Reddit Posts
Mentions
tldr; Seba, a crypto bank based in Switzerland, has received approval-in-principle (AIP) from Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) for its regional subsidiary. This approval is the first step towards obtaining a full license for Seba Hong Kong to deal in crypto and virtual assets-related products as well as traditional securities. The approval is part of Hong Kong's efforts to attract firms to the region under its new regulatory regime. Seba already holds licenses in Switzerland and Abu Dhabi, and the AIP from Hong Kong significantly expands its global regulatory footprint. Seba was founded in 2018 and became the first digital asset company to receive a license from the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) in 2019. It has raised nearly $250 million for global expansion, including a recent Series C funding round of $119 million. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Try our free crypto chatbot at https://chat.coinfeeds.io*
tldr; Switzerland-based crypto bank Seba has received approval-in-principle (AIP) from Hong Kong's Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) for its regional subsidiary. This marks the first step towards acquiring a full license for Seba Hong Kong to deal in crypto and virtual assets-related products, as well as traditional securities. The approval is seen as an extension of Seba's global regulatory footprint, which already includes licenses from FINMA in Switzerland and FSRA in Abu Dhabi. Seba aims to support the responsible growth of the digital assets industry in Hong Kong, aligning itself with the government and financial regulators. The SFC has not yet commented on the approval. Seba was founded in 2018 and became the first digital asset company to receive a license from FINMA in 2019. It has raised nearly $250 million for global expansion, including a recent Series C funding round. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR. Try our free crypto chatbot at https://chat.coinfeeds.io*
>Arbitrum will use ARB for their validators (and Orbit) What AIP establishes this?
tldr; Offchain Labs has launched BOLD (Bounded Liquidity Delay), a permissionless validation protocol for Arbitrum on Ethereum. BOLD aims to enhance the capabilities of Optimistic Rollup chains and settle states more efficiently. It introduces a fixed upper bound of 7 days on confirmation delays, making the validation process more secure and resistant to denial-of-service attacks. BOLD supports efficient all-versus-all disputes and ensures that a single honest party can prevail against malicious claims. The protocol has undergone a meticulous audit and the code and research specification are available on Github. Offchain Labs plans to release instructions for running an Arbitrum Nitro devnet with BOLD challenges enabled and prepare an AIP for the DAO to decide whether to adopt the protocol. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
tldr; Arbitrum has activated support for the account abstraction endpoint on its One and Nova mainnets. This activation follows the successful passage of AIP-2, which aimed to activate support for a new RPC endpoint called eth_sendRawTransactionConditional. This endpoint addresses an issue related to the validation and execution of bundled transactions for submission to an alternative mempool. The activation of this endpoint is expected to enhance the efficiency and security of Layer 2 transactions on Arbitrum, aligning with the broader Ethereum ecosystem. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.*
I'm saying that AIP-1 explicitly says it doesn't work that way. I'm only suggesting reasons why it might be that way. I thought that was what you were asking.
You're talking about giving some deployed process control over the funds. I'm saying that's the thing that the regulators ought to insist "no! you must not." Anyone can do it. And who exactly is it we're supposed to call as the custodian responsible for the funds then, when nobody is required to facilitate these tx? The Foundation exists to protect the foundation's assets from bozos like you (no offense) who think that "anyone can do this" – now bear with me, I'm not trying to chide at you. It's literally true that anyone can do this (anyone can fund the wallet for the sequencer, it is a public account number and Ethereum nor Arbitrum won't stop us), but not just anyone can access funds of the foundation. Are you suggesting that anyone in particular should set up the automated tx from their personal funds? Or do we hook it directly up to the master wallet of the Arbitrum foundation? Then won't it be true that anyone who compromises whatever mechanism you just suggested... can have access to the funds? It seems frankly that not just anyone can write such a process, it should be written by the most qualified experts available if it can even be constructed safely, which is not given. And the Arbitrum foundation had to launch before it was practical to compile such a team of experts, so I guess that's how we got AIP-1. I'm not really trying to call you a bozo. Nobody liked AIP-1, and everyone was asking the same question at the time. "But why do we need to trust them? Who are they? I don't want to trust them." I'm with you on this!
I think it has to be done manually because nobody wants to give the keys to the Arbitrum Foundation's treasury directly to the DAO and just trust the robot is infallible. There might be an attack that can drain the sequencer one day, and having a manual control (rather than a direct drip from the reserves) turns out to be important to prevent the attacker from successfully siphoning reserves out of the treasury? IDK, but the Arbitrum foundation definitely has a treasury, and they have manual control and command over it. (We knew that since AIP-1)