Lummis Predicts Positive Outlook For Crypto If Senate Shifts To Republican Control

bitcoinistОпубліковано о 2024-09-28Востаннє оновлено о 2024-09-28

Анотація

In a recent interview with CNBC, Republican Senator Cynthia Lummis, a prominent advocate for crypto assets, discussed the potential for...

In a recent interview with CNBC, Republican Senator Cynthia Lummis, a prominent advocate for crypto assets, discussed the potential for significant regulatory changes following the upcoming US elections. 

With just under two months until voters head to the polls, Lummis emphasized the need for a robust digital asset framework to support the US economy.

Lummis Urges Congress To Lead In Crypto Regulation

While there has been notable progress, including the approval of crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that invest directly in major cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), Lummis pointed out that the US still lags behind the European Union’s ineffective regulation. 

The Senator highlighted that the EU began implementing its regulatory framework in January 2023. Lummis expressed concern that the US should not have allowed other nations to take the lead in financial services.

Commenting on recent statements made by Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chair Gary Gensler earlier this week, in which he stressed the need for further investor protection in the industry, Lummis argued that the SEC’s current approach – characterized by enforcement actions rather than clear regulatory guidance – has hindered the growth of the crypto industry. 

Lummis asserted that Congress should take the reins in regulating this sector, criticizing the SEC for claiming it possesses the necessary tools while instead pursuing court cases against alleged bad actors under the current Biden administration.

Lummis Questions Gensler’s Future At SEC 

Regarding Gensler’s future at the SEC, Lummis noted that if former President Donald Trump were to be reelected, he has indicated intentions to fire Gensler immediately. However, she was less certain about Gensler’s fate in the event of a Kamala Harris victory. 

When discussing the prospect of a divided Congress—where the House could be Democratic and the Senate Republican—Lummis expressed optimism that a Republican-controlled Senate would be more beneficial for digital assets

The Senator highlighted that Tim Scott’s potential chairmanship of the Banking Committee would lead to a stronger push for a statutory framework for digital assets, contrasting this with the current leadership under Sherrod Brown. 

This comes as Lummis has also been actively proposing legislation to solidify the US position in the crypto space. On July 31, she introduced a bill to establish a “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve” program. 

This initiative would direct the US Treasury to acquire one million Bitcoins over five years, likening the program to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Lummis believes that such a substantial Bitcoin accumulation could reinforce the value of the US dollar and play a crucial role in addressing the national debt, which currently stands at $35 trillion.

Crypto
The 1D chart shows that BTC’s price is trending upward. Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView.com

At the time of writing, the largest cryptocurrency on the market has climbed to $66,000 for the first time in over two months, following a substantial 12% rise in September.

Featured image from DALL-E, chart from TradingView.com 

Ronaldo Marquez

Ronaldo Marquez

Ronaldo is a seasoned crypto enthusiast with over four years of experience in the field. He is passionate about exploring the vast and dynamic world of decentralized finance (DeFi) and its practical applications for achieving economic sovereignty. Ronaldo is constantly seeking to expand his knowledge and expertise in the DeFi space, as he believes it holds tremendous potential for transforming the traditional financial landscape.

Пов'язані матеріали

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

In May, Meta imposed internal restrictions on its engineers regarding the use of Claude Code and Codex, two widely used AI programming tools. Despite being a major client, Meta's guidelines, still in effect, prohibit these external models from being used for specific tasks to prevent potential "escalations with partners." The core concern is "distillation"—the risk that outputs from Claude or Codex could inadvertently contaminate the training data and evaluation processes for Meta's in-house AI coding assistant, MetaCode. If MetaCode is trained or evaluated using data generated by these external models, it risks learning their capabilities rather than developing its own, blurring the line of intellectual origin. The restrictions are precise: engineers cannot use the external models to generate test questions, debug source code, or suggest test cases. AI-generated content is also barred from environments accessible to MetaCode. However, AI can still assist with peripheral tasks like workflow setup and code organization, provided all outputs are manually reviewed. This caution reflects a broader industry dilemma. While distillation is a common technique, using a competitor's model output for training raises legal and ethical questions about the ownership of derived capabilities. Contractual terms from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic explicitly forbid using their outputs to build competing products, putting enforcement power in the hands of rivals. The move is also financially motivated, as Meta seeks to reduce its hefty internal AI spending, estimated in the billions this year. Meta's policy illustrates the delicate balance companies must strike: leveraging powerful external AI tools while safeguarding the integrity and independence of their own AI development. As AI systems increasingly help build other AIs, distinguishing the origin of capabilities becomes a fundamental challenge for the entire industry.

marsbit56 хв тому

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

marsbit56 хв тому

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

The article "Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?" explores the complex and often contentious integration of AI into the cultural and creative industries, particularly film and television. It begins with the cancellation of Amazon's AI-generated animation "Punky Duck," highlighting the ethical debates surrounding AI content. AI's rapid advancement is transforming video production, enabling cost-effective, full-length AI films (e.g., "RAPHAEL," "Dreams of Violets") while sparking industry resistance over issues like "synthetic actors." The core debate has shifted from whether to use AI to how to use it responsibly. The article analyzes why AI's entry into film is uniquely unsettling. It distinguishes between "cultural fast food" (short-form, fast-paced content like micro-dramas) and "cultural main courses" (traditional, long-form film/TV). AI currently excels at the former, matching its fragmented narratives, shallow emotional needs, and free-to-consumer models. However, venturing into the latter challenges the human-centric essence of storytelling—creativity, emotional depth, and the unique value of human labor and experience. While AI can generate massive volumes of content and lower costs, it risks devaluing human creativity, leading to homogenized output, and creating unfair competition through potential intellectual property infringement. Its efficiency also amplifies content safety risks, making preemptive governance crucial. To counter these risks, the article proposes establishing clear boundaries guided by a human-centered AI content perspective. It outlines four principles: 1) Amplify, rather than displace, human creative space; 2) Respect and protect human creative output; 3) Ensure human creative control and responsibility remain paramount; and 4) Guarantee transparency and traceability in AI creation. The conclusion emphasizes that humans must act as the "helmsmen" of technology, steering AI development to enhance, not replace, the core human values at the heart of cultural expression.

marsbit1 год тому

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

marsbit1 год тому

Planck Retracted? The Father of Quantum Tripped by an Algorithm

The recent discovery that two articles (published in 1940 and 1942) by Max Planck, the Nobel laureate and founder of quantum theory, are marked as "retracted" on Springer's digital platform highlights a curious clash between historical publishing practices and modern automated systems. An investigation suggests these retractions are algorithmic errors, not due to fraud or misconduct. The papers, philosophical reflections on science published in *Die Naturwissenschaften*, were likely flagged by the platform's systems. One article, a republished lecture, may have been mistaken for duplicate publication. Another, sharing a title with a prior article by a different author (a common practice for continuing debates at the time), may have triggered a similar automated check. The digital versions have even been replaced with blank pages, contrary to normal practice of preserving retracted texts. This incident underscores how contemporary digital infrastructure, built around concepts like "self-plagiarism" and strict copyright, can misclassify and obscure legitimate historical scholarly communication. It serves as a warning that digital archives are not neutral mirrors of the past but are filtered by platform rules, potentially distorting the scientific record. As AI systems increasingly rely on such databases, such erroneous metadata could propagate, affecting how future tools interpret and access historical knowledge.

marsbit1 год тому

Planck Retracted? The Father of Quantum Tripped by an Algorithm

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片