Snippings

xxx

A striking feature of the manipulation of our attention by smartphones is that it is not usually achieved through misinformation. Typically, our phones are not supplying us with false information. As those who endlessly scroll news platforms can attest, the accuracy and truth of the information they are accessing is central to whether they will continue to use a platform. Rather, what is being manipulated is our attention.Footnote6 The provision of information, resources, or useful tools is a way to draw in smartphone users whose attention can then be manipulated either for the purposes of marketing (think advertisements on news websites, ‘clickbait’, and targeted advertising), or for collecting social information that can then be used for manipulation (again, as in the Cambridge Analytica affair). Google Maps, for example, provides the user with accurate navigational information, while also providing the company Google with valuable information about all sorts of things from daily routines to shopping habits they can then use for targeted marketing across other unrelated apps. Tech companies can also add such data to large, anonymized databases which are a valuable commodity. This sort of manipulation, we argue, undermines the first-pass assessment of smartphones as cognitive extensions. Importantly, what is key here is not just that our phones can be used to exploit and manipulate us, but that they are designed for this purpose.

From: Full article: Smartphones: Parts of Our Minds? Or Parasites?.

xxx

xxx

Mica is clear on the rules for a stablecoin issued by several issuers all within the EU. Under a unified regulatory framework, the issuers must maintain a single reserve, a unified custody policy, and make clear all issuers of the same stablecoin are jointly liable for any redemptions.

But the regulation is silent when it comes to a global firm issuing the same fungible stablecoin both from an EU-regulated entity and from a third-country entity as Circle has done. In this case, the reserves backing the stablecoin are split across jurisdictions, each with its own requirements, enforced by local regulators tasked with safeguarding the interests of their own jurisdiction. Stablecoin regulations remain unaligned on requirements regarding prohibitions on interest, redemption and eligible reserve assets.

From: The stablecoin loophole that could expose the EU.

xxx

xxx

Ten of the largest trade associations in fintech and crypto have called on President Donald Trump to intervene in what they say is a coordinated attack by big banks to stifle innovation and lock out competitors.

In a letter sent on Wednesday, the groups, which include the Blockchain Association, and the Crypto Council for Innovation, warned that JPMorgan’s plan to charge fees for access to consumer banking data threatens to de-bank millions of Americans and could cripple the adoption of stablecoins (USDC, USDT) and self-custody wallets.

From: Stablecoin News: Crypto Industry Asks Donald Trump to Stop JPMorgan’s ‘Punitive Tax’ on Data Access.

xxx

Elon Musk’s Starlink went down on 24th July, causing chaos across the globe. Elon Musk apologised for the outage of his Starlink network, on X. “SpaceX will remedy the root cause to ensure it doesn’t happen again,” he wrote.

I just assuemd that this was a ptetty typical case of management incompetence rahter than an unexpected solar flare or somethign. Except that 

xxx

Ukrainian military Starlink systems were down for two and a half hours overnight, a senior commander confirmed, as part of a global disruption to the satellite internet provider.

From: Ukraine says Starlink’s huge global outage hit military communications.

xxx

xxx

Last week, the House passed three major crypto bills: the GENIUS Act, which regulates stablecoins; the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, which outlines which assets should and shouldn’t be subject to securities laws, and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act, which prohibits the creation of a U.S. central bank digital currency. The GENIUS Act was signed into law Friday, making it the first significant federal legislation to govern crypto markets.

From: The Take Away: What Crypto Legislation Does.

xxx

xxx

The Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act
The simplest of the three bills, the Anti-CBDC Act, bans the Federal Reserve from issuing a central bank digital currency or offering retail accounts or services to individuals.

From: The Take Away: What Crypto Legislation Does.

xxx

Because of its broad language and sharp partisan undertones, this bill faces an uphill battle to pass the Senate, where 60 bipartisan votes are needed for it to prevail.

xxx

The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act
establishes the first federal framework for stablecoins. At its core, the law requires U.S. stablecoin issuers to hold 1:1 collateral reserves in cash, short-term Treasuries, money market funds, or central bank reserve deposits.

From: The Take Away: What Crypto Legislation Does.

Rosa Giovanna Barresi, a lawyer and Adjunct Professor at the University of Florence, summaries the GENIUS Act succinctly. She says the GENIUS states stablecoins are a special type of digital asset, but does not explain what a digital asset is, explicitly forbids stablecoins from earning earning interest but allows their conversion into instruments that can and “leaves so many loopholes that it will be a lawyers’ bonanza for years on end“.

It also brings stablecoin issuers under the Bank Secrecy Act, requiring them to collect customer data and monitor for suspicious activity. But those provisions are “not precise,” says the Cato Institute’s Director of Financial Regulation Studies Jennifer Schulp. 

 

xxx

The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act
Finally, the third bill, the House’s Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (“Clarity”), attempts to write rules of the road for the rest of blockchain-based assets. It creates a new “safe harbor” framework to exempt sales of certain assets from the securities laws where decentralized blockchains are not effectively controlled by any one entity.

From: The Take Away: What Crypto Legislation Does.

xxx

xxx

One of the functions of identity is to have something that can be targeted for punishment

From: Does digital ID have risks even if it’s ZK-wrapped?.

xxx

xxx

Suppose that a ZK-identity platform works exactly as intended, faithfully replicating all the logic above, and we even figure out how to keep user secrets safe for the long term, for non-technically-proficient users, without trusting centralized authorities.

From: Does digital ID have risks even if it’s ZK-wrapped?.

xxx

This is, to say the least very least, a tough nut to crack and one of the reasons why I think that putting people in charge of their own identities, a rallying cry of the decentralsied identity crowd, will lead to disaster.

xxx

Hong Kong customs officers have arrested two men who allegedly smuggled cash out of the city and made suspicious transactions, including with a popular stablecoin, to launder HK$1.15 billion (US$146.5 million).

A Customs and Excise Department spokesman said on Tuesday that an investigation into the pair found they had smuggled cash out of the city.

An insider said the suspects also made transactions using the stablecoin USDT and regular currency, with officers finding the source of funds to be questionable.

From: 2 arrested in Hong Kong over laundering HK$1.15 billion in case involving stablecoin | South China Morning Post.

xxx

xxx

Amazon has acquired the AI wearables startup Bee, according to a LinkedIn post by Bee co-founder Maria de Lourdes Zollo. Amazon confirmed the acquisition to TechCrunch but noted that the deal has not yet closed.
Bee, which raised $7 million last year, makes both a stand-alone Fitbit-like bracelet (which retails for $49.99, plus a $19-per-month subscription) and an Apple Watch app. The product records everything it hears — unless the user manually mutes it — with the goal of listening to conversations to create reminders and to-do lists for the user.

From: Amazon acquires Bee, the AI wearable that records everything you say | TechCrunch.

xxx

xxx

The Bank for International Settlements said stablecoins fail the three main tests of any money because they are not backed by central banks, lack sufficient guardrails against illicit usage and do not have the flexibility of funding needed to generate loans.

From: Stablecoins ‘perform poorly’ as money, central banks warn.

Now, none of these are tests of money as I understand it. Money does not need to be backed by central banks (the money in my Barclays account is not), the £50 note does not have guardrails against illicit usage and a £1 coin does not “generate” loans (although it can be used as collateral for a loan, as will Bitcoin over at JP Morgan Chase). Anyway, that’s not the point I wanted to focus on. The BIS go on to say that “due to their need to always be backed by an equivalent amount of assets, they also do not have the ‘elasticity’ that allows banks to create extra money by granting loans”. But this why stablecoins are a good thing, and the reason why banks need really tight regulation but stablecoins do not.