[ad_1]
<div _ngcontent-c15 = "" innerhtml = "
On Friday, May 31, the Securities and Exchange Commission's Strategic Center for Innovation and Financial Technology (known as "FinHub") hosted a FinTech Forum at its Washington DC headquarters. The one-day event highlighted distributed ledger technology and digital badets. It included several panel discussions, punctuated by remarks from FinHub Director Valerie Sczepanik, SEC Chair Jay Clayton, Finance Corporation Division Director William Hinman, and Peter Driscoll, Director of Compliance Inspections and Reviews. , in this order. These key regulators have provided insights and guidance on the existing regulatory framework for federal securities legislation, demonstrating their openness to connecting to the blockchain community and their drive to stimulate emerging technology innovation. .
The event was commendable, and commendable, for convening practitioners and regulators for engaged discussions on a range of topics, including capital formation, trade and markets, and investment management for general ledger technology. distributed.
As I boarded the train back to Delaware, I contemplated the many insightful points I made during the day.& nbsp; After a two-hour trip home, I reflected on the omnipresent focus of panellists on cryptocurrency and public blockchains, the inevitability of confidential or private information about public blockchains, the interoperability of blockchains, the promise of decentralized exchanges and the need for protection solutions. & nbsp;I also thought about what was not said.
The blockchain universe is vast. It would be impossible to explore all facets. Still, I thought about what was not discussed (or ephemeral) during the event and why it was true. And with the help of my friend Lewis Cohen, from DLx Law, I compiled this & nbsp;list of unexplored topics:
- Scalability and latency of public blockchains& nbsp;
Throughout the discussion on public blockchains, there has been little question of the real-life challenges badociated with the use of this technology. The group discussions focused on what might be, not the current reality. There is no doubt that we are currently thinking that these problems will be solved if not now, so very soon.
- Energy consumption and change to proof of participation
Block chains "Proof of Work" require huge amounts of energy. But this was not discussed during the event. Of course, this is a recognized problem, which is why "proof of stakes" and so many other consensual mechanisms are being developed. However, there are very few examples of such alternative consensus mechanisms operating successfully on a large scale.
- Wyoming
A thoughtful and in-depth discussion about how custodians could protect digital badets was inspired by the extensive work done recently in Wyoming, but no one mentioned the groundbreaking legislation being put in place at the state level. State, nor Caitlin Long, his champion and principal architect. Panelists may have thought that he was not in a position to present Wyoming's bold (and yet untested) regulatory structure in a federal forum.
- Decentralized Finance
DeFi is one of the buzzwords of 2019, but it was hardly mentioned during the event. I suspect& nbsp;The reason is that the panelists were not interviewed about it or may not have had direct experience of this emerging field. Nevertheless, DeFi raises important regulatory issues, including the life span of a truly decentralized (ie purely algorithmic) financial market participant.
- Use of crypto to secure borrowings and the badumption of digital badets.
This is another hot topic. But that was not addressed in the conversation. It is also a very controversial issue, which is another reason to avoid this topic in "mixed societies" (regulators and non-regulators). The fact remains, however, that bitcoins and other non-revenue-generating digital badets represent unused capital, something distressing in nature, almost as much as a void, which is unlikely.
- Use of blockchain technology in machine-to-machine transactions
It is a very important subject and likely to play a crucial role in the overall development of space.& nbsp; But this is not directly part of the SEC's domain, and the panelists were probably not on the subject.
- That average people are not engaged with crypto
The reality is that the use of blockchain, cryptocurrency and decentralized applications (dApps) has not reached the usual stage. Only a very small group of people are involved in digital badets. The SEC focuses on protecting people who invest in securities. But we also need to discuss how to make digital badets and blockchain-based applications relevant to everyone. If members of the blockchain community can not find a way to bring value to their friends and family, digital badets will then largely be the result of a promise that has not been realized. never materialized.
- Stable coins
Almost from nowhere, the so-called "stable rooms" have taken their own lives. Frankly, I find them totally uninteresting. But they serve as bridges between fiduciary money and the digital world, which plays an important role. Strange that they have not been seriously investigated (keeping aside a brief reference to their close cousins, the central bank's digital currencies).
What does all this mean? The craze for digital badets continues to grow. And yet, & nbsp; much of the discussion at the event was ambitious. It tells me that we are still very early in space. It is clear that the SEC wants the regulation to be correct and is carefully studying the best way to navigate this new wave of & nbsp; securities. The SEC openly promotes cooperation by soliciting the experience and knowledge of the blockchain community. See regulators and opinion leaders blockchain exchanging ideas on stage (and mingle behind the scenes) gives me the hope that we are creating the path we need now to innovate and secure our future together. By combining what has been said and what was not, it is clear that there is still much to be done in the world of blockchain.
">
On Friday, May 31, the Securities and Exchange Commission's Strategic Center for Innovation and Financial Technology (known as "FinHub") hosted a FinTech Forum at its Washington DC headquarters. The one-day event highlighted distributed ledger technology and digital badets. It included several panel discussions, punctuated by remarks from FinHub Director Valerie Sczepanik, SEC Chair Jay Clayton, Finance Corporation Division Director William Hinman, and Peter Driscoll, Director of Compliance Inspections and Reviews. , in this order. These key regulators have provided insights and guidance on the existing regulatory framework for federal securities legislation, demonstrating their openness to connecting to the blockchain community and their drive to stimulate emerging technology innovation. .
The event was commendable, and commendable, for convening practitioners and regulators for engaged discussions on a range of topics, including capital formation, trade and markets, and investment management for general ledger technology. distributed.
As I boarded the train back to Delaware, I contemplated the many insightful points I made during the day. After a two-hour trip home, I reflected on the omnipresent focus of panellists on cryptocurrency and public blockchains, the inevitability of confidential or private information about public blockchains, the interoperability of blockchains, the promise of decentralized exchanges and the need for protection solutions. I also thought about what was not said.
The blockchain universe is vast. It would be impossible to explore all facets. Still, I thought about what was not discussed (or ephemeral) during the event and why it was true. And with the help of my friend Lewis Cohen, from DLx Law, I've compiled this list of unexplored topics:
- Scalability and latency of public blockchains
Throughout the discussion on public blockchains, there has been little question of the real-life challenges badociated with the use of this technology. The group discussions focused on what might be, not the current reality. There is no doubt that we are currently thinking that these problems will be solved if not now, so very soon.
- Energy consumption and change to proof of participation
Block chains "Proof of Work" require huge amounts of energy. But this was not discussed during the event. Of course, this is a recognized problem, which is why "proof of stakes" and so many other consensual mechanisms are being developed. However, there are very few examples of such alternative consensus mechanisms operating successfully on a large scale.
- Wyoming
A thoughtful and in-depth discussion about how custodians could protect digital badets was inspired by the extensive work done recently in Wyoming, but no one mentioned the groundbreaking legislation being put in place at the state level. State, nor Caitlin Long, his champion and principal architect. Panelists may have thought that he was not in a position to present Wyoming's bold (and yet untested) regulatory structure in a federal forum.
- Decentralized Finance
DeFi is one of the buzzwords of 2019, but it was hardly mentioned during the event. I suspect The reason is that the panelists were not interviewed about it or may not have had direct experience of this emerging field. Nevertheless, DeFi raises important regulatory issues, including the life span of a truly decentralized (ie purely algorithmic) financial market participant.
- Use of crypto to secure borrowings and the badumption of digital badets.
This is another hot topic. But that was not addressed in the conversation. It is also a very controversial issue, which is another reason to avoid this topic in "mixed societies" (regulators and non-regulators). The fact remains, however, that bitcoins and other non-revenue-generating digital badets represent unused capital, something distressing in nature, almost as much as a void, which is unlikely.
- Use of blockchain technology in machine-to-machine transactions
It is a very important subject and likely to play a crucial role in the overall development of space. But this is not directly part of the SEC's domain, and the panelists were probably not on the subject.
- That average people are not engaged with crypto
The reality is that the use of blockchain, cryptocurrency and decentralized applications (dApps) has not reached the usual stage. Only a very small group of people are involved in digital badets. The SEC is committed to protecting people who invest in securities. But we also need to discuss how to make digital badets and blockchain-based applications relevant to everyone. If members of the blockchain community fail to find a way to bring value to their friends and family, then digital badets will become largely the artifact of a promise that does not exist. is never materialized.
- Stable coins
Almost from nowhere, the so-called "stable rooms" have taken their own lives. Frankly, I find them totally uninteresting. But they serve as bridges between fiduciary money and the digital world, which plays an important role. Strange that they have not been seriously investigated (keeping aside a brief reference to their close cousins, the central bank's digital currencies).
What does all this mean? The craze for digital badets continues to grow. And yet, much of the discussion at the event was ambitious. It tells me that we are still very early in space. It is clear that the SEC wants the regulation to be correct and is carefully studying the best way to navigate this new wave of securities. The SEC openly promotes cooperation by soliciting the experience and knowledge of the blockchain community. See regulators and opinion leaders blockchain exchanging ideas on stage (and mingle behind the scenes) gives me the hope that we are creating the path we need now to innovate and secure our future together. By combining what has been said and what was not, it is clear that there is still much to be done in the world of blockchain.
