[JumpCrisscross]

> Gensler declined to say whether or not Ether is a security in front of congress

Whether Ether is a security is irrelevant to this case, based on an investigation which pre-dates Gensler’s term at the SEC, which is about whether Coinbase is required to register and operate as a securities exchange on account of having traded e.g. Solana. The entire argument obsessing over his refusing to come to conclusions until facts are established reminds me of creationists picking a tiny, side element of scientists’ arguments and then spending their entire time arguing with themselves over a point with zero germaneness.

[jbverschoor]

Coinbase already has a license, but they're not using it. If it's not even clear what a security is, why would you register as a securities broker/exchange?

[JumpCrisscross]

> If it's not even clear what a security is, why would you register as a securities broker/exchange

False condition. The SEC has made it clear that various crypto, e.g. Solana, are securities. If you want to trade those, you must register. Again, if you just want to cash trade Bitcoin and Ether, the SEC has shown zero inclination of messing with you.

[shawabawa3]

I can only find a source from 2 days ago that says the SEC claims Solana is a security.

Before that afaik the only cryptocurrency the sec had explicitly said was a security was XRP which coinbase delisted

[JumpCrisscross]

In 2017, the SEC issued the DAO Report [1]. It—together with guidance around ICOs—made the status quo per the SEC super clear. Investigations and enforcement take time, but the rules of the game were known; the industry had been working to change the status quo.

If you want to know whether something is legal or not, you talk to a lawyer or (less reliably) law enforcement. When Coinbase asked the SEC if it needed to register, without—to my knowledge—exception, it said yes.

[1] https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdf