中本聪的致命缺陷：比特币的创造者如何无意中为监管铺平了道路......

在匿名性常常占据主导地位的加密世界中，有一个名字既是一个谜，又是一股革命力量——中本聪(Satoshi Nakamoto)。

难以捉摸的比特币创造者中本聪于 2008 年通过发布比特币白皮书引入了去中心化数字货币的概念，引发了一场金融革命，这场革命将颠覆传统银行系统并挑战货币控制的基础。

然而，尽管中本聪有着巧妙的设计和远见，比特币结构中的一个潜在缺陷却在不知不觉中为他的致命错误铺平了道路——易受监管接管。

中本聪和比特币遗产

比特币的诞生是在2007年至2009年席卷全球的经济大衰退的痛苦中。比特币被称为点对点电子现金系统，旨在将人们从中心化金融机构的束缚中解放出来。

中本聪的理念是通过消除中介机构并建立透明、抗审查的金融生态系统，为消费者提供金融自由。

英国文学当然有利于创意阶层，并且认为金融投资者和技术专家不需要语法熟练程度的假设是错误的。

例如，a(B)和a(b)造成了BTC生态系统的混乱。

以下是中本聪 (Satoshi Nakamoto) 语法错误的情况。

据市场分析师称，中本聪只犯了一个错误，一些人认为这是支持垃圾邮件的比特币爱好者们感到困惑的根源。

比特币中的垃圾交易是指用低价值或不必要的交易淹没网络的交易，导致拥塞和潜在的中断。

这种做法通常是恶意或无意中进行的，目的是测试网络容量或破坏正常运行。

中本聪使用同一个名字“比特币”来描述两个不同的概念：资产和网络。

这里有一个理解：它们是相互依赖的，但具有完全不同的属性。

网络，而不是资产，是

资产，而不是网络，

至关重要的是，为了从资产的属性中受益，需要访问网络，反之亦然。

现在很明显，为了从资产的功能中受益，需要访问网络，反之亦然。

分析人士认为，那些声称“比特币是敌人的”来为垃圾邮件辩护的人未能理解资产与网络之间的关键对比。

原理很简单

What are the reasons regulators have to come after BTC?

While Satoshi Nakamoto had good intentions, that definition and distinction left regulators a loophole to come after the digital asset. Government arms such as the United States CFTC and the SEC worry about bitcoin’s stability, and without the network and asset understanding, they have come for the Bitcoin network.

This has been done indirectly by censoring crypto exchanges such as Binance, Kraken, FTX, Huobi, and Coinbase. Bitcoin’s decentralized nature and lack of backing by any government raise concerns about its stability and potential impact on traditional financial systems.

Regulators worry about the potential for financial instability and contagion, especially if cryptocurrencies are not properly regulated. Stronger financial regulation and global standards are seen as measures to address these concerns.

Gary Gensler’s take on crypto regulation

The head of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Gary Gensler, has consistently stated that all digital tokens, with the exception of Bitcoin, are subject to SEC jurisdiction.

Bitcoin, he claims, is a commodity. In an interview with New York Magazine in February, Gensler stated, “at the core, these tokens are securities because there’s a group in the middle, and the public is anticipating profits based on that group.”

Gensler is alluding to the Howey Test, which is based on a 1946 Supreme Court decision in the SEC v. W.J. Howey Company case. Howey sold citrus groves to Florida customers, who leased them back to the corporation, which subsequently cultivated the plants and sold the oranges on their behalf, splitting the profits.

Howey later declined to register with the SEC, claiming that its transactions were not investment contracts. Howey lost the case when the court determined that the leaseback arrangements were indeed investment contracts, hence establishing the Howey test.

The crypto market is at a standstill awaiting the approval of the BTC ETFs, as many analysts had called for a January 10th deadline. In the wait, Gary Gensler has something to say:

The SEC commissioner emphasized that crypto investors “should understand they may be deprived of key info” and “other important protections” as a result of their investment. The SEC chairman emphasized:

Investments in crypto assets also can be exceptionally risky & are often volatile. A number of major platforms & crypto assets have become insolvent and/or lost value. Investments in crypto assets continue to be subject to significant risk.

Gary Gensler

In the near future, if BTC ETFs are approved, crypto investors will be able to draw a line between regulators and Satoshi Nakamoto’s financial freedom plan. Who really has their best interests at heart: Financial protection through Gary Gensler or financial freedom through the pseudonymous Satoshi Nakamoto?

热点：中本聪 比特币 比特币的 特币