's pretty much all the Bitcoin subset of the crypto industry needs, afaik.
A more relevant goal of the lobby is to deal with unbanking of the industry. But Molly is worried that they want to go beyond that and make the government bail them out next time things implode. Which is also something I expect to happen. Though there's no concrete evidence for this yet. https://youtu.be/06DGU_o8h5A
LOAD OLDER THREADS