[notafraudster]

But on a fundamental level you're not describing a technical hurdle, you're describing a social-policy hurdle. Like, wouldn't you agree that if there was policymaker will to make this process more efficient, it could be more efficient without a blockchain?

Suppose that blockchain did not exist but that securities law did not require you to consult securities attorneys to "create the investment opportunity". You would have an efficiency gain by cutting out the attorneys.

In particular I think about your "dream": you dream that in lieu of paying people with a mixture of direct deposit and paper checks, you could pay them with an electronic currency; but presumably at least some of the people being paid with paper checks want to be paid with paper checks (if not, you'd presumably pay them all with direct deposit) and while securities law probably doesn't let you disburse via Paypal or Venmo or any other electronic account transfer, if it did, doing so would be approximately the same as USDC, right?

It seems to me to make a sustainable case for blockchain, you need to basically say assuming the exact same regulatory posture and the exact same degree of technical laziness in terms of automating steps not currently automated, would blockchain make it better?

[peyton]

A standardized set of smart contracts would solve the problem. I think you’re thinking about payment methods.