[Lex Computer & Tech Group/LCTG] Letter to Congress re Blockchain and Crypto Hype

Wed Jun 8 07:09:01 PDT 2022

I don't see the non-crypto references. They seem to qualify their
references to blockchain to include applications where crypto-assets are
used for speculative investment.

A blockchain is a form of distributed database and ledger. It seems the
letter writers aren't including those applications where crypto-coins
aren't minted. If a coin is minted, then it's a speculative investment.
Does this make sense?

Jerry

On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 9:52 AM Robert Primak <bobprimak at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Yes, I agree that sensible regulations for cryptocurrencies and crypto
> exchanges would be wise.
>
> The authors of the letter did not specify cryptocurrency blockchains. In
> fact, they cited some non-crypto examples as "proof" that there is no
> legitimate use case for blockchain technology.
>
> -- Bob Primak
>
> On Wednesday, June 8, 2022 at 09:41:37 AM EDT, Jerry Harris <
> jerryharri at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Bob,
> I agree the term "blockchain" is almost as generic as "database." In my
> talk, I used terms like "Bitcoin Blockchain" to offer more clarity to which
> instance of a blockchain I was referring. However, I don't think the letter
> was referring to a generic blockchain-based system. I think its context is
> for any cryptocurrency-based blockchain, where coins are minted upon block
> validation. I think you and the authors of the letter agree that more
> regulation is required.
>
> Jerry
>
> On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 3:23 PM Robert Primak <bobprimak at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> What I think is being called "the blockchain" or "blockchain technology"
> is too narrow a definition. But regulation of crypto transactions, and
> especially of the products and services which use blockchain technology, is
> in my opinion inevitable.
>
> The technology can be misapplied. But it also has more mundane and
> practical use cases which have already been made. As I have said before,
> credit card companies, logistics operations and many other businesses and
> industries, have all been successfully using blockchain technologies and
> validation methods for some time now.
>
> What needs to be the focus of regulation, it seems to me, is the use of
> blockchains and cryptocurrencies, NFTs and Meta goods and services, in the
> FinTech industry.  FinTech and related investment vehicles are not now
> adequately or properly regulated. There is no SEC or CFTC for crypto
> exchanges. And that is sometimes a fatal flaw in the world of crypto based
> investing. It is more of a speculative market than it needs to be. And most
> investors don't even know just how shaky the underpinnings of many crypto
> and NFT blockchains really are. Not to mention the outright scams and
> frauds in this arena.
>
> Concern is warranted. But outright banning of the underlying blockchain
> technology is not only unwise, it is impossible. Blockchain tech. is not
> the problem. The speculative  misuses of blockchains is a huge problem.
>
> Anyway, that's my partially-informed take on this latest outcry against
> crypto and blockchains. I expect a lot of sound and fury, but very little
> action from this Administration, this Congress or the Courts. And even less
> action if the political tides in Washington and in the States turn yet
> again.
>
> -- Bob Primak
>
> On Friday, June 3, 2022 at 01:58:36 PM EDT, Jerry Harris <
> jerryharri at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Hello,
> I am sharing this since on the day I gave the Bitcoin / Web3 talk, a group
> of 25 computer scientists, software engineers and technologists drafted a
> letter <http://concerned.tech> to Congress Wednesday criticizing
> blockchain technology. It did not go over well with the crypto community.
> The letter focused most of its attention on blockchain technology, and it
> didn't hold back: “Not all innovation is unqualifiedly good; not everything
> that we can build should be built. The history of technology is full of
> dead ends, false starts, and wrong turns"
>
> A well-known Kubernetes engineer Kelsey Hightower felt a harsh backlash,
> saying that he’d received death threats over Twitter DMs. “Now I gotta go
> figure out how to unsign a thing. This isn't the hill I'm willing to
> literally die on." He didn't remove his signature, and he's not the only
> critic of crypto I've heard receiving death threats, DDOS attacks, and
> other harassment.
>
> "The catastrophes and externalities related to blockchain technologies and
> crypto-asset investments are neither isolated nor are they growing pains of
> a nascent technology. They are the inevitable outcomes of a technology that
> is not built for its purpose and will remain forever unsuitable as a
> foundation for large-scale economic activity.
>
> Given these vast externalities, together with the-at best still-ambiguous,
> and at worst non-existent-uses of blockchain, we recommend that the
> Committee look beyond the hype and bluster of the crypto industry and
> understand not only its inherent flaws and extraordinary defects but also
> the litany of technological fallacies it is built upon."
>
> http://concerned.tech
>
> Jerry
> ===============================================
> ::The Lexington Computer and Technology Group Mailing List::
> Reply goes to sender only; Reply All to send to list.
> Send to the list: LCTG at lists.toku.us      Message archives:
> http://lists.toku.us/private.cgi/lctg-toku.us
> To subscribe: email lctg-subscribe at toku.us  To unsubscribe: email
> lctg-unsubscribe at toku.us
> Future and Past meeting information: http://LCTG.toku.us
> List information: http://lists.toku.us/listinfo.cgi/lctg-toku.us
> This message was sent to bobprimak at yahoo.com.
> Set your list options:
> http://lists.toku.us/options.cgi/lctg-toku.us/bobprimak@yahoo.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.toku.us/pipermail/lctg-toku.us/attachments/20220608/246e2d1c/attachment.html>