Skip to content

SEC says it will deregulate cryptocurrencies with 'Project Crypto'

Technology
143 74 22
  • 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.”

    Crypto makes it easier to launder dirty money

  • 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.”

    Those greedfuck assholes. Never fucking learning anything.

  • Genuine question, is crypto good for anything other than gambling at the moment? I don't ever hear of anyone buying anything with crypto, only exchanging it out for USD. NFTs are basically a punchline now... what is it actually good for?

    Its good for evading the law.

  • 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.”

    Whoohoo Viva Ponzi baby!

    Edit: But also very little is being said here.

  • 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.

  • Seo Execuitve

    Technology technology
    1
    1
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    7 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Watermarks offer no defense against deepfakes, study suggests

    Technology technology
    30
    1
    190 Stimmen
    30 Beiträge
    185 Aufrufe
    K
    You can have whatever token you want with all the metadata, licensing and ownership information you want... ...unless you plan on only seeing images in your own platform, nobody gives a shit, people will take screenshots and image files and share and use them however they want. There's no world in which you load a full DRM plugin or do 4 different types of handshake with a full blockchain just to load a jpeg into a comment.
  • 89 Stimmen
    15 Beiträge
    162 Aufrufe
    S
    I suspect people (not billionaires) are realising that they can get by with less. And that the planet needs that too. And that working 40+ hours a week isn’t giving people what they really want either. Tbh, I don't think that's the case. If you look at any of the relevant metrics (CO², energy consumption, plastic waste, ...) they only know one direction globally and that's up. I think the actual issues are Russian invasion of Ukraine and associated sanctions on one of the main energy providers of Europe Trump's "trade wars" which make global supply lines unreliable and costs incalculable (global supply chains love nothing more than uncertainty) Uncertainty in regards to China/Taiwan Boomers retiring in western countries, which for the first time since pretty much ever means that the work force is shrinking instead of growing. Economical growth was mostly driven by population growth for the last half century with per-capita productivity staying very close to inflation. Disrupting changes in key industries like cars and energy. The west has been sleeping on may of these developments (e.g. electric cars, batteries, solar) and now China is curbstomping the rest of the world in regards to market share. High key interest rates (which are applied to reduce high inflation due to some of the reason above) reduce demand on financial investments into companies. The low interest rates of the 2010s and also before lead to more investments into companies. With interest going back up, investments dry up. All these changes mean that companies, countries and people in the west have much less free cash available. There’s also the value of money has never been lower either. That's been the case since every. Inflation has always been a thing and with that the value of money is monotonically decreasing. But that doesn't really matter for the whole argument, since the absolute value of money doesn't matter, only the relative value. To put it differently: If you earn €100 and the thing you want to buy costs €10, that is equivalent to if you earn €1000 and the thing you want to buy costing €100. The value of money dropping is only relevant for savings, and if people are saving too much then the economy slows down and jobs are cut, thus some inflation is positive or even required. What is an actual issue is that wages are not increasing at the same rate as the cost of things, but that's not a "value of the money" issue.
  • 75 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    19 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 110 Stimmen
    84 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    T
    It's not new technology you numpty. It's not news. It's not a scientific paper. Wireless energy transfer isn't "bullshit", it's been an understood aspect of physics for a long time. Since you seem unable to grasp the concept, I'll put it in bold and italics: This is a video of a guy doing a DIY project where he wanted to make his setup as wireless as possible. In the video he also goes over his thoughts and design considerations, and explains how the tech works for people who don't already know. It is not new technology. It is not pseudoscience. It is a guy showing off his bespoke PC setup. It does not need an article or a blog post. He can post about it in any form he wants. Personally, I think showcasing this kind of thing in a video is much better than a wall of text. I want to see the process, the finished product, the tools used and how he used them.
  • Ai Code Commits

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    164 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    455 Aufrufe
    M
    From what I know, those agents can be absolutely fantastic as long as they run under strict guidance of a senior developer who really knows how to use them. Fully autonomous agents sound like a terrible idea.
  • 4 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    171 Aufrufe
    V
    Oh, I get it. You're a purposefully ignorant dumbass.
  • Apple Eyes Move to AI Search, Ending Era Defined by Google

    Technology technology
    2
    10 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    28 Aufrufe
    ohshit604@sh.itjust.worksO
    It’s infuriating that Safari/Apple only allows me to choose from five different search engines. I self-host my own SearXNG instance and have to use a third-party extension to redirect my queries.