Feelings Check-In: Coinbase and Binance lawsuits briefing feat. special guest TuongVy Le, Head of Regulatory & Policy at Bain Capital Crypto

[00:00] Doo doo doo doo doo. [00:03] Oh, we're recording. [00:05] We're in. [00:25] Just boy stuff. [00:26] - Hi. - Hey. [00:28] Big-ass week. Big-ass week. We changed the format of the feelings check-in this week because they're... [00:36] were too many feelings. [00:38] that [00:39] needed to be dealt with in [00:42] light of the regulatory system. [00:44] news environment [00:45] Yeah. Honestly, the feeling was, okay, this is something... [00:49] I need an expert. My feeling is I need an expert. We wanted to invite someone on that could give us a [00:57] explain it like on five and so we could like get our heads around it yeah and for those who don't know two lawsuits happened this week we're going to get into it in the interview but essentially coinbase and binance were sued by the sec this week so we had an expert in [01:13] Come on and talk to us about the regulatory environment. And wow. [01:19] What a wonderful person. What a wonderful woman. Okay, so we had on Chuangvi Lee. She's the managing director and head of crypto policy and regulatory. [01:27] at Bain Capital, which in and of itself,

[01:31] is an incredible credential so impressive previously to working on this side of the fence [01:39] on crypto at crypto uh she at crypto working at crypto [01:44] she was at the sec uh where she served as senior counsel in the division of enforcement she worked on some of the agency's first investigations involving digital assets ton of work with congress the treasury department she is legit with a capital l yeah and also which is just so generous in how she explained the landscape and the environment in a way that was just like really [02:14] So if you've been, [02:15] around the news this week, but not really feeling like you're totally grasping it. This is a great podcast episode to listen to, to kind of get the world of it. Yeah. V was so... [02:25] helpful and kind and also just really measured [02:29] and practical on this is where we're at. These are the areas that are reasonable. [02:35] in her opinion, these are the areas that are [02:38] Unreasonable for the SEC to be going after thinking about and so I really appreciated that because it felt very balanced in the way that she was looking at it and really thoughtful about how can we get to something that. [02:50] is [02:51] better for everybody and real common sense regulation for people who are working in this industry. And the thing that she said at the end that I thought was really great was you can't put the genie back in the bottle. And that's sort of how I feel about the regulatory environment is there's.

[03:06] Too many smart people. There's too much money. We're too far down the line of this thing for us not to get to a place that... [03:15] that works in some capacity. [03:17] You heard it here first. Crypto is too big to fail. Too big to fail. [03:22] Okay, so that's the... [03:25] Episode... [03:26] Please. [03:27] If you like it, [03:29] subscribe. [03:30] and rate and review the podcast. And to all of your family members who are like, wow, so crypto is illegal now. [03:38] send them this podcast and tell them it is not. It is not. [03:48] Welcome to the show, Chuang B. Lee. We're so excited to have you. Hey, guys. It's so fun to be on. We're really excited to have you. And we really, I mean, it was honestly a huge get for Natasha. Yeah. No, stop. The honor's all mine. I was feeling very stressed about what we needed to cover this week. I was like, [04:08] And then when we heard that you would come on, I was like, thank God. Wait, did something happen this week? [04:18] Let's dig into it. You bring a really unique perspective having been a former SEC person, and now you're a crypto person. You have such a unique perspective on what's happening right now, having been on both sides of the fence. So we wanted to start

[04:36] with just how are you feeling? How's it been for you? Do you need a can of meal tea? [04:47] all week and realize like I haven't had time for a feelings check-in so I'm actually just gonna use this session as like a therapy session if that's okay with you guys we would love that just kidding no I feel good I mean [05:00] I feel more motivated than ever. I mean, we're going to keep doing what we're doing, which is supporting entrepreneurs and builders and entrepreneurs. [05:09] working with congress to come up with legislation that's going to create an actual compliant and safe environment for crypto in the u.s so none of that's changed and i [05:20] feel confident that we're going to get there eventually. I don't know how long it's going to take, but I do feel confident that we're going to get there in the U.S., especially because [05:29] If you look abroad, that's the direction that pretty much every other jurisdiction that is working on this is going. Right. And we, you know, the U.S. obviously doesn't exist in a vacuum. [05:39] especially when it comes to this kind of technology which is inherently borderless [05:43] So I think we're going to get there eventually. So I feel good about that. Okay, so love to start off on an optimistic note. For folks that haven't been following what's went down this week very closely, can you give us a briefing? Explain it like I'm five. Where are things at? Yeah, so I mean, I'll just start by saying I don't think any of us were surprised by the events of this week. For those of us who haven't been following who aren't

[06:13] So the SEC brought back-to-back lawsuits against Binance on Monday and then Coinbase on Tuesday. And, you know, they've sued crypto exchanges before, so it's not like it's a first in that sense. But they were always smaller crypto exchanges, like exchanges that most people probably haven't heard of, like Bitrex or Bixi or way back in the day, EtherDelta. [06:35] Poloniex in 2021. But of course, Binance and Coinbase are the big kahunas, right? In fact, Coinbase is a public company, and we can get into that later. But yeah, these were the big ones. So in terms of the specific charges that they brought against these companies, it was mostly what we expected. The SEC is saying that they're acting as unregistered exchanges, brokers, and clearing agents, which are three kinds of functions that are required to be not only registered with the [07:05] securities context, but they're also required by law to be three totally separate functions, like three separate entities. And so that's important actually, right? Because the SEC isn't just saying that they failed to register as these things. They're also saying that it was unlawful for them to be one entity engaged in all three of these things because there could be conflicts of interest and other risks to customers. [07:28] that are present when you're combining those three functions in the traditional securities context. I don't think that's necessarily true in the crypto context. And we can talk about that some more, but that's what the SEC is alleging. [07:38] And then also included in both cases were staking charges. Also not a surprise. They largely mirror the allegations that the SEC brought against Kraken when they shut down their staking service earlier this year. The one takeaway, though, I think from that is that there were questions after Kraken happened whether the SEC would consider any kind of staking service to be illegal. I think after the allegations in Coinbase and Binance this week, it's pretty clear that they'd probably consider...

[08:06] everything short of like self-staking where you're literally setting up your own node to be illegal. And so, yeah, I think these cases just kind of continue the SEC's campaign of enforcement actions against different parts of the crypto ecosystem. You know, in the earlier years when I was at the SEC, it was mostly us going after ICOs, but now they're really focusing more on the intermediaries, [08:36] with these companies to come up with a path to compliance and I think that's unfortunate. [08:42] So yeah, that's what happened this week. Oh man. Yeah. That's why I had to put concealer on before I came on. So one thing that keeps coming up for me is the back to back. [08:56] lawsuits and that feeling really intentional and it seems like there's a real moment that's happening and I'm curious why now why do you think both at the same time does this [09:06] feel politically motivated? Like, what's the intention? That's such a good question. I mean, I can't speak to the motives of the timing, but it feels like [09:15] There was some, it was calculated to some degree. Not only did the Coinbase case drop on the same day as a major congressional hearing, [09:25] where this committee, this subcommittee in Congress, is actively considering legislation to regulate the crypto markets. [09:32] Not only did it happen on the same day as the hearing, one of the witnesses in that hearing is the chief legal officer of Coinbase itself.

[09:40] So, yeah, so I think maybe it was designed to steal his thunder a little bit, which I think it did. Right. I mean, all of the headlines you saw that day and the next day were all about [09:50] these major enforcement actions that the SEC brought. I didn't see anything really about [09:55] this major congressional hearing, which is unfortunate because it was a really interesting hearing. It was to consider some very important legislation, some really thoughtful and I think sensible legislation that was just introduced. So, but yeah, I mean, I think it kind of just underscores like the two big things that are happening at the same time right now, right? So the SEC continuing to bring enforcement actions and then at the same time Congress is actively working to [10:22] to draft and pass laws that would create like some kind of new regulatory framework for tokens, for crypto platforms to come into compliance. And it's actually it's so interesting because this was not always the case, right? So if you look at a lot of [10:37] what the chair of the SEC, Gary Ginzer, if you look at a lot of what he was saying [10:42] last year. [10:43] he was he's singing a very different tune now right so last year he told congress that the sec actually needed additional authority to go after crypto because right now the securities laws have a lot of regulatory gaps meaning the sec doesn't currently have the power to go after certain things like crypto exchanges and then he also said he'd be open to using the sec has what's called exemptive powers which allows them to exempt things like securities things like a crypto exchange

[11:13] the power to create special laws for things like that if they find that the existing securities laws don't work, right? So they've done this in the past for things like asset-backed securities. They've done it for things like alternative trading platforms, which are different than exchanges and brokers. They created new regulations to accommodate these innovations in the capital markets. So he said things last year that showed that he was open to using these special powers to create [11:42] tailored regulations for crypto, recognizing that maybe because of the technology, because of the way that digital assets are different from securities in terms of the way that they're issued and traded and custody and things like that, he'd be open to creating special regulations. But now it's so wild, but he's saying now that no new authority is needed. [12:02] The securities laws are crystal clear. They always have been. And they apply to all of crypto, basically. I know we can't get into the psyche of this man, but is it like, what's the... [12:15] What's the talk on the streets about why he's left? Do you think there was like public opinion more broadly shifted? Is that? Yes, absolutely. I think it's kind of undeniable, right? And it's not just him. Even Congress and the White House and the other regulators were much more open minded about crypto last year and really interested in creating a new framework. [12:39] for crypto, not just to allow for innovation to happen, but also to address the very real risks that exist in crypto. But that was all last year. And then, of course,

[12:48] All the crazy stuff happened starting, I would say, with Terra Luna. [12:52] and then culminating in FTX. All of that stuff happened, and it understandably, I think, caused [12:59] many Democrats in particular, but like I was saying, also the White House, Treasury, certainly the SEC and the chair, the banking regulators, etc., to be skeptical, if not just outright hostile. [13:12] to crypto. You were not really hearing this last year, but now you have people saying, [13:17] Crypto is so dangerous that it should just be banned. And to even consider that we would pass legislation to keep customers safe, [13:25] would be like legitimizing the industry and we should just let it burn because it's that dangerous. And so no one was saying that last year really. And now you actually have people in Congress calling for that, which I think is completely irresponsible and [13:39] and reckless. But that's, I mean, it has changed quite a bit. And yes, I think it was because of things like FTX and the other bad events of last year. So just a question on like logistics. So the bill that was introduced on Friday, that is not perfect, but I understand to be like a positive step forward in trying to bring some sensible regulation to what's happening. Yeah. So that's an [14:03] Congress and there's some hearings that are happening around that now. And then the SEC is over here doing this thing. The right hand definitely isn't talking to the left. If this other bill goes through. [14:11] through first? Does that have implications to the SEC's case? How do these things work together, if at all? Yeah. I mean, the way that it's working right now is that a regulator like the SEC, and just like any administrative agency, they're only allowed to act within the bounds of, you

[14:27] the laws that Congress passes, right? And so a lot of times these laws are broad and flexible. So like the federal securities laws, which were passed in the 1930s and 1940s, they were designed to be flexible so that the SEC could keep up with, I don't know, innovations in technology, different innovations in the capital markets. I mean, the SEC was largely able to keep up with [14:57] Thank you. [14:58] trading stocks using paper certificates to largely online trading. And the securities laws were able to adapt to that for the most part. And there have been instances where they've had to create special regulations for things like asset-backed securities and alternative trading schemes. But for the most part, the securities laws were written pretty flexibly. [15:17] And so the SEC, they are free to interpret the securities laws [15:21] to encompass something like tokens or crypto exchanges, if that's how they're reading the law and if that's how they're reading a case like Howie, which is a [redacted address] case that said that an investment contract is a type of security and it defined how you determine if something is an investment contract. [15:43] which is one of the enumerated types of securities in the securities laws. So, you know, it's free to apply how we have it thinks that that applies to a certain kind of asset, like a digital asset. And that's what it's done, right? And so it's free to continue doing that until a...

[15:59] a court says that it's wrong, which could happen. Right? A court, you know, the Ripple case, for instance, is ongoing right now. And the judge could very well say, [16:10] we disagree with your application of Howie in this case, or we disagree that the securities laws cover something like crypto tokens. [16:20] you did not have the authority to bring this case. You just don't have jurisdiction over these crypto assets or you're interpreting your authority incorrectly, right? So that's one thing that could happen, is that the courts could stop them. The second thing that could happen is that Congress could pass a law to say, [16:35] actually, this is how the securities laws should be interpreted, meaning the way that the SEC has been interpreting it has been wrong. Or maybe they have been interpreting it right, but guess what? We're going to change the law so that the SEC can't interpret it that way anymore. And so the bill that you just mentioned, the market structure bill, that bill is interesting. I mean, it's like 160 something pages long, but it actually does a combination of those things. So one, it clarifies [17:05] cannot continue to interpret it in that way. And then the second thing it does is it creates completely new law. [17:12] meaning it gives... [17:14] in some cases the CFTC, in some cases the SEC, totally new powers. [17:19] to do certain things with respect to crypto right so one thing that the law would do is it would say you know what we're going to say that spot markets in crypto so basically like what coinbase offers is in exchange for people to buy and sell crypto we're going to create a new market and allow the cftc to regulate that market for for crypto trading so that doesn't exist right now right now okay right now the cftc doesn't have power to regulate crypto spot market trading but this new

[17:49] I'd say. [17:50] For much of crypto trading, the CFTC is allowed to create something called a digital commodity exchange and companies like Coinbase, like Binance would have to register with the CFTC and then they'd be able to allow trading or to offer trading in these crypto assets. [18:07] in a legal way. And why [18:09] is... [18:11] a scenario where the CFTC is regulating these exchange exchanges, [18:15] better or more advantageous than the SEC regulating these exchanges? I think the hope is that, well, so just looking at what the SEC is doing, right? They're telling Coinbase and Binance, what you guys are currently doing is not compliant. What that doesn't do is tell you, okay, well, how can we offer crypto trading in a compliant way? They haven't said how you could do that. And Coinbase has been talking to the SEC for over a year about, [18:45] us you don't like our current models. So tell us what we need to do to come into compliance. How can we still offer crypto trading in a form that resembles like crypto trading, meaning real time settlement, not having to wait three days or two days for trades to settle, not having to [19:03] break ourselves up into like a separate broker and exchange and clearing agent when it's not clear what risks that would mitigate or address. The reason that separation exists in the traditional securities context is because you can have conflicts of interest that could hurt customers, right? But if a crypto exchange is acting as the broker and the exchange, essentially, which is what most crypto exchanges do, they take custody of the customer assets. That's one of the reasons they're able to do real time settlement.

[19:33] The reason why you don't necessarily need that separation in the crypto context is because the same conflicts of interest don't exist. Right. And so that I mean, the SEC hasn't really addressed that they haven't addressed at all, like how crypto exchanges are different, how digital assets are different and why the existing securities framework just doesn't work. Can you explain a little bit how they are different? [19:57] Yeah, so I mean, there's so many differences between how crypto is issued, traded and custodied and cleared in the crypto context versus the traditional securities context. One of the things is what I just mentioned, which is digital assets trade differently just by virtue of the technology, right? As you guys know, you can trade crypto 24/7, 365 days a year, whereas [20:20] on a traditional securities exchange or through a broker, there are very limited trading hours. [20:26] You know, for traditional securities, another way it's different is in order to trade through an exchange, you have to do it through an SEC and FINRA registered broker. With digital assets, this isn't necessary because you can conduct trades directly without the need for an intermediary. And if you force crypto into the same traditional securities mold, you just lose out on real time settlement. [20:44] without it being clear, like I said, with what risks you're trying to address exactly. As long as the crypto exchange isn't engaged in things like market making or anything that could create a conflict of interest with its customers, FTX and Alameda did that. Right, right. Alameda was a market maker for FTX and clearly we saw the conflicts of interest that can arise there. But Coinbase doesn't do that. And so it's not clear what forcing them to separate into a broker and an exchange, like what risk that would actually address.

[21:13] The way that I'm understanding it is the Catholic church versus the Christian church. Like the Catholic church, you have to go through a priest to talk to God. And Christian church, you're like, you're direct to the guy, direct to the source. Yeah, I love that analogy. I'm going to start using that when I talk to lawmakers. I'm like, okay, I'm getting it. No, that's basically right. I mean, it's kind of a funny analogy, but I think it's actually really apt. So I don't know if you guys caught, there was this market structure hearing this week. [21:43] Thank you. [21:43] And one of the witnesses at the hearing was Dan Gallagher, who himself is a former SEC Commissioner, but he's now the CEO of Robinhood. They're an online SEC registered broker dealer. So he was asked in this hearing, well, you guys are an SEC registered broker dealer. Like, can't you just move your crypto over to your registered broker entity and let your customers trade them there? And he said no. [22:06] the current regulations don't allow crypto assets to trade alongside traditional securities. And also, so it's not just the regulations that don't allow that, the infrastructure is also not there, right? So in order to allow their customers to trade crypto, they've had to set up like a separate entity. And he said they've worked for six, so I didn't know this, but he said they've worked for 16 months with the SEC to get what's called a special purpose broker dealer license that would

[22:36] And the SEC basically said no. So, you know, this idea, this thing that you hear from, from Gensler a lot that you can just like come in and register and that no special accommodations need to be made for crypto is just, it's not true. And I thought, [22:51] I thought the Robinhood CEO did a really good job of expressing that. I think the other way that the existing securities laws really don't work [22:59] for crypto is when it comes to custody and clearance and settlement. Right. So like crypto exchanges, like I said, typically what they'll do is they'll store the crypto in in wallets and then they control those wallets with a private key. That's one way that they take custody of customer. [23:15] assets? [23:16] Again, this is how they're able to offer things like real-time settlement in a safe way. And Coinbase does this, and it's regulated by many states, including New York, to be able to take custody in a way that's really safe. In traditional finance, the exchange doesn't [23:30] take custody they don't transfer they don't clear right so it's totally different and that's why it's one of the reasons it takes like two days or more to actually affect a trade it's also necessary in the traditional securities context because it's it's designed to make sure that the ownership change is properly registered that the funds and assets are kept safe and that they're transferred and an ownership transferred and it's recorded and things like that that's why intermediaries like so many intermediaries are required in the traditional securities context [24:00] necessary just because of how digital assets trade and are custodied on a blockchain, right? So I think that's actually just another really important example of how crypto is really different. Crypto trading is really different than traditional securities trading and why it needs special accommodations and special regulations to allow it to continue to function safely. One thing that we haven't touched on at all yet, and I know we have just a couple minutes left,

[24:30] in these cases in both the Coinbase and the Binance case. My understanding is that it's kind of an indirect. I don't quite understand why that has happened the way it's happened. But I'd love for you to talk a little bit about what that means for these companies. [24:44] tokens, blockchains, projects, I don't know what we want to call them. And what [24:48] happens to the people that are holding those and [24:51] What's the sort of roadmap there? [24:53] So this is actually... [24:55] A frustrating tactic that the SEC has used right where they will sue. [25:00] an exchange or they'll sue an individual like for insider trading or something like that. And then as a part of the complaint, they'll allege that [25:08] "Oh, these 12 or 13 tokens, by the way, they're unregistered securities." Without naming those token issuers as parties in the litigation, [25:18] themselves, right? And so that's really frustrating because [25:21] The token issuers obviously are not defendants in this case, and they don't have a real way to defend themselves, yet they still suffer the consequences of being accused of [25:31] being unregistered securities, right? So the market will react to these actions, even though these tokens aren't parties in the actions and they're not themselves being sued by the SEC. I mean, it's an unfortunate way. [25:43] to go about it. I don't know why in the cases this week against Coinbase and Binance, why they chose the particular [25:51] tokens that they did. I mean, it seems like they just went after some of the pretty large market cap ones, the major layer one and layer two blockchains like Matic and Nier and Cardano. And I mean, notably not ETH, although who knows, like that could be coming. I don't really see, just based on the Howey analysis that's in these lawsuits we've seen, I don't really see a principal difference between some of these tokens and Ethereum. And so, but you know, they haven't

[26:21] alleged that ethos is security to date but yeah i'm not sure how they landed on these 12 or 13 tokens in particular but they're the big ones but this is part of the problem with regulation by enforcement right is that like [26:34] you're just sort of left to divine what the rhyme or reason is behind these actions. And it just causes so much [26:42] chaos and confusion in the markets, which is the opposite of what the SEC should be doing. One thing that I'm seeing is because these lawsuits happening back to back and [26:52] all happening in the same moment. It's sort of the story, the headlines, press, it's all getting wrapped into sort of one moment in crypto. And I think that could be very dangerous for a number of reasons. But the story around Binance and Coinbase and CZ personally, like all of these things are packaged now from a media perspective into one thing that's happening. And so I'd love to get your perspective on... [27:17] how you feel about that and if you think that's dangerous and how sort of distinct you think these different lawsuits are. [27:25] Like I said, a lot of the charges [27:27] in the lawsuit were not particularly surprising. Acting as an unregistered exchange and broker and clearing agent, that's the same sort of charges they've brought against smaller exchanges [27:39] before it's what we expected them to bring against finance and coinbase i think some of the interesting parts of those cases are you know in the binance case they're accusing cz of misusing

[27:53] like 12 billion dollars of customer funds right so i mean they definitely do not allege that in a coinbase case but they allege it in the binance case and that just has echoes of ftx all over again [28:03] So that's one thing that I thought was really notable. The other thing that's really interesting about the Binance case is that they're asking for all sorts of temporary and preliminary injunctions. So all that means is they're going to court to ask the court to allow them to basically seize [28:19] and freeze assets on the Binance platform, both Binance US and Binance International. And they're doing that because they think that there's basically an imminent [28:30] danger of those funds being lost or customers being harmed right so they they have to show that [28:36] in order to get that sort of emergency relief from a court. So they're not asking for that in Coinbase. They're asking for that in Binance because I think they are worried about what's going to happen to the assets on the platform. So that's one really notable thing about the Binance case. Something that I think was notable and somewhat unexpected in the Coinbase case, at least for me, was they're alleging that Coinbase's self-hosted wallet offering, [29:06] connect [29:07] to a decentralized exchange like Uniswap so that they can trade on the DEX. They are alleging that that self-hosted wallet offering was an unregistered brokerage [29:17] service. So that's really surprising because I think that's the first time the SEC has alleged that a self-hosted wallet

[29:24] is an unregistered broker essentially right and so potentially they could go after all sorts of self-hosted wallets for acting as unregistered brokers so those were sort of the things that surprised me in the cases the staking and the other unregistered exchange broker clearing agent i think we were all expecting that [29:40] So I thought those aspects of it were pretty interesting. And then, of course, the tokens that they chose to go after. Big week. Yes. And, you know, I am just, I'm expecting... [29:51] more to come, so... [29:53] you know, buckle up. We'll get through it. I mean, it feels like a really... [29:59] dark time, but you know, I'm [30:01] I'm really encouraged. It's funny, like you're I'm on crypto Twitter just as a part of my job. I have to be. And it's I feel like there's like two parallel universes. Obviously, I follow a lot of my lawyer and policy friends in crypto and everyone's freaking out and frustrated and pissed and and just trying to figure out like what all of this regulatory action means, like what's happening in Congress. How's that going? And then on the other side, there's the developers. It's it's our portfolio companies that I follow. It's the entrepreneurs. [30:29] And they're obviously paying attention to what's going on, but then they're talking about intents and account abstraction and like all this other stuff that stuff they're working on day in and day out in that. [30:41] It's kind of like a reminder that [30:44] Thank you. [30:45] you can't really stop innovation people are going to keep building and innovating and working on you [30:52] cool like technology and

[30:54] the world is sort of moving on [30:57] whether or not we get our act together on the regulatory and legislative side. And the rest of the world is moving on. The EU is passing sensible legislation, the UK is headed in that direction. So many parts of Asia are doing the same. And so [31:11] I think the message for me this week is that [31:13] everything's on fire in a way, but like the world is, is moving on too. And you can't, [31:19] You can't stop innovation and you can't put the genie back in the bottle. So I think for me, that's been really encouraging. I think the flip side of that is, yes, and those entrepreneurs could continue to be doing that innovation in places like Hong Kong and the UAE and places where there's friendly or crypto regulations. Yeah, that's exactly it. I love a helpful note, though. One other thing. What do you think the timeline will be? [31:42] Like, I look at this and I'm like, okay, more than two years, this will settle out. Yeah. But I wonder if that's the wrong way to be thinking about it. I actually don't think that's a crazy timeline. The EU just passed MECA, like I think, like a few weeks ago. So it's going to start to be implemented in 24, 25. And there are a bunch of pieces of draft legislation floating around on the House side, at least. Things are quieter on the Senate side, I think in part because they're waiting to see what happens [32:09] if something eventually gets passed out of the House and then moves on to the Senate. But they're talking to each other. [32:15] and they're trying to get on the same page. I think the key is going to be to get as many Democrats on board [32:21] as possible. I think the Republicans are somewhat more unified in supporting the need for crypto regulation. Some of the Dems have been very vocally anti-crypto. I don't know if we're going to ever get them to move to our side, but there are a lot of Dems that are sort of keeping an open mind, waiting to see what the new legislation looks like, waiting to see how it shapes out. I think it's going to be really key to get them on board. But as far as timing, I mean, it's so,

[32:48] unpredictable as you know when it comes to anything having to do [32:52] with congress right and then of course we have a presidential [32:55] election [32:57] next year. Fun times ahead. Yeah, which is going to, I think, change the dynamic a lot as well. So it's just, it's really hard to say. I hope we at least get something like stablecoin legislation passed by the end of this year. I think, [33:10] Thank you. [33:11] Payment stable coin legislation is something that's relatively, I don't want to say simple, but it's much more straightforward than regulations that cover the entire crypto ecosystem from token issuers to every kind of crypto platform to DeFi to all of that. Right. So I think the key is to just not bite off more than we can chew and just focus on some of the basic customer protections that we can do. And hopefully that will sort of speed things along. But the key is to get more Democrats on board. [33:37] and open to creating safer regulated crypto markets in the US, which it's hard. I think it's going to definitely be an uphill battle, but I'm really optimistic that we're going to get there hopefully within the next two years. So if you want a number, that would be my prediction. Okay. So everyone who's listening, get out your pens and papers, start writing to your democratic delegates. Exactly. Get involved. [34:03] talk to your Congress members. It makes a difference. It really does. Amazing. All right. Well, thank you so much for your time. I know it's a hugely busy week for you. This was actually very therapeutic for me. Oh, good. I'm so glad. Same. Honestly, same. Thanks so much for having me on. Yeah, for sure. Thanks for coming on.

[34:26] Okay, since we didn't have any deep dive into personal feelings, we're going to do an extra draft tweet here. So do you want to go first? [34:33] You go first. [34:34] Okay. [34:36] Oh. [34:36] I want to go about my life with the confidence and smugness [34:41] Oh, wait, there's a typo. Okay. I want to go about my life with the confidence and smug attitude of a buyer at Buffalo Exchange. [34:52] They are... [34:55] They are so rude. Mean. Mean. And like... [35:02] I get there and I'm like, [35:04] You have all the power over me right now. All of it, all of it, head to toe power. And you are wielding it left and right. And I'm just like, wow, if I operated in the world with that. [35:15] attitude and confidence, um, [35:18] a lot would open up for me. A lot would get done. Yeah. So I feel like there's more that could happen in that tweet. Like, [35:25] It's not exactly there. [35:27] It could be Buffalo Exchange. It could be Crossroads. I haven't really gotten to it. You got to keep marinating that one. [35:33] Exactly. I think there's something there. I think there's something there. Oh, thank you. I think in fairness, they have to deal with a lot of riffraff. [35:39] a lot of riffraff but i'm like i'm not riffraff i'm not they don't know that [35:44] My clothes are like clean and folded and like I'm showing up caring for them and that is not reciprocated. [35:51] Okay. How much money did you make? Don't even talk to me about it. $26. I was going to guess right there.

[35:58] Oh my gosh. Okay. [36:02] What's going on with you? Okay, I have one that I did not end up sending. Me, after one, [36:08] One in parentheses. [36:09] uh brunch cocktail time to email an ex-girlfriend and spend 250 dollars on a balayage yeah [36:16] True story. [36:18] absolutely shoe story that's so funny oh man you know that famous the the song of the summer right now too [36:28] It's like one margarita. So it's very topical. [36:35] All right. On that note. Okay. Bye. [36:40] Dina, where are we going to be in September? We are going to be at Permissionless in Austin, Texas. Permissionless too. It's happening. And we're curating the culture track for the conference. So if you're into the stuff we talked about here, you should come and have a good time with us. So email your boss, tell them that you need to go and buy your ticket now. They will never be as cheap as they are today. And we also have a promo code in our discord for a Boy Scout member. [37:05] come hang in Austin friends [37:10] This is where we make an ask. We're in our call to action era. It's CTA times. Rate and review this podcast. Subscribe to our newsletter. And if you're feeling extra generous... [37:23] Send it to one friend. Thank you for listening. We love you. Bye.