Community Trust ScoreLikely Real
Someone with common sense thinking stated: There are still significant problems here, foremost of which is that *mining and validating transactions are different things*. Any full node validates transactions, whether in blocks or the mempool. Miners “package” mempool transactions into blocks to form a canonical ordering.
As written, this language would potentially still apply to miners. Moreover, there’s a real problem in that exclusionary language (i.e., carve-outs) cannot properly handle edge cases or unanticipated situations and use-cases. This language is an improvement, but no fix, Sen Lummis.
Related addendum: the exclusion is for entities that conduct business “solely” in the form of whatever carve-outs. But let’s say you sell hardware wallets AND also distribute, IDK, video games. Are you a broker? Under this language, yes!
What about software that lets you do things *in addition,* to controlling a private key? Like maybe something like Urbit, where you have a private key that controls a server? Are you a broker? Uh, maybe?
These are only two examples. Carve-outs from overbroad language are *DANGEROUS*, and they should be treated as such. But you all are clapping like trained seals at a circus.
Community clarification: Their definition of validation includes block production/finalization?
For example, in the Cosmos ecosystem, block producers are called validators, simply because most of the time, they are validating blocks, not producing them.
So would you say they are “solely” “in the business” of “validating”? I don’t know how every ecosystem does it, but Ethereum and Cosmos use validators in both the bitcoin sense and the block producer sense. Universally, miners are understood to be a kind of block producer.
Lightning node operators are more than validators, though, no? I would honestly like to read through the “Why” any of this is necessary, to begin with. Have there been massive numbers of court cases in relation to crypto projects? It seems to me that the request for rules and regulations should come from those of us actively participating.
So this amendment does nothing to protect lightning network routing nodes. It appears the amendment is primarily focused on saving ethereum 2.
So, how much of the bank industry is being taxed for this infrastructure? Oh, that’s right. The banks had/have lobbyists with politicians in their back pockets.
It’s still overbroad. “Person” includes individuals. Employees, even outside lawyers and accountants, who “regularly provide service” are arguably covered. The carve-outs are useless to anyone who doesn’t “solely” do what they allow. And no one “sells” software. It’s licensed.
Why “selling” wallets? Should be “providing,” no? The wallet could be provided at no charge, but exemption should still apply.
Many more concerns are pending.
