In recent days, the debate has been launched on the need for regulators to take Web 3 seriously and for such regulation to be carried out by adapted institutions. See, for example, Tomicha Tillemann and James Rathmell’s post on CoinDesk. The authors demand such regulation, arguing both the great weight of the actors present in the matter – large technology companies, large banks – and the protective function that regulation must have. In this case, the protection of citizens who move more and more in the ecosystems of crypto assets.
Cryptocurrencies to go mainstream with regulation, says SEC’s Gary Gensler
Regulation Web 3
Now, in addition to the urgency of such regulations and taking into account the potential beneficial consequences of the cryptoeconomy on the economy as a whole, the question arises as to whether the current regulatory institutions can carry out the regulation of a totally different world, that did not exist when they were created, and of which, in addition, they are in the antipodes in many respects. Would it be necessary to create, then, other regulatory institutions so that, in turn, they would produce better, more balanced and more adequate regulation?
Global regulation of crypto assets, the pending financial issue
When you start to study Law, one of the subjects with which you were immersed in the field is Philosophy of Law. And, with it, in some of the foundations of this area of knowledge. Although, between them, there could be apparent logical contradictions. One of the classics: there is no society without rights. It is about the proverb attributed to Cicero: Where there is man there is society, where society is there right. But, in turn, this harmony between regulation and society is bracketed under other formulations. As the one that shows that the change in laws follows, behind, the change in societies. Something that could be underlined with: the change in the laws follows, but far behind, the changes in the economy, and goes at a snail’s pace with respect to technological innovations.
Regulation of crypto assets
With regard to the regulation of crypto assets, the regulations have been about a decade out of step. If new regulatory institutions are created in this new field, it is very possible that the time required to make decisions about its characteristics, its purposes, its way of functioning, the profiles of its components, its organization, the scope of its activities. decisions, etc. take the backlog much further. Meanwhile, the fast-paced cryptocurrency hare would run wildly. Now, if we are faithful to the moral of the fable of the tortoise and the hare, it is better to go slowly but with a firm and sure step.
China to launch the first national blockchain standard next year
Philosophy of Law was the subject that, along with History of Law, the one that I liked the most. Something strange, because most of them liked what they called “more practical” subjects. It seemed to me that precisely the most practical ones were my favorites.
Concepts like money or value
I still think that there is nothing more practical than a knowledge of history and transformations in a field or a good theory. But surely I am wrong, even if I continue to believe that until regulators have a clear conception of what concepts such as money or value mean, with their transformations throughout history, that allows us to get away from the noise of the present (taxation of cryptocurrencies, crime financing, etc.), they will hardly understand the meaning of Blockchain, with cryptocurrencies in particular and crypto assets in general at the center of focus.
Cryptocurrency regulation in the US puts its financial leadership at stake
When something is urgent and, at the same time, requires time, you have a practical problem of relevance. It is no longer a logical contradiction, because in practice and even less in political practice there are no contradictions.