基于Solana的DeFi平台Mango Markets起草了与美国证券交易委员会的结算条件提案

币界网Published on 2024-08-22Last updated on 2024-08-22

币界网报道:

基于智能合约平台Solana(SOL)的去中心化金融(DeFi)平台正在起草一份与美国证券交易委员会(SEC)达成和解的提案。

在一项新的社区提案中,芒果市场(MNGO)的去中心化自治组织(DAO)投票决定与美国证券交易委员会达成和解,尽管监管机构尚未正式指控去中心化交易所(DEX)协议犯有任何罪行。

然而,在2022年加密货币交易员Avraham Eisenberg利用该协议获得1.1亿美元后,美国证券交易委员会和其他联邦机构对芒果市场展开了调查。

根据Mango DAO的说法,美国证券交易委员会指控他们违反了1933年和1934年《证券法》中的几项条款。

DAO继续表示,如果被美国证券交易委员会接受,和解将包括233228美元的民事罚款,以及一项停止“通过美国州际贸易手段或工具根据协议提供、销售或转售MNGO代币的协议”

此外,该协议将同意在美国证券交易委员会接受条款后10天内销毁或以其他方式使其拥有的所有MNGO代币不可用。

“为了解决美国证券交易委员会对DAO的指控,本提案授权担任DAO代表的CyberByte sp.z.o.o代表DAO向美国证券交易委员提出具有约束力的和解建议,其中包括支付民事罚款、禁令救济和承诺,代表DAO执行和解文件,并在美国证券交易委接受的情况下执行和解要求的承诺。

作为和解提议的一部分,DAO不会承认或否认美国证券交易委员会的指控。”

艾森伯格在2023年被指控并随后被判犯有商品欺诈罪,此前他人为抬高了MNGO的价格,并利用其代币多头头寸的未实现利润从DEX借入了大量数字资产。

在撰写本文时,MNGO的交易价格为0.0162美元,在过去24小时内上涨了6%。

不要错过任何节拍-订阅以直接将电子邮件提醒发送到您的收件箱

检查价格操作

在X、Facebook和Telegram上关注我们

冲浪每日Hodl混合

生成的图像:Midjourney

Trending Cryptos

Related Reads

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

In May, Meta imposed internal restrictions on its engineers regarding the use of Claude Code and Codex, two widely used AI programming tools. Despite being a major client, Meta's guidelines, still in effect, prohibit these external models from being used for specific tasks to prevent potential "escalations with partners." The core concern is "distillation"—the risk that outputs from Claude or Codex could inadvertently contaminate the training data and evaluation processes for Meta's in-house AI coding assistant, MetaCode. If MetaCode is trained or evaluated using data generated by these external models, it risks learning their capabilities rather than developing its own, blurring the line of intellectual origin. The restrictions are precise: engineers cannot use the external models to generate test questions, debug source code, or suggest test cases. AI-generated content is also barred from environments accessible to MetaCode. However, AI can still assist with peripheral tasks like workflow setup and code organization, provided all outputs are manually reviewed. This caution reflects a broader industry dilemma. While distillation is a common technique, using a competitor's model output for training raises legal and ethical questions about the ownership of derived capabilities. Contractual terms from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic explicitly forbid using their outputs to build competing products, putting enforcement power in the hands of rivals. The move is also financially motivated, as Meta seeks to reduce its hefty internal AI spending, estimated in the billions this year. Meta's policy illustrates the delicate balance companies must strike: leveraging powerful external AI tools while safeguarding the integrity and independence of their own AI development. As AI systems increasingly help build other AIs, distinguishing the origin of capabilities becomes a fundamental challenge for the entire industry.

marsbit56m ago

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

marsbit56m ago

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

The article "Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?" explores the complex and often contentious integration of AI into the cultural and creative industries, particularly film and television. It begins with the cancellation of Amazon's AI-generated animation "Punky Duck," highlighting the ethical debates surrounding AI content. AI's rapid advancement is transforming video production, enabling cost-effective, full-length AI films (e.g., "RAPHAEL," "Dreams of Violets") while sparking industry resistance over issues like "synthetic actors." The core debate has shifted from whether to use AI to how to use it responsibly. The article analyzes why AI's entry into film is uniquely unsettling. It distinguishes between "cultural fast food" (short-form, fast-paced content like micro-dramas) and "cultural main courses" (traditional, long-form film/TV). AI currently excels at the former, matching its fragmented narratives, shallow emotional needs, and free-to-consumer models. However, venturing into the latter challenges the human-centric essence of storytelling—creativity, emotional depth, and the unique value of human labor and experience. While AI can generate massive volumes of content and lower costs, it risks devaluing human creativity, leading to homogenized output, and creating unfair competition through potential intellectual property infringement. Its efficiency also amplifies content safety risks, making preemptive governance crucial. To counter these risks, the article proposes establishing clear boundaries guided by a human-centered AI content perspective. It outlines four principles: 1) Amplify, rather than displace, human creative space; 2) Respect and protect human creative output; 3) Ensure human creative control and responsibility remain paramount; and 4) Guarantee transparency and traceability in AI creation. The conclusion emphasizes that humans must act as the "helmsmen" of technology, steering AI development to enhance, not replace, the core human values at the heart of cultural expression.

marsbit1h ago

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

marsbit1h ago

Planck Retracted? The Father of Quantum Tripped by an Algorithm

The recent discovery that two articles (published in 1940 and 1942) by Max Planck, the Nobel laureate and founder of quantum theory, are marked as "retracted" on Springer's digital platform highlights a curious clash between historical publishing practices and modern automated systems. An investigation suggests these retractions are algorithmic errors, not due to fraud or misconduct. The papers, philosophical reflections on science published in *Die Naturwissenschaften*, were likely flagged by the platform's systems. One article, a republished lecture, may have been mistaken for duplicate publication. Another, sharing a title with a prior article by a different author (a common practice for continuing debates at the time), may have triggered a similar automated check. The digital versions have even been replaced with blank pages, contrary to normal practice of preserving retracted texts. This incident underscores how contemporary digital infrastructure, built around concepts like "self-plagiarism" and strict copyright, can misclassify and obscure legitimate historical scholarly communication. It serves as a warning that digital archives are not neutral mirrors of the past but are filtered by platform rules, potentially distorting the scientific record. As AI systems increasingly rely on such databases, such erroneous metadata could propagate, affecting how future tools interpret and access historical knowledge.

marsbit1h ago

Planck Retracted? The Father of Quantum Tripped by an Algorithm

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot

Hot Articles

Discussions

Welcome to the HTX Community. Here, you can stay informed about the latest platform developments and gain access to professional market insights. Users' opinions on the price of SOL (SOL) are presented below.

活动图片