Sam Bankman Fried, CEO of FTX said that he was not interested in any discussions that concern crypto policies. In an announcement, he made it clear that he was not interested in any debate on crypto policies. Twitter thread Shared over the weekend
“Take the wheel, Crypto Twitter,” says Bankman-Fried after a heated argument in the comment section of the Twitter thread.
While cryptocurrency users wait for federal regulatory frameworks Bankman-Fried published an assortment of guidelines Digital industry to be implemented in a press bulletin. However, his publication was met by a lot of resistance from key industry figures.
Bankman-Fried is pushing Congress to approve a bill regulating market activity that was introduced in the Senate by Debbie Stabenow, Michigan, and John Boozman, Arkansas. The Commodity Futures Trading CommissionCFTC) would have expanded regulatory authority over crypto exchanges under the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act.
The bill is likely to be harmful to DeFi. It concerns primarily DeFi’s sector of blockchain-based solutions, which seek to enhance finance through the swapping of central middlemen for computer codes.
Bankman-Fried called on Erik Voorhees (ShapeShift CEO) to do what is right, and to make his voice heard in the Twitter thread. He also encouraged everyone to fight for their right to be free, the functioning of the economy, and the enormously scalable power of Decentralized Finance (DeFi).
Oppositions in Blockchain Industry
Not everyone is being criticized by Bankman-Fried for proposing a Crypto policy.
South Korea’s Financial Authorities have, for example, stated that they Opposition Busan City has proposed to offer special regulatory assistance to foreign crypto businesses that set up digital asset exchanges.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, a US government institution, was charged with protecting the financial systems in the event that banks fail. It sent five crypto-related companies including FTX US to the FDIC. Let’s not continue Requesting that they cease making false and misleading claims about the availability of deposit insurance to their customers. This is another model through which opposition can be shown.