The right to bear crypto 

Spent my weekend reading a 2nd amendment case for cryptography.

If Americans cared about encryption as much as they care about guns there'd be a much different conversation rn in DC.

And they should.

Need a podcast on this

The right to bear crypto 

Spent my weekend reading a 2nd amendment case for cryptography.

If Americans cared about encryption as much as they care about guns there'd be a much different conversation rn in DC.

And they should.

Need a podcast on this

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2882074

Dangerous argument that will attract dangerous people. 

Crypto is not a weapon. It can be used as a tool of war but so can be any money, so can be words, so can be ideas - doesn’t make them arms.

building @theengine incubated by /skylab. copyright lawyer by training, producer by trade, web3 maxi at heart.

Crypto is a technology. And the forms and use cases it expresses itself in should be treated differently depending on what they are.

Money. 
Commodities.
Innovative financial instruments.
Art.
Collectibles.
Data bases. 

Not arms.

The right to bear arms is not the only right that should be protected vehemently. 

If anything, crypto is speech. 

Think of how code is protected by the same copyright rules as literary work.

Finally, to put it bluntly, “let’s classify crypto as a weapon so that we can protect our right to bear it” is a very American way of thinking.

The rest of the world thinks very differently about guns.

Nowhere else in the world are guns seen as freedom.

Arms are a source of danger and violence and are heavily regulated around the world. As they should be.

Don’t put crypto in that bucket.

Crypto is money. 
Crypto is speech.
Crypto is property. 

Enough reasons to protect it.

X-ray machines produce radiation.
Cars kill people. 
Electricity is deadly.

We don’t treat any of these as arms. 
Neither should we.