Tokenization means no central control, no dtcc middle man, no need for brokers, no naked shorting or FTDs, no front running trades, no dark pools, and instant settlement.
It's DRS and transparent fair markets with mechanics that make sense.
When computing rate exceeds the rate at which 51% of the distributed (single system) storage computers can verify , hasn't your tokenization simplified the take over ?
Why the race to so many super computers ? You will own nothing and be happy ?
Confidence in a system is all that is real in stocks. Unlike commodities which ultimately are required , stocks are just a game , like Kings have always played.
Just the plastic tokens in the game of risk. Margin calls just exposing the cheating that others knew from the prior 122 episodes.
51 percent attacks apply to proof-of-work or proof-of-stake consensus chains, not to tokenized stocks as a category. Most tokenized equities today are not secured by open, permissionless consensus. They are issued on permissioned chains, Layer 2s, or even centralized ledgers.
So when you say: “When computing rate exceeds the rate at which 51 percent can verify”
You are attacking a system most tokenized securities are not actually using. Public blockchains, permissioned ledgers, centralized registries, and clearing houses are not the same animal. Tokenized securities are not secured by hash rate like Bitcoin. They are secured by governance, custody, and law, exactly like traditional equities
The race for compute power is not primarily about securities validation. That is more relevant to AI training and proof-of-work mining.
Stocks are not commodities, but they are not purely imaginary either. They confer legal claims, voting rights, dividends, and control. Those rights can be abused or diluted, but dismissing them as entirely fictional is just silly.
Stocks have always been abstractions. If you think a paper share certificate was more real because it could be spilled on with coffee, you are confusing tangibility with authority. Ownership has never been located in cellulose fibers. It has always been located in recognized records enforced by law. Tokenization does not invent abstraction. It simply admits what has always been true.
And let us talk about this romantic notion of the old system being safer because it was slower and more opaque. That is not wisdom. That is Stockholm syndrome. The pre-tokenized world gave us rehypothecation stacked on rehypothecation, settlement delays measured in days, and a priesthood of intermediaries who all swore they were not cheating until margin calls started confessing on their behalf.
Tokenization does not create fragility. It exposes it earlier. And exposure is what liars fear.
The line “you will own nothing and be happy” gets applause, but it proves too much. If ownership can be revoked at the protocol level, it can already be revoked at the legal level. Ask anyone whose assets were frozen by a court order, seized by a regulator, or diluted into irrelevance by corporate action. The threat is not code. The threat is sovereignty. And sovereignty has always sat above the market, whether the ledger was on paper, in a database, or on a chain.
As for commodities versus stocks, this is another sleight of hand. Yes, wheat feeds you and equities do not. But civilization runs on coordination, not just calories. Capital formation is how factories get built, bridges get raised, and medicines get developed. Calling equities a “game” is like calling contracts a game because they are written in ink instead of stone.
Confidence is not a flaw in markets. It is the point. Marriage runs on confidence. Law runs on confidence. Money itself runs on confidence. The question is not whether confidence exists, but whether it is disciplined by transparency, accountability, and consequences.
Tokenization, done rightly, increases auditability, compresses settlement risk, and reduces the number of dark corners where cheats can hide. That does not guarantee righteousness. But neither did the old system. At least this one turns the lights on.
But I made no such claim of superiority of the existing system. Good description of the current "Confidence Game" though :
They confer legal claims, voting rights, dividends, and control. Those rights can be abused or diluted, but dismissing them as entirely fictional is just silly ... It has always been located in recognized records enforced by law... Calling equities a “game” is like calling contracts a game because they are written in ink ...or...stone.
...transparency, accountability, and consequences... are indeed the tools of those who wield "discipline" in order to maintain confidence. But are of zero value without confidence first.
How will they tokenize all those non-existent short shares ? Billions in shares that just aren't there 🤔
Are we just ceding more control to Cede & Co. ?
They don't. They margin call those people.
Tokenization means no central control, no dtcc middle man, no need for brokers, no naked shorting or FTDs, no front running trades, no dark pools, and instant settlement.
It's DRS and transparent fair markets with mechanics that make sense.
When computing rate exceeds the rate at which 51% of the distributed (single system) storage computers can verify , hasn't your tokenization simplified the take over ?
Why the race to so many super computers ? You will own nothing and be happy ?
Confidence in a system is all that is real in stocks. Unlike commodities which ultimately are required , stocks are just a game , like Kings have always played. Just the plastic tokens in the game of risk. Margin calls just exposing the cheating that others knew from the prior 122 episodes.
Ever heard of a "Confidence Game" ?
51 percent attacks apply to proof-of-work or proof-of-stake consensus chains, not to tokenized stocks as a category. Most tokenized equities today are not secured by open, permissionless consensus. They are issued on permissioned chains, Layer 2s, or even centralized ledgers. So when you say: “When computing rate exceeds the rate at which 51 percent can verify” You are attacking a system most tokenized securities are not actually using. Public blockchains, permissioned ledgers, centralized registries, and clearing houses are not the same animal. Tokenized securities are not secured by hash rate like Bitcoin. They are secured by governance, custody, and law, exactly like traditional equities
The race for compute power is not primarily about securities validation. That is more relevant to AI training and proof-of-work mining.
Stocks are not commodities, but they are not purely imaginary either. They confer legal claims, voting rights, dividends, and control. Those rights can be abused or diluted, but dismissing them as entirely fictional is just silly.
Stocks have always been abstractions. If you think a paper share certificate was more real because it could be spilled on with coffee, you are confusing tangibility with authority. Ownership has never been located in cellulose fibers. It has always been located in recognized records enforced by law. Tokenization does not invent abstraction. It simply admits what has always been true.
And let us talk about this romantic notion of the old system being safer because it was slower and more opaque. That is not wisdom. That is Stockholm syndrome. The pre-tokenized world gave us rehypothecation stacked on rehypothecation, settlement delays measured in days, and a priesthood of intermediaries who all swore they were not cheating until margin calls started confessing on their behalf.
Tokenization does not create fragility. It exposes it earlier. And exposure is what liars fear.
The line “you will own nothing and be happy” gets applause, but it proves too much. If ownership can be revoked at the protocol level, it can already be revoked at the legal level. Ask anyone whose assets were frozen by a court order, seized by a regulator, or diluted into irrelevance by corporate action. The threat is not code. The threat is sovereignty. And sovereignty has always sat above the market, whether the ledger was on paper, in a database, or on a chain. As for commodities versus stocks, this is another sleight of hand. Yes, wheat feeds you and equities do not. But civilization runs on coordination, not just calories. Capital formation is how factories get built, bridges get raised, and medicines get developed. Calling equities a “game” is like calling contracts a game because they are written in ink instead of stone.
Confidence is not a flaw in markets. It is the point. Marriage runs on confidence. Law runs on confidence. Money itself runs on confidence. The question is not whether confidence exists, but whether it is disciplined by transparency, accountability, and consequences.
Tokenization, done rightly, increases auditability, compresses settlement risk, and reduces the number of dark corners where cheats can hide. That does not guarantee righteousness. But neither did the old system. At least this one turns the lights on.
Thank you for the explanation.
But I made no such claim of superiority of the existing system. Good description of the current "Confidence Game" though :