10 ms·

SEC announces 'Cyber Unit'

139 points by newman8r 9y ago

newman8r 9y ago
Interesting bullet points include: 'false information spread through electronic and social media' 'violations involving distributed ledger technology and initial coin offerings'
- zghst 9y ago
  We might as well start adopting policies straight out of China since we seem to be a few years behind them in recognizing these issues.
  - DSingularity 9y ago
    Are you suggesting we should have banned ICOs?
    - redorb 9y ago
      I suggest that. Not forever but until there can be a framework in place about the minimum information required to be given to potential investors. A lot of ico's are pure scams; banning them upfront would limit the number of investors to those who are willing to break the law.
      - CryptoPunk 9y ago
        It should be Buyer Beware, with only those convicted of engaging in fraud facing legal restrictions. No one is forced to invest their cryptocurrency into these token sales. A blanket ban on an entire category of digital information/value exchange, which effectively punishes millions of people in the name of preempting scams, is busy bodies sticking their nose where it doesn't belong, to control the actions of their fellow citizens to an extent that they have no right to. Emulating the Chinese government, which rules a country with a much less developed tradition of civil liberties than the West, would be a giant move backwards.
        bostik 9y ago
        > Buyer Beware Careful there. The origins of that expression come from old Rome, "Caveat Emptor". A culture whose pantheon had a common deity for merchants and thieves. And while we are on the topic of legalised robbery: every time you see someone discourage regulation in the name of "giving the consumer a choice", keep in mind that they are most likely thinking about a more elaborate Hobson's choice.[0] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice
        CryptoPunk 9y ago
        Losing money on a bad cryptocurrency or token investment is a rite of passage that provides an invaluable learning experience to a budding cryptocurrency investor. On that note, children that are overly sheltered grow up to have problems as adults. The same applies to the investing public. And on top of that, they're not children. It's their right, as adults, to do with their own money what they wish. Disclosure and false advertising regulations, like what applies to herbal supplements, are fine, as they directly address fraud. The centralization of the securities industry, with IPO-related registration requirements, and onerous and privacy-compromising regulations that have to be met for any securities purchase, is not fine. I understand that most tokens don't qualify as securities, and thus won't be affected by SEC regulations, but that doesn't change the fact that securities regulations have a direct and profound negative effect on personal rights, and set a dangerous precedent for far more of the same.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        There are two sides of the issue. One is gullible people who lose money. The others are frauds who gain it. I don't think that the society should in any way encourage becoming an asshole who preys on other people's stupidity.
        CryptoPunk 9y ago
        Fraud should absolutely be punished. There are real fraudsters in every industry, especially cryptocurrency, and it would be great to see government resources spent going after them. But creating a centralized gatekeeper, and applying Prior Restraint to anyone that hasn't registered and been approved by that gatekeeper, is not a proportionate and just strategy for combating scams. It's preemptive and punishing to innocent people.
- thephyber 9y ago
  > 'false information spread through electronic and social media' I was about to make a "Ministry of Truth" kind of comment until I re-checked the article: "Market manipulation schemes involving false information spread through electronic and social media"
  - newman8r 9y ago
    yeah I should have included the full context, but I think it could end up being a gray line. It's something to keep an eye on because the difference between market manipulation and trolling/FUD could be hard to distinguish.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      > but I think it could end up being a gray line. The SEC can and does monitor social media, correlate it to trade data, and takes action based on that data. http://nypost.com/2017/09/07/ex-amazon-employee-pleads-guilty-on-insider-trading-charges/ http://nypost.com/2017/09/07/ex-amazon-employee-pleads-guilt... Credit to Matt Levine's Money Stuff Bloomberg article where I originally read about this, but cannot find the article with a bit of Google searching.
    - astura 9y ago
      It's nothing new, the SEC already prosecutes market manipulation schemes involving false information spread through electronic and social media. Recent example: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-10/scammers-used-seekingalpha-for-bogus-stock-promotions-sec-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-10/scammers-... Market manipulation for financial gain is not at all a grey line.
- justinzollars 9y ago
  What a nightmare.
firloop 9y ago
Off topic but the word/prefix "cyber" is so cool. I wish it was used more, like the "e-" prefix for internet applications.
- 83457 9y ago
  Cyber is short for cybersex in some minds which makes official statements and words sound funny. Was just thinking about how cool it must be for Gibson to have pulled a term like cyberspace out of his head years ago and for it to be such a widely used term now. Edit, found video interview... https://youtu.be/ae3z7Oe3XF4 https://youtu.be/ae3z7Oe3XF4
  - richardknop 9y ago
    What? I was not aware that cyber is short for cybersex. That's strange. I thought cybersecurity, cyberspace, cyberpunk are what most people would imagine if they hear "cyber". When I hear "cyber" the mental image I get is some sort of a scene from Matrix where Neo plugs a wire into his brain and goes into virtual world.
    - 83457 9y ago
      Cyber is an adjective essentially meaning computer. It is well known from the word cybernetics and later cyberspace. However I was pointing out that it used to be common to use the word "cyber" in phrases in place of cybersex like "want to cyber?". Maybe it was just a late-90/eary-2000s thing.
      - vertex-four 9y ago
        It's mostly been replaced by RP ("roleplay") or ERP ("erotic roleplay"), the latter of which can make business process discussions interesting.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- smcl 9y ago
thephyber 9y ago
The organizational structure of many US government organizations still seems strange to me. The DHS's restructure after 9/11 seemed to make sense (from my viewpoint as an outsider) even if it looks like they outsourced the branding of it to the 3rd Reich. The Secret Service has dual roles of protection of certain officials and their families and investigating financial crimes. I understand the Secret Service's history as a sub-department of the Department of the Treasury made sense, but it still seems weird to have two very different, yet very specialized roles. And then there's this weird new requirement that very many US Government departments have their own tactical officer squads. Can't we just have a National Police (a merged FBI, US Marshals, etc)? The current silo system reeks of each silo budget hoarding. All of this to say: The SEC now needs to compete with the other branches of government to hire the best InfoSec people at a time when companies are investing more in the same space. If only the NSA was more focused on defending our government's systems, we could free up other government resources to work on the non-redundant functions.
- KGIII 9y ago
  Nazis wore Hugo Boss. As for branding, the TSA has nothing on that. The TSA recruits on pizza boxes.
  - pizza 9y ago
    Striking imagery is too gauche; a policy of deliberate ambiguity is always preferable, and something it seems the public unconscious (yours truly likely included) very rapidly absorbs.
    - KGIII 9y ago
      Your username indicates your bias! On a more serious note, uniforms are so much more drab today. I do wonder if there's some psychological science behind the mundanity of dress uniforms. I don't suppose you're up on your psychology? I tried Google and can only find the psych behind uniforms, and their effect on others, but no references to why they aren't as extravagant as they used to be.
paulie_a 9y ago
So not that I am looking but where do I submit my application to this new division...Actually scratch that: "I am happy to announce my new security consulting firm to aid the SEC Cyber Unit called joshing.io"
sdfgelgh43oito3 9y ago
The SEC is a dept with teeth. I expect the SEC Cyber Unit to catch many an internet scammer, likely to be more effective than regular law enforcement. This is good news for your average citizen, and bad news for financial criminals.
- flukus 9y ago
  What percentage of internet scammers and financial criminals are within the SEC's jurisdiction (the USA)?
  - phaus 9y ago
    By numbers there's enough to keep law enforcement busy. However, the percentage of global activity originating in the US would be insignificant.
- throwawayhnst 9y ago
  There is a theory called regulatory capture, according to which, regardless of the original purpose of a regulatory body, it will be "captured" by the very entities it was supposed to regulate, and end up used for their purposes.[1] In fact, the shameful behavior of all crypto related markets puts the lie to that theory. As we know, the SEC does not result in upstart startups not being able to raise money. It does not result in bigger, established startups monopolizing their markets, or doing anything else inappropriate. We can all found a traditional startup if we want. Literally anyone. Indeed, the SEC protects investment markets and makes them a safe and sane place to build startups in. It is safer for an investor to hand money to a startup in California, and safer for that startup to accept it (and abide at reasonable expense by the laws there), than anywhere in the world. We know this. That is what this whole site is about. At the same time, crypto currency markets are wastelands of fraud and crime. In fact, I do not even feel safe posting under my long-established name, because I don't want to be targeted by criminals now or in the future for it. I steer far, far away from this. This is a 100% genuine comment, I am not being sarcastic, I have no association with the SEC (in fact if anything I'm on the other side in the sense that I'm more of a startup founder), and this isn't shilling of any kind. I think the SEC does really good and important work. All the (traditional, fiat-based) valuations of startups that we speak of are thanks to the hard work of the SEC in establishing a fair market. How do we know? Because everyone can see the snake oil all over the darkweb, in crypto currency exchanges and markets, in ICO's, and everywhere the SEC hasn't been touching. I am really thankful for their work and welcome this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
nickysielicki 9y ago
Should I take this to mean that cryptocurrencies are all scams that demand SEC intervention, or that cryptocurrencies are legitimate and here to stay?
- wmf 9y ago
  Most crypto currencies are regulated by the CFTC instead of the SEC, but DACs/DAOs and ICOs are within the SEC's remit. They recently announced a crackdown on some but not all ICOs: https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_coinofferings https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_co...
- matt4077 9y ago
  Yes Serious answer: the SEC doesn't have an opinion on "cryptocurrencies" as such. They don't see them through the paradigm of the internet's crypto-anarchists' assault on the financial establishment that many in the community seem to prefer. They have certain mandates to ensure financial markets are able to function, and they set rules whenever they deem something a threat to that functioning market. That's why bitcoin has only seen some light regulation, mostly around "know your customers"–rules to guard against tax evasion and money laundering, the two most important ways it could be used illegally. ICO's are now used rather extensively for something between outright investment fraud and a pyramid scheme, so the usual rules about offering investments are applied.
justinzollars 9y ago
Can't continue to have an inflation tax (our government outspends what it takes in year after year after year) if the population moves to cryptocurrencies.
- millstone 9y ago
  How do cryptocurrencies prevent the government from borrowing?
  - justinzollars 9y ago
    It doesn't. But using non fiat currencies prevents value from being extracted from your dollars value. A 6 nuclear aircraft carrier armada and hundreds of military bases across the earth isn't free.
unstatusthequo 9y ago
Its 2017 and they are just thinking about this after their embarrassing failure. Asleep at the wheel
- sullivanmatt 9y ago
  This is the EDGAR system that was breached: https://www.edgarfiling.sec.gov/Welcome/EDGARLogin.htm https://www.edgarfiling.sec.gov/Welcome/EDGARLogin.htm Up until two years ago, that page used to recommend a minimum browser of either IE 5 or Netscape Navigator 3. If you look at the source and use of 'htm' extension, all signals point towards it being created using an extremely old version of Microsoft FrontPage (2000?). And that's not particularly uncommon on the government systems for unsexy tasks like filing regulatory reports. Limited IT staff and budget, paired with an unimaginable amount of red tape, lead to this type of breach. Also good InfoSec talent usually doesn't stay at the Federal space long. Anyone with strong skills within 50mi of the beltway can make $25k+ more per year by going private sector. Finally, let's not forget a much more limited talent pool is available because, in many situations, these jobs require you to be a U.S. citizen. I would argue that the SEC breach is only a symptom of a much more systemic problem with IT at the Federal level. To fix it will be extremely costly and painful. To do nothing will be extremely costly and painful.
  - thephyber 9y ago
    > To fix it will be extremely costly and painful. The last few years of the Obama administration, the White House proposed budget included an interesting and useful (IMHO) line item to address this. The gist of it was that any department could draw up a plan to take a loan against their future budgets to pay down IT efficiency projects (including streamlining of processes and improvements to cybersecurity posture). I doubt a Republican Congress would go for larger federal spending now for future savings, but I hope that all "government should be small and efficient" advocates would give this kind of proposal serious thought.
mtgx 9y ago
Whatever happened to the Cybersecurity Act (also called CISA) surveillance-bill-in-disguise championed so heavily by Dianne Feinstein and Obama that was supposed to help the NSA protect American individuals and companies against data breaches? This is why any such legislation needs to come with annual reviews. If it doesn't work as expected after a few years, then it should be repealed. But of course many of us know that the law was not about cybersecurity at all, despite its misleading name, but about allowing the NSA more direct access to companies' data.
EGreg 9y ago
Violations OF WHAT? Where are the rules for ICOs so far?

139 points by newman8r 9y ago

Interesting bullet points include: 'false information spread through electronic and social media' 'violations involving distributed ledger technology and initial coin offerings'

zghst 9y ago
We might as well start adopting policies straight out of China since we seem to be a few years behind them in recognizing these issues.
- DSingularity 9y ago
  Are you suggesting we should have banned ICOs?
  - redorb 9y ago
    I suggest that. Not forever but until there can be a framework in place about the minimum information required to be given to potential investors. A lot of ico's are pure scams; banning them upfront would limit the number of investors to those who are willing to break the law.
    - CryptoPunk 9y ago
      It should be Buyer Beware, with only those convicted of engaging in fraud facing legal restrictions. No one is forced to invest their cryptocurrency into these token sales. A blanket ban on an entire category of digital information/value exchange, which effectively punishes millions of people in the name of preempting scams, is busy bodies sticking their nose where it doesn't belong, to control the actions of their fellow citizens to an extent that they have no right to. Emulating the Chinese government, which rules a country with a much less developed tradition of civil liberties than the West, would be a giant move backwards.
      - bostik 9y ago
        > Buyer Beware Careful there. The origins of that expression come from old Rome, "Caveat Emptor". A culture whose pantheon had a common deity for merchants and thieves. And while we are on the topic of legalised robbery: every time you see someone discourage regulation in the name of "giving the consumer a choice", keep in mind that they are most likely thinking about a more elaborate Hobson's choice.[0] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobson%27s_choice
        CryptoPunk 9y ago
        Losing money on a bad cryptocurrency or token investment is a rite of passage that provides an invaluable learning experience to a budding cryptocurrency investor. On that note, children that are overly sheltered grow up to have problems as adults. The same applies to the investing public. And on top of that, they're not children. It's their right, as adults, to do with their own money what they wish. Disclosure and false advertising regulations, like what applies to herbal supplements, are fine, as they directly address fraud. The centralization of the securities industry, with IPO-related registration requirements, and onerous and privacy-compromising regulations that have to be met for any securities purchase, is not fine. I understand that most tokens don't qualify as securities, and thus won't be affected by SEC regulations, but that doesn't change the fact that securities regulations have a direct and profound negative effect on personal rights, and set a dangerous precedent for far more of the same.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        There are two sides of the issue. One is gullible people who lose money. The others are frauds who gain it. I don't think that the society should in any way encourage becoming an asshole who preys on other people's stupidity.
        CryptoPunk 9y ago
        Fraud should absolutely be punished. There are real fraudsters in every industry, especially cryptocurrency, and it would be great to see government resources spent going after them. But creating a centralized gatekeeper, and applying Prior Restraint to anyone that hasn't registered and been approved by that gatekeeper, is not a proportionate and just strategy for combating scams. It's preemptive and punishing to innocent people.
thephyber 9y ago
> 'false information spread through electronic and social media' I was about to make a "Ministry of Truth" kind of comment until I re-checked the article: "Market manipulation schemes involving false information spread through electronic and social media"
- newman8r 9y ago
  yeah I should have included the full context, but I think it could end up being a gray line. It's something to keep an eye on because the difference between market manipulation and trolling/FUD could be hard to distinguish.
  - toomuchtodo 9y ago
    > but I think it could end up being a gray line. The SEC can and does monitor social media, correlate it to trade data, and takes action based on that data. http://nypost.com/2017/09/07/ex-amazon-employee-pleads-guilty-on-insider-trading-charges/ http://nypost.com/2017/09/07/ex-amazon-employee-pleads-guilt... Credit to Matt Levine's Money Stuff Bloomberg article where I originally read about this, but cannot find the article with a bit of Google searching.
  - astura 9y ago
    It's nothing new, the SEC already prosecutes market manipulation schemes involving false information spread through electronic and social media. Recent example: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-10/scammers-used-seekingalpha-for-bogus-stock-promotions-sec-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-10/scammers-... Market manipulation for financial gain is not at all a grey line.
justinzollars 9y ago
What a nightmare.

firloop 9y ago

Off topic but the word/prefix "cyber" is so cool. I wish it was used more, like the "e-" prefix for internet applications.

83457 9y ago
Cyber is short for cybersex in some minds which makes official statements and words sound funny. Was just thinking about how cool it must be for Gibson to have pulled a term like cyberspace out of his head years ago and for it to be such a widely used term now. Edit, found video interview... https://youtu.be/ae3z7Oe3XF4 https://youtu.be/ae3z7Oe3XF4
- richardknop 9y ago
  What? I was not aware that cyber is short for cybersex. That's strange. I thought cybersecurity, cyberspace, cyberpunk are what most people would imagine if they hear "cyber". When I hear "cyber" the mental image I get is some sort of a scene from Matrix where Neo plugs a wire into his brain and goes into virtual world.
  - 83457 9y ago
    Cyber is an adjective essentially meaning computer. It is well known from the word cybernetics and later cyberspace. However I was pointing out that it used to be common to use the word "cyber" in phrases in place of cybersex like "want to cyber?". Maybe it was just a late-90/eary-2000s thing.
    - vertex-four 9y ago
      It's mostly been replaced by RP ("roleplay") or ERP ("erotic roleplay"), the latter of which can make business process discussions interesting.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
smcl 9y ago

thephyber 9y ago

The organizational structure of many US government organizations still seems strange to me. The DHS's restructure after 9/11 seemed to make sense (from my viewpoint as an outsider) even if it looks like they outsourced the branding of it to the 3rd Reich. The Secret Service has dual roles of protection of certain officials and their families and investigating financial crimes. I understand the Secret Service's history as a sub-department of the Department of the Treasury made sense, but it still seems weird to have two very different, yet very specialized roles. And then there's this weird new requirement that very many US Government departments have their own tactical officer squads. Can't we just have a National Police (a merged FBI, US Marshals, etc)? The current silo system reeks of each silo budget hoarding. All of this to say: The SEC now needs to compete with the other branches of government to hire the best InfoSec people at a time when companies are investing more in the same space. If only the NSA was more focused on defending our government's systems, we could free up other government resources to work on the non-redundant functions.

KGIII 9y ago
Nazis wore Hugo Boss. As for branding, the TSA has nothing on that. The TSA recruits on pizza boxes.
- pizza 9y ago
  Striking imagery is too gauche; a policy of deliberate ambiguity is always preferable, and something it seems the public unconscious (yours truly likely included) very rapidly absorbs.
  - KGIII 9y ago
    Your username indicates your bias! On a more serious note, uniforms are so much more drab today. I do wonder if there's some psychological science behind the mundanity of dress uniforms. I don't suppose you're up on your psychology? I tried Google and can only find the psych behind uniforms, and their effect on others, but no references to why they aren't as extravagant as they used to be.

paulie_a 9y ago

So not that I am looking but where do I submit my application to this new division...Actually scratch that: "I am happy to announce my new security consulting firm to aid the SEC Cyber Unit called joshing.io"

sdfgelgh43oito3 9y ago

The SEC is a dept with teeth. I expect the SEC Cyber Unit to catch many an internet scammer, likely to be more effective than regular law enforcement. This is good news for your average citizen, and bad news for financial criminals.

flukus 9y ago
What percentage of internet scammers and financial criminals are within the SEC's jurisdiction (the USA)?
- phaus 9y ago
  By numbers there's enough to keep law enforcement busy. However, the percentage of global activity originating in the US would be insignificant.
throwawayhnst 9y ago
There is a theory called regulatory capture, according to which, regardless of the original purpose of a regulatory body, it will be "captured" by the very entities it was supposed to regulate, and end up used for their purposes.[1] In fact, the shameful behavior of all crypto related markets puts the lie to that theory. As we know, the SEC does not result in upstart startups not being able to raise money. It does not result in bigger, established startups monopolizing their markets, or doing anything else inappropriate. We can all found a traditional startup if we want. Literally anyone. Indeed, the SEC protects investment markets and makes them a safe and sane place to build startups in. It is safer for an investor to hand money to a startup in California, and safer for that startup to accept it (and abide at reasonable expense by the laws there), than anywhere in the world. We know this. That is what this whole site is about. At the same time, crypto currency markets are wastelands of fraud and crime. In fact, I do not even feel safe posting under my long-established name, because I don't want to be targeted by criminals now or in the future for it. I steer far, far away from this. This is a 100% genuine comment, I am not being sarcastic, I have no association with the SEC (in fact if anything I'm on the other side in the sense that I'm more of a startup founder), and this isn't shilling of any kind. I think the SEC does really good and important work. All the (traditional, fiat-based) valuations of startups that we speak of are thanks to the hard work of the SEC in establishing a fair market. How do we know? Because everyone can see the snake oil all over the darkweb, in crypto currency exchanges and markets, in ICO's, and everywhere the SEC hasn't been touching. I am really thankful for their work and welcome this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture

nickysielicki 9y ago

Should I take this to mean that cryptocurrencies are all scams that demand SEC intervention, or that cryptocurrencies are legitimate and here to stay?

wmf 9y ago
Most crypto currencies are regulated by the CFTC instead of the SEC, but DACs/DAOs and ICOs are within the SEC's remit. They recently announced a crackdown on some but not all ICOs: https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_coinofferings https://www.sec.gov/oiea/investor-alerts-and-bulletins/ib_co...
matt4077 9y ago
Yes Serious answer: the SEC doesn't have an opinion on "cryptocurrencies" as such. They don't see them through the paradigm of the internet's crypto-anarchists' assault on the financial establishment that many in the community seem to prefer. They have certain mandates to ensure financial markets are able to function, and they set rules whenever they deem something a threat to that functioning market. That's why bitcoin has only seen some light regulation, mostly around "know your customers"–rules to guard against tax evasion and money laundering, the two most important ways it could be used illegally. ICO's are now used rather extensively for something between outright investment fraud and a pyramid scheme, so the usual rules about offering investments are applied.

justinzollars 9y ago

Can't continue to have an inflation tax (our government outspends what it takes in year after year after year) if the population moves to cryptocurrencies.

millstone 9y ago
How do cryptocurrencies prevent the government from borrowing?
- justinzollars 9y ago
  It doesn't. But using non fiat currencies prevents value from being extracted from your dollars value. A 6 nuclear aircraft carrier armada and hundreds of military bases across the earth isn't free.

unstatusthequo 9y ago

Its 2017 and they are just thinking about this after their embarrassing failure. Asleep at the wheel

sullivanmatt 9y ago
This is the EDGAR system that was breached: https://www.edgarfiling.sec.gov/Welcome/EDGARLogin.htm https://www.edgarfiling.sec.gov/Welcome/EDGARLogin.htm Up until two years ago, that page used to recommend a minimum browser of either IE 5 or Netscape Navigator 3. If you look at the source and use of 'htm' extension, all signals point towards it being created using an extremely old version of Microsoft FrontPage (2000?). And that's not particularly uncommon on the government systems for unsexy tasks like filing regulatory reports. Limited IT staff and budget, paired with an unimaginable amount of red tape, lead to this type of breach. Also good InfoSec talent usually doesn't stay at the Federal space long. Anyone with strong skills within 50mi of the beltway can make $25k+ more per year by going private sector. Finally, let's not forget a much more limited talent pool is available because, in many situations, these jobs require you to be a U.S. citizen. I would argue that the SEC breach is only a symptom of a much more systemic problem with IT at the Federal level. To fix it will be extremely costly and painful. To do nothing will be extremely costly and painful.
- thephyber 9y ago
  > To fix it will be extremely costly and painful. The last few years of the Obama administration, the White House proposed budget included an interesting and useful (IMHO) line item to address this. The gist of it was that any department could draw up a plan to take a loan against their future budgets to pay down IT efficiency projects (including streamlining of processes and improvements to cybersecurity posture). I doubt a Republican Congress would go for larger federal spending now for future savings, but I hope that all "government should be small and efficient" advocates would give this kind of proposal serious thought.

mtgx 9y ago

Whatever happened to the Cybersecurity Act (also called CISA) surveillance-bill-in-disguise championed so heavily by Dianne Feinstein and Obama that was supposed to help the NSA protect American individuals and companies against data breaches? This is why any such legislation needs to come with annual reviews. If it doesn't work as expected after a few years, then it should be repealed. But of course many of us know that the law was not about cybersecurity at all, despite its misleading name, but about allowing the NSA more direct access to companies' data.

EGreg 9y ago

Violations OF WHAT? Where are the rules for ICOs so far?