Regulation of the Crypto-Economy: Managing Risks, Challenges, and Regulatory Uncertainty
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distributed ledger technology, also known as the blockchain, is gaining traction globally. Blockchain offers a secure validation mechanism and decentralized mass collaboration. Cryptocurrencies make use of this technology as a new asset class for investors worldwide. Cryptocurrencies are being used by companies to raise capital via initial coin offerings (ICOs). The substantial inflow of unregulated capital into a transactional and transnational industry has aroused interest from not just investors, but also national securities and monetary regulatory agencies. In this paper, we review the Security and Exchange Commission’s initial statements and subsequent pronouncements on ICO’s to illustrate the potential problems with applying an older legal framework to an ever-evolving ecosystem. Recognizing the inability of enforcement within existing regulatory frameworks, we discuss the importance of regulation of the crypto asset class and internal collaboration between government agencies and developers in the establishment of an ecosystem that integrates investor protection and investments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it