Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Jesse Walden
@jesse
permissionless innovation in the early internet was enabled by open protocols AND protected by a strong regulatory foundation: the first amendment. the fundamental unit of the internet is packets, containers for arbitrary information-and transmitting information is generally protected as free speech. the fundamental unit of crypto is tokens, containers for arbitrary value-and transmitting value is generally among the most highly regulated activities in world. so while permissionless innovation in crypto is similarly enabled by open protocols, it’s lack of a regulatory protection or clarity has been limiting.
6 replies
3 recasts
50 reactions
Snibb123.eth
@snibb123
My problem with this analogy, even though it’s true to some extent, is that is assume money is treated the same as information in our society. It isn’t and never was. See Section 230 vs. Bank Secrecy Act. So we need that to change first.
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
cryptocellaris.eth 🎩
@cryptocellaris
i think the point is that it would take political action to get money treated more like information
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Snibb123.eth
@snibb123
Yes, but I would contend it will take far more political will than it did in the 1990s, since we can’t rely on the constitutional precedents or cultural norms that information had. Not saying it’s impossible, but we shouldn’t be naive to that fact
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Jesse Walden
@jesse
agreed. relying on freedom of speech was a layup by comparison.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
cryptocellaris.eth 🎩
@cryptocellaris
absolutely agree, i just read the post as trying to summon that will
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
