Turkey’s Upcoming Crypto Rules Will Protect Users While Fostering Innovation, Lawmaker Says

CoinDeskPolicyPublicado em 2024-02-20Última atualização em 2024-02-21

Resumo

Ömer İleri, who oversees Information and Communication Technologies for Turkey’s ruling party, met with representatives of the crypto sector to discuss upcoming regulations.

Turkey is preparing a regulatory package for the crypto industry.
The goal of the package is to protect consumers while fostering innovation in the sector, a member of the parliament told CoinDesk Turkey.

8.5K

Turkey’s planned rules for the crypto industry are primarily to ensure consumer protection – but in a way that also supports innovation, Ömer İleri, deputy chairman for the ruling AK Party, told CoinDesk Turkey in an interview on Tuesday.

İleri, who oversees Information and Communication Technologies for the AK Party, met with crypto industry representatives, including legal experts and members of the media, to discuss the planned legislative package.

“Our goal is to secure the citizen, to protect the investor, to regulate the platforms, but to put forward a draft law that also paves the way for innovators and innovation,” İleri said.

According to İleri, Turkey has big plans for various tech fields, such as blockchain and artificial intelligence. He pointed to initiatives like Blockchain Istanbul and Forum Metaverse by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s administration as examples of the government’s interest in the blockchain space.

In January, the country’s Finance Minister Mehmet Şimşek said the government was almost done with technical studies for a crypto legislative package. Conducting a “legal study” of crypto assets is important for consumer protection and promoting innovation in the space, İleri said Tuesday.

STORY CONTINUES BELOW

Recommended for you:

“Today’s meeting was really very beneficial in this sense. Sector representatives shared their thoughts on situation assessment. They expressed their opinions on what should be included in the draft. Honestly, we see that all of us have similar thoughts in this process,” he said.

Edited by Sandali Handagama.

Leituras Relacionadas

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbitHá 7m

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbitHá 7m

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbitHá 48m

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbitHá 48m

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

A social media claim has brought attention to Hyperliquid (HYPE) and the growth of its related ETF products. According to a June 20 post on X by AlphaOnChain, three Hyperliquid ETFs launched in May 2026 have collectively amassed $158 million in assets under management, led by a Bitwise fund with $88 million and a 21Shares fund with $66 million. The article notes this claim is from social media and not verified by official issuer data, advising caution. Nonetheless, the report highlights that HYPE is gaining traction as a notable altcoin narrative. Its focus on on-chain perpetual trading and exchange infrastructure places it at the intersection of DeFi and derivatives, attracting traders looking for high-conviction plays beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum. The key takeaway is that while social momentum can influence short-term markets, sustainable growth for HYPE would require confirmed demand, liquidity, and continued ecosystem development.

bitcoinistHá 2h

Hyperliquid ETF Claim Draws Attention As HYPE Narrative Builds On X

bitcoinistHá 2h

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbitHá 2h

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbitHá 2h

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbitHá 2h