limits to cognition and the possibility of things

Read “The SEC’s behind-the-scenes approval of a Bitcoin spot ETF

Yesterday, I accompanied my fiancee to see an orthopedic clinic at a traditional Chinese medicine hospital known for treating orthopedics in this city. The cause of the injury was that she went down the stairs and broke her tail keel (the tail of the spine). After a doctor’s diagnosis and payment, I went to the Chinese and Western pharmacies to pick up the medicine. Both Pharmacies are hospital-owned institutions in the Chinese healthcare system. My fiancee said that the doctor said that there was still a paste of ointment, and I said that all the medicines were picked up because I had been to both the Chinese medicine pharmacy and the Western Pharmacy. How could there have been any omissions? Take the medicine list and consult the nurse guide; if there is a missing medicine, you need an orthopedic outpatient pharmacy.

At this time, I realized the limitations of my own cognition. I thought that the hospital had only one Pharmacy for taking medicines, and large hospitals could have at most two pharmacies—Chinese medicine pharmacies and Western pharmacies. However, there were other pharmacies for taking medicines, which broke this perception. Although it is now considered that the setting is unreasonable, resulting in too many places for patients to take medicines, it is easy to miss the medicines.

There is also this problem with the legal status of Bitcoin in China, whether it is recognized or not. Still, some government departments in China recognize the value of Bitcoin, and some government departments do not. For example, the management of banks, securities and public security, and other administrative departments do not recognize the economic value of Bitcoin, and participation in transactions is invalid. However, the court and other departments will realize the value of Bitcoin and determine the amount of compensation according to the market value of the transaction in legal documents such as judgments.

(Chinese government departments do not endorse Bitcoin value announcements)
(Chinese courts refer to the market value price, and the legal facts recognize its value)

In 1994, former American football player O.J. Simpson’s murder of his wife became the most sensational incident in the United States at the time. This case is a well-known case of the century, and the specific facts of the case will not be elaborated on. According to the legal logic of the Chinese, either kill his wife or don’t kill his wife. If O.J. Simpson kill someone, O.J. Simpson should go to prison and be sentenced to death. If he did not kill his wife, he was returned to his innocence and did not bear any criminal or civil liability….. The result is criminal innocence but a civil liability.

The logic is also incomprehensible to ordinary people. Everyone knows cognition is limited, and they don’t see another possibility. SEC Chairman Gary Gensler probably really doesn’t understand cryptocurrencies. But it may also be that he understands and we don’t. Chinese law is not the same species as U.S. law, Chinese accounting standards are not the same as U.S. accounting standards, and political culture is also very different. We should understand Bitcoin spot ETFs more from his perspective.

The article “Behind the Scenes of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Approval of Bitcoin ETFs” is logical and convincing. However, Gary Gensler will not be so “poor quality”; it is unbelievable. The view that Bitcoin should not be determined by the SEC and that futures are not suitable for Bitcoin have significantly impacted me, subverting my cognition, and I can’t judge who is right and who is wrong.

The article classifies Bitcoin as a consensus asset with different properties from fiat assets. This leads to a different conclusion from Gary Gensler, which is also a problem of “a recognized value and a non-recognized value.” It is more often the case with the inability to use a concept to reach a consensus that is considered reasonable in its respective scope. This is a controversial issue, and interested readers can log on to the no-link website (chainless.hk) to view the original article.

Commented by Peter Pan, who is Loyal reader of zhuweisha

Please follow and like us:
RSS
Follow by Email
X (Twitter)
Visit Us
Follow Me
YouTube
YouTube

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top