Moving Into The 21st Century

One thing is sure, is that our legal processes often do not take into account the evolution of the power of the Internet. Like it or not…

Photo by Umberto on Unsplash

Moving Into The 21st Century

One thing is sure, is that our legal processes often do not take into account the evolution of the power of the Internet. Like it or not, we are now entering a world of digital tokens, and where our assets — either their ownership and trading — are now linked to digitally signed entities. But much of our legal system can only see wet signatures as the ultimate truth, and where there is no clear understanding of how digital assets and tokens will be traded, and especially in the safeguards that would apply. I have previously written on this related to a Blockchain Act for every country:

https://medium.com/asecuritysite-when-bob-met-alice/we-need-a-blockchain-act-for-every-country-7ae10f36b3c4?source=friends_link&sk=f20732f901d528839c54cee6f5311b47

and I still strongly believe we need something like this. The countries of the world thus need to put in place legal protection for those who deal with digitally signed assets. At the one end, you have cryptocurrency, but at the other, you have digitally signed assets and related tokens.

To me, we will grow a new economy — a tokenized economy — and it will be based on digital trust. Whether we hold just hold public keys on a ledger in a permissioned way, or record our transactions on a public ledger, it doesn’t matter, as it is all about the digital certainty of signing a transaction, and properly integrating digital trust. The PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) has taken us so far with its machine-to-machine focus, but the evolution of digital signing moves it into every part of our society.

And so, we need sense within the wider question of digital signing and not the knee jerk reactions to cryptocurrency. For me, this article at least starts a sensible debate around the issue, and outlines practical ways forward:

https://blog.coinbase.com/our-response-to-a-recent-editorial-from-bloomberg-on-congresss-crypto-tax-proposal-78c0ecc59d0a

An interesting quote is:

The IRS already has the authority to require crypto brokers to provide regular reporting of the gains and losses of their customers’ accounts. But they haven’t. For years, the crypto industry has asked for those regulations, and we are still waiting.

The article proposes sensible approaches on a way forward:

  • “Brokers” of digital assets should be defined as it is understood in the real world today.
  • Propose regulations to define the parameters of tax information reporting for crypto.
  • Hold hearings in Congress on tax oversight for crypto so that there is robust debate on the issue.
  • We should not draft legislation that focuses on crypto ghosts that don’t exist now and have no roadmap to exist in the future.

Conclusions

I believe in building a new digital world, and where the rights of the citizen is at its core. At the core of the future, is to replace our flawed data infrastructures and protocols, and move towards creating a foundation of cryptography, and build software that integrates fully with this layer.

Subscribe: https://billatnapier.medium.com/membership