A question I keep coming back to. What would a supervisor ask for that this cannot currently produce.
Reconstructing a holder position at a past date seems answerable. Archive nodes keep full history.
Proving a transfer satisfied the rules at the time it happened seems answerable too if the rules executed in the contract.
Where I am less sure is anything requiring judgement rather than record. Was this trading pattern suspicious. Did this holder behave in a way that warrants review. Those are questions supervision actually asks and they are not questions a ledger answers.
So the honest position is that this replaces the record keeping half of compliance well and leaves the interpretive half exactly where it was.
That is still worth a great deal. Most of the cost in compliance is reconciliation rather than judgement.
But nobody should describe this as compliance being solved.
what part of compliance do you think technology can actually replace
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
Reconstructing a holder position at a past date seems answerable. Archive nodes keep full history.
Proving a transfer satisfied the rules at the time it happened seems answerable too if the rules executed in the contract.
Where I am less sure is anything requiring judgement rather than record. Was this trading pattern suspicious. Did this holder behave in a way that warrants review. Those are questions supervision actually asks and they are not questions a ledger answers.
So the honest position is that this replaces the record keeping half of compliance well and leaves the interpretive half exactly where it was.
That is still worth a great deal. Most of the cost in compliance is reconciliation rather than judgement.
But nobody should describe this as compliance being solved.
what part of compliance do you think technology can actually replace
@Dusk #dusk $DUSK
