Skip to content

SEC says it will deregulate cryptocurrencies with 'Project Crypto'

Technology
142 74 22
  • after learning that in China 200 years ago people used non-uniform money, that is, all kinds of coins, some literally ancient still in circulation, and somehow that worked

    I'm talking about valuation pegged paper money, not hard value currency. This old strawman is getting old too.

    The coins worked because they were still tangible material with assigned value (ie metals value by weight or marking).

    The local bank paper money was different, and pegged to hard value materials (gold standard).

    Cryptocurrency works like the second because, like the paper money, crypto doesn't have inherent tangible value (technically even less than paper since it's completely intangible).

    It doesn't work like the fucking Chinese coins (which, btw, still relied on a very centralized government existing anyway) because you can't hold or do anything with 0s and 1s, nor can you physically keep it around.

    because, like the paper money, crypto doesn’t have inherent tangible value

    That's wrong, "owning a number" is tangible value. That's also why there are no (working) offline cryptocurrencies, double spending is a problem.

    If by "works like the second" you mean that it doesn't have physical form, then yeah, that's in the name.

    which, btw, still relied on a very centralized government existing anyway

    A few of them, different ones, each making their own coins. So no.

    because you can’t hold or do anything with 0s and 1s, nor can you physically keep it around.

    Yeah, that's a problem, but "fucking Chinese coins" in their value also were worth more than the metals they were made from. Sometimes those metals were not very meaningful for Europeans.

    And using a mix of non-uniform coins for transactions was a thing for much of history in Europe too.

    In any case, in absolutes of course nothing is like any other thing. If your argument fits under that, then don't bother, it's boring and useless.

    In relatives - you can have a "half-offline" cryptocurrency, where you don't need all the network (or good enough majority of it) to be accessible, just one partition (or even just portion) of it, to make a transaction. In theory. This can even seem like a "partitioned blockchain", LOL. A tree of blockchains.

    There are so many cryptocurrencies so honestly I don't know if such has been made, but it would be useful.

  • It rebounding and crashing by hundreds in value like a meth head on caffeinated cocaine laced with LSD is what doesn't make it a currency.

    No one wants a shit currency where one day a donut costs 1000 and the next 2000 and on the weekend it's either 599 or 3999.

    That's why it's at best a speculative asset, except it's dumber than that because it's intangible. It's like the long term stupidity of fiat mixed with insane instability, all while using way more resources.

    Same thing happened to the Argentine peso, let's not pretend if you make a government currency it's magically stable

  • The comment you're responding to linked to a page giving statistics about the Lightning network. The number of channels peaked in 2022 and has been going down ever since then.

    Number of channels is decreasing, but the money in each channel increased. In BTC terms the money decreased, but in real terms the money increased.

    Real terms being 2022 dollar value

  • I used to buy a lot of pizza and burgers with bitcoin when I did night shifts. Still use it to buy electronics at least once a month.

    It's also the best way to donate to nonprofit projects. I can just send ~ $10 of value, one time. No need to risk accidentally signing up for a monthly subscription or being bombarded by spam.

    If you don't keep 100% of your monthly budget in BTC, you don't really care about the volatility either, because long term it always goes up.

    None of your examples are examples of what it is good for, since they can all be done by other means.

  • In a Thursday speech, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman Paul S. Atkins announced “Project Crypto,” an initiative to modernize the country’s securities rules and regulations to move financial markets on-chain.

    “Under my leadership, the SEC will not stand idly by and watch innovations develop overseas while our capital markets remain stagnant,” he said at an America First Policy Institute event in Washington D.C. His plan includes measures to reshore crypto businesses that have left the country and to ensure that “archaic rules and regulations do not smother innovation and entrepreneurship in America.”

    Oh Boy, it's Great Depression 2: Electric Boogaloo!

  • So to match the fraudulent government, the USA is going to have an entirely fraudulent market and soon after an entirely fraudulent currency.

    soon? it always has been. Does no one remember the whole CDO shit? buying insurance on bullshit loans or packaged loans/debts of quite literally shit? no one knew what the fuck was in those things, literally no one. The rating agencies would rate these things and have no fucking clue what the hell they were. They handed loans out like halloween candy to Americans just to get more shit into these things.

    the US Market has been fraudulent for decades.

  • Same thing happened to the Argentine peso, let's not pretend if you make a government currency it's magically stable

    The Argentine peso crashed and then stayed down. That's actually a sign of stability, because it's remaining at a constant, not jumping up and down wildly.

    It didn't crash only to go back to original value to the decrease by half and undulate like a wave, like Bitcoin and other crypto does.

  • I mean, global economy really. Crypto has the potential and already fucked a few banks when it shit itself which could've led to awful bank runs.

    If/when it destabilizes the American banking system the entire global economy will follow its lead down, at least a bit.

    Like I don't think people understand how devastating letting a scam like this into proper finance can be. Finance itself already has way more latitude than it should- wait until this just splits everything wide open.

    For some, that is the point.

  • If/when it destabilizes the American banking system the entire global economy will follow its lead down

    One of the nice things Trump has been doing has been decoupling the US domestic market from the global chain. If we can keep ourselves propped up for another couple of years, the collapse will remain contained to ourselves and our immediate allies. I mean, case in point, Russians and Iranians and N. Koreans and Cubans are so sanctioned to shit that they don't really care if the dollar takes a tumble.

    Like I don’t think people understand how devastating letting a scam like this into proper finance can be.

    2008 was the hard lesson. Too Big To Fail means the scammers are the only ones who walk away from the mess.

    Yeah I had arguments with my late brother about this, but 2008 could have been the perfect time to let banks fail or be completely federalized, and directly bail out home dwellers and implement universal basic income at the same time to make the “payment systems and retirement funds will vanish” argument invalid.

  • Number of channels is decreasing, but the money in each channel increased. In BTC terms the money decreased, but in real terms the money increased.

    Real terms being 2022 dollar value

    No it hasn't. Again, according to that link I provided, the total capacity of Lightning peaked in December 2024. These are not the graphs of a growing layer 2, it's been stagnant for many years.

    Bitcoin simply wasn't designed for this sort of application, and Bitcoin's foundation layer is absolutely frozen due to the ideology of its users and developers so I don't expect the situation will improve. If you want to do a layer 2 then why not use a blockchain that's specifically designed to support it? If you use Ethereum you can even use token-wrapped Bitcoin as your medium of exchange. There's $14.4 billion dollars worth of WBTC on Ethereum available for exchange, as opposed to the $440 million worth in Lightning channels.

  • The Argentine peso crashed and then stayed down. That's actually a sign of stability, because it's remaining at a constant, not jumping up and down wildly.

    It didn't crash only to go back to original value to the decrease by half and undulate like a wave, like Bitcoin and other crypto does.

    What are you talking about? It crashed, then crashed again, then crashed again. How is that stable?

  • No it hasn't. Again, according to that link I provided, the total capacity of Lightning peaked in December 2024. These are not the graphs of a growing layer 2, it's been stagnant for many years.

    Bitcoin simply wasn't designed for this sort of application, and Bitcoin's foundation layer is absolutely frozen due to the ideology of its users and developers so I don't expect the situation will improve. If you want to do a layer 2 then why not use a blockchain that's specifically designed to support it? If you use Ethereum you can even use token-wrapped Bitcoin as your medium of exchange. There's $14.4 billion dollars worth of WBTC on Ethereum available for exchange, as opposed to the $440 million worth in Lightning channels.

    If bitcoin is worth more, you need to move fewer bitcoins to achieve the same result. If there USD value moved in lightning never increases then I would agree it's a failure

  • What are you talking about? It crashed, then crashed again, then crashed again. How is that stable?

    You mean all crashes then? The 3 that have happened in over ONE HUNDRED YEARS?

    You can't be fucking serious to compare that fluctuation with Bitcoin's

  • It's easy to transfer to other countries. Ever tried to send $20 to another country like Kazakhstan? It's a nightmare

    easy to transfer to other countries

    Also easy to transfer with IBAN and relatively cheap ... so I guess other countries that do not rely on IBAN?

  • the Ethereum blockchain

    Ah, yes. The fine folks that gave us NFTs.

    No pump and dumps to be found over there

    To be fair, the concept of an NFT was very cool when it was first imagined, but then all people used NFTs for was stupid gifs to be sold like trading cards or fucking pogs...

    But the concept is cool if you actually use it for something. For instance, you can create an NFT as a digital key (like a literal key that unlocks something) or as a legal deed that proves ownership of something. Then you have a digital asset that can be resold or folded into a smart contract, where the digital item actually controls something physical. For instance, you could design an NFT to be the actual key that can unlock and start a car. If you sell this digital asset, you will not be able to start the car, but the new owner will. That is cool, monkey gifs are stupid bullshit. And if you try to convince people to buy bullshit, that makes you a scammer.

    But Etherium didn't invent the stupid bullshit, they just created a system that made more interesting things possible. And then with the power to do anything, some people made the stupidest shit in the world. It's like, you can hand someone a pencil and paper and some people will use that to prove a theorem, some people will sketch a landscape, and some people will draw a huge cock and balls... But you don't blame the people that created the pencil and paper.

  • To be fair, the concept of an NFT was very cool when it was first imagined, but then all people used NFTs for was stupid gifs to be sold like trading cards or fucking pogs...

    But the concept is cool if you actually use it for something. For instance, you can create an NFT as a digital key (like a literal key that unlocks something) or as a legal deed that proves ownership of something. Then you have a digital asset that can be resold or folded into a smart contract, where the digital item actually controls something physical. For instance, you could design an NFT to be the actual key that can unlock and start a car. If you sell this digital asset, you will not be able to start the car, but the new owner will. That is cool, monkey gifs are stupid bullshit. And if you try to convince people to buy bullshit, that makes you a scammer.

    But Etherium didn't invent the stupid bullshit, they just created a system that made more interesting things possible. And then with the power to do anything, some people made the stupidest shit in the world. It's like, you can hand someone a pencil and paper and some people will use that to prove a theorem, some people will sketch a landscape, and some people will draw a huge cock and balls... But you don't blame the people that created the pencil and paper.

    the concept of an NFT was very cool when it was first imagined

    Going to have to agree to disagree.

    It was always vaporware. A bunch of empty promises that predicted a digital monoculture. Feel like I have to carve "Ready Player One was a Dystopia!" on a baseball bat and hit people with it.

  • 228 Stimmen
    60 Beiträge
    15 Aufrufe
    S
    No no, you don't get it. Random Windows 'Powerusers' obviously know more about programming and cybersecurity than people who actually do that for a living, as a professional line of work, duh! See, I wrote a bash file once, so I basically know everything about software dev, especially on linux as well, which is basically just the whole OS is powershell, right? /s/s/s
  • 735 Stimmen
    438 Beiträge
    644 Aufrufe
    U
    Ha thank you for your informations. Much apreciated.
  • 43 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    29 Aufrufe
    C
    From the same source, Blacklight is really good. https://themarkup.org/series/blacklight Blacklight is a Real-Time Website Privacy Inspector. Enter the address of any website, and Blacklight will scan it and reveal the specific user-tracking technologies on the site So you can see what's happening on a site before you visit it
  • Is Matrix cooked?

    Technology technology
    54
    101 Stimmen
    54 Beiträge
    422 Aufrufe
    W
    Didn't know it only applied to UWP apps on Windows. That does seem like a pretty big problem then. it is mostly for compatibility reasons. no win32 programs are equipped to handle such granular permissions and sandboxing, they are all made with the assumption that they have access to whatever they need (other than other users' resources and things that require elevation). if Microsoft would have made that limitation to every kind of software, that Windows version would have probably been a failure in popularity because lots of software would have broken. I think S editions of windows is how they tried to go in that direction, with a more drastic way of simply just dropping support for 3rd party win32 programs. I don't still have a Mac readily available to test with but afaik it is any application that uses Apple's packaging format. ok, so if you run linux or windows utils in a compatibility layer, they still have less of a limited access? by which I mean graphical utilities. just tried with firefox, for macos it wanted to give me an .iso file (???) if so, it seems apple is doing roughly the same as microsoft with uwp and the appx format, and linux with flatpak: it's a choice for the user
  • 2 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 92 Stimmen
    42 Beiträge
    341 Aufrufe
    G
    You don’t understand. The tracking and spying is the entire point of the maneuver. The ‘children are accessing porn’ thing is just a Trojan horse to justify the spying. I understand what are you saying, I simply don't consider to check if a law is applied as a Trojan horse in itself. I would agree if the EU had said to these sites "give us all the the access log, a list of your subscriber, every data you gather and a list of every IP it ever connected to your site", and even this way does not imply that with only the IP you could know who the user is without even asking the telecom company for help. So, is it a Trojan horse ? Maybe, it heavily depend on how the EU want to do it. If they just ask "show me how you try to avoid that a minor access your material", which normally is the fist step, I don't see how it could be a Trojan horse. It could become, I agree on that. As you pointed out, it’s already illegal for them to access it, and parents are legally required to prevent their children from accessing it. No, parents are not legally required to prevent it. The seller (or provider) is legally required. It is a subtle but important difference. But you don’t lock down the entire population, or institute pre-crime surveillance policies, just because some parents are not going to follow the law. True. You simply impose laws that make mandatories for the provider to check if he can sell/serve something to someone. I mean asking that the cashier of mall check if I am an adult when I buy a bottle of wine is no different than asking to Pornhub to check if the viewer is an adult. I agree that in one case is really simple and in the other is really hard (and it is becoming harder by the day). You then charge the guilty parents after the offense. Ok, it would work, but then how do you caught the offendind parents if not checking what everyone do ? Is it not simpler to try to prevent it instead ?
  • 241 Stimmen
    175 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    N
    I think a generic plug would be great but look at how fragmented USB specifications are. Add that to biology and it's a whole other level of difficulty. Brain implants have great potential but the abandonment issue is a problem that exists now that we have to solve for. It's also not really a tech issue but a societal one on affordability and accountability of medical research. Imagine if a company held the patents for the brain device and just closed down without selling or leasing the patent. People with that device would have no support unless a government body forced the release of the patent. This has already happened multiple times to people in clinical trials and scaling up deployment with multiple versions will make the situation worse. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamanetworkopen/fullarticle/2818077 I don't really have a take on your personal desires. I do think if anyone can afford one they should make sure it's not just the up front cost but also the long term costs to be considered. Like buying an expensive car, it's not if you can afford to purchase it but if you can afford to wreck it.
  • 163 Stimmen
    9 Beiträge
    78 Aufrufe
    stroz@infosec.pubS
    Move fast and break people