A group of 26 leading computer experts urge US lawmakers to resist crypto lobbying efforts, calling crypto financial instruments “risky, flawed, and unproven”
Computer scientists and academics target US lawmakers in effort to counter well-financed lobbying efforts Source: concerned.tech .
Earlier industry and financial-sector appeals for clearer rules framed the debate around innovation and market access; concerned.tech shifts attention toward whether crypto financial products have earned regulatory accommodation at all.
First-order effects
US lawmakers considering crypto policy now face a coordinated objection from computer scientists and academics, rather than only competing industry and investor arguments.
Crypto advocates must defend their financial-instrument claims against a public assessment that labels them risky, flawed, and unproven.
Second-order effects
The industry’s Washington campaign becomes less able to treat regulation as solely an innovation-versus-restriction debate, as technical credibility becomes a distinct point of contention.
Financial firms seeking crypto-linked products face a policy debate in which support from market participants is offset by organized expert skepticism.
Third-order effects
If expert groups continue to organize against crypto lobbying, US crypto policy is likely to be shaped by a legitimacy contest over product safety and usefulness, not just by demands for regulatory clarity.
That contest favors regulatory approaches that require crypto advocates to establish the case for financial products before receiving the treatment sought by industry lobbyists.
The trend: Crypto’s policy debate is evolving from a push for clearer rules into a broader contest over whether its financial products merit institutional legitimacy.
Our call to action is simple. If you are a computer scientist or developer concerned about this issue, we're opening the letter to the wider tech community to sign and tell our policymakers that enough is enough, the status quo has to change. Sign at https://concerned.tech/
@matthew_d_green
Matthew Green on x
A group of technologists have signed a letter panning cryptocurrency. And while many of their criticisms are sound (there are too many scams), from a technical perspective this letter is pretty messy. https://concerned.tech/
@katie_martin_fx
Katie Martin on x
Crypto promoters: 'why don't you educate yourself about the technology?' Serious software engineers: “The claims that the blockchain advocates make are not true. It's not secure, it's not decentralised” https://www.ft.com/...
@boazbaraktcs
Boaz Barak on x
Big gap between urging congress to take “critical, skeptical approach” towards blockchains (which I agree with) and saying blockchains “will remain forever unsuitable as a foundation for large-scale economic activity” (requires more clairvoyance than I can muster on a Wednesday).…
@silvermanjacob
Jacob Silverman on x
“Crypto-assets have been the vehicle for unsound and highly volatile speculative investment schemes that are being actively promoted to retail investors who may be unable to understand their nature and risk” https://www.ft.com/...
@smdiehl
Stephen Diehl on x
Today the global community of technologists sent a letter to Congress urging them to resist the crypto industry's lobbying influence. The letter was signed by some of the most respected scholars and technologists in our field. And now we need your help. 🧵 https://www.ft.com/...
@matthew_d_green
Matthew Green on x
Blockchains can't have transaction reversal methods. This is nonsense. As an example: many popular stablecoins have “freeze” mechanisms built into their smart contracts. https://twitter.com/...
@matthew_d_green
Matthew Green on x
“Blockchains don't have privacy, but if they do have privacy then privacy is bad.” https://twitter.com/...
@geoffreyhuntley
@geoffreyhuntley on x
Shipped a thing. Please take the time to read the thread below and the letter that was sent to Congress. https://concerned.tech/ https://twitter.com/...
@johnreedstark
John Reed Stark on x
26 independent expert technologists just wrote an open letter to Congress ridiculing blockchain and exposing Web3 as a bogus marketing tool and high-tech swindle. Mark this day on your calendar as the beginning of the end of Web3 and the Big Crypto Cartel. https://concerned.tech/
@mskidchaos
@mskidchaos on x
Tech nerds are taking no prisoners! “The computational power is equivalent to what you could do in a centralised way with a $100 computer, We're wasting millions of dollars' worth of equipment because we've decided that we don't trust the banking system” https://www.ft.com/...
@adamsamson
Adam Samson on x
A group of leading tech experts is urging Congress to crack down on the crypto industry. This is an important story b/c the crypto lobby in the US and globally has become much bigger, organised and well financed in recent months. https://www.ft.com/... @ScottChipolina
@billbennettnz
Bill Bennett on x
Common sense, but when did that ever account for anything in politics? Tech experts urge Washington to resist crypto industry's influence https://www.ft.com/...
@davetroy
Dave Troy on x
🚨 It's much worse than just “influence,” we are talking about capture, and in the context of global hybrid war. The best thing we can do is drive policies that crush the Ponzis that enable the capture. Can't happen soon enough! https://twitter.com/...
@1br0wn
@1br0wn on x
Tech experts (including Bruce Schneier) urge Washington DC to resist cryptocurrency industry's influence and ‘claim that crypto and blockchain tech serve no real purpose.’ https://www.ft.com/...
@tante
@tante on x
I am a proud signatory of this open letter directed at (for now) the US Senate. Technologists need to speak up, we need to make our voices heard to get policymakers to put a stop to the blockchain scam engine. https://twitter.com/...
@catherineflick
Dr Catherine Flick on x
I have also signed this letter. Hoping it will also be sent to governments further afield. https://twitter.com/...
@marietjeschaake
@marietjeschaake on x
Experts counterlobby: “The claims that the blockchain advocates make are not true,” said @schneierblog “It's not secure, it's not decentralised. Any system where you forget your password and you lose your life savings is not a safe system,” ↘️ https://giftarticle.ft.com/...