NFT 泡沫和潛在的洗錢：事情本來不必如此

與數位貨幣行業的慣例一樣，芬茲納在推特上的聲明包含了一個微妙的謊言。 SEC 不會針對創作者和藝術家採取行動

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Gary Gensler may be the most despised figure in the digital currency industry.

美國證券交易委員會（SEC）主席加里·詹斯勒（Gary Gensler）可能是數位貨幣行業最受鄙視的人物。

Since his appointment by President Joe Biden in February 2021, Gensler has wasted no time in fulfilling his promise to tame the Wild West era of ‘crypto’ with gusto. With lawsuits against Binance and Coinbase (NASDAQ: COIN), a clampdown on initial coin offerings (ICOs), and massive fines for firms like BlockFi for failing to register as a lending product, it’s clear that the SEC means business.

自 2021 年 2 月被喬·拜登總統任命以來，Gensler 立即兌現了他的承諾，滿懷熱情地馴服“加密貨幣”的狂野西部時代。隨著針對Binance 和Coinbase（納斯達克股票代碼：COIN）的訴訟、對首次代幣發行（ICO）的打擊，以及對BlockFi 等公司因未能註冊為借貸產品而被處以巨額罰款，很明顯SEC 是認真的。

Last week, the non-fungible token (NFT) platform OpenSea became the latest recipient of SEC enforcement actions when it received a Wells Notice alleging that some NFTs on the platform could be considered unregistered securities.

上週，不可替代代幣（NFT）平台 OpenSea 收到了 Wells 通知，聲稱該平台上的某些 NFT 可能被視為未註冊證券，成為 SEC 執法行動的最新接收者。

Predictably, OpenSea co-founder Devin Finzer took to X, stating, “We’re shocked that the SEC would make such a sweeping statement against artists and creators.” Yet, it did, and ironically, it never had to be this way.

不出所料，OpenSea 聯合創始人 Devin Finzer 在接受 X 採訪時表示：“我們對 SEC 會對藝術家和創作者做出如此全面的聲明感到震驚。”然而，事實確實如此，而且諷刺的是，事情本來不必如此。

The NFT bubble and potential money laundering

NFT 泡沫和潛在的洗錢

As usual in the digital currency industry, Finzer’s statement on X contains a subtle lie. The SEC is not acting against creators and artists but against a company that facilitated the trade of NFTs, some of which may be unregistered securities.

與數位貨幣行業的慣例一樣，Finzer 關於 X 的聲明包含了一個微妙的謊言。 SEC 並不是針對創作者和藝術家，而是針對一家促進 NFT 交易的公司，其中一些 NFT 可能是未註冊的證券。

Whether OpenSea actively facilitated the perception that NFTs are investment opportunities will be determined in court and will likely be one of the factors deciding the case. Regardless, it certainly promoted them, leading at least one employee to insider trade based on which NFTs the platform would draw attention to next.

OpenSea 是否積極促進人們認為 NFT 是投資機會將由法庭決定，並且很可能成為決定此案的因素之一。無論如何，它確實促進了這些 NFT，導致至少一名員工進行內線交易，並根據該平台接下來會引起人們關注的 NFT 進行交易。

Regardless of OpenSea’s role, in early s2021, the idea that NFTs were investments was rife. Beeple’s ‘Everydays: The First 5000 Days’ sold for a whopping $69 million, Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFTs sold for millions a piece, and Stoner Cats brought the Ethereum blockchain to a standstill.

無論 OpenSea 扮演什麼角色，在 2021 年初，「NFT 是投資」的想法很盛行。 Beeple 的《Everydays: The First 5000 Days》以6,900 萬美元的價格售出，Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) NFT 的售價為每件數百萬美元，而Stoner Cats 則讓以太坊區塊鏈陷入停滯。

Who would pay such colossal sums for JPEGs? Part of the problem is that nobody knows. Without any direct link between blockchain wallets and identity, it’s challenging to figure out who bought and sold these NFTs. This has led the U.S. Treasury to flag NFTs and platforms that sell them as a potential vehicle for money laundering.

誰會為 JPEG 支付如此巨額的費用？部分問題在於沒人知道。區塊鏈錢包和身分之間沒有任何直接聯繫，因此很難弄清楚誰購買和出售了這些 NFT。這導緻美國財政部將 NFT 和銷售 NFT 的平台標記為潛在的洗錢工具。

It never had to be this way

本來不必是這樣的

What do Coinbase, Binance, OpenSea and other SEC lawsuit recipients have in common? They are centralized entities that facilitate the buying and selling of digital currencies, NFTs, and other tokens for a fee. Thus, they are legal entities subject to the laws of their jurisdictions.

Coinbase、Binance、OpenSea 和其他 SEC 訴訟接受者有什麼共同點？它們是中心化實體，促進數位貨幣、NFT 和其他代幣的付費買賣。因此，它們是法人實體，受其管轄範圍內的法律管轄。

Even so-called ‘decentralized’ platforms like Uniswap were created by a centralized entity, hence the SEC enforcement against Uniswap Labs. While the Uniswap platform governance is controlled by a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) consisting of UNI token holders, Uniswap Labs spearheaded its initial development and launch. It also distributed the UNI token via airdrop.

即使像 Uniswap 這樣的所謂「去中心化」平台也是由中心化實體創建的，因此 SEC 對 Uniswap 實驗室進行了執法。雖然 Uniswap 平台治理由 UNI 代幣持有者組成的去中心化自治組織 (DAO) 控制，但 Uniswap Labs 率先開發和推出了該平台。它還透過空投分發 UNI 代幣。

This is likely why Satoshi Nakamoto, the inventor of Bitcoin, did not take this approach. He/she/they issued all Bitcoin tokens at zero value, and the Bitcoin protocol distributes them to miners to provide proof of work. This is why Gensler has clarified that Bitcoin is not a security and that the SEC has never filed a lawsuit against Satoshi Nakamoto.

這也許就是比特幣的發明者中本聰沒有採取這種方法的原因。他/她/他們以零價值發行所有比特幣代幣，比特幣協議將它們分發給礦工以提供工作證明。這就是為什麼 Gensler 澄清比特幣不是證券，並且 SEC 從未對中本聰提起訴訟。

Satoshi also clearly intended Bitcoin to be a peer-to-peer electronic cash system rather than digital gold or a speculative investment. He wanted to empower artists and creators to engage in P2P commerce on the blockchain without needing centralized, fee-taking entities like OpenSea.

中本聰也明確地希望比特幣成為一種點對點電子現金系統，而不是數位黃金或投機投資。他希望讓藝術家和創作者能夠在區塊鏈上參與 P2P 商務，而無需像 OpenSea 這樣的中心化收費實體。

Had Satoshi’s vision not been hijacked, it’s unlikely the SEC would be involved in the industry at all. The Bitcoin protocol he created can facilitate all sorts of innovation and transaction types, including the minting of unique tokens (NFTs), the use of smart contracts and just about everything else developers can dream of.

如果中本聰的願景沒有被劫持，美國證券交易委員會根本不可能介入這個產業。他創建的比特幣協議可以促進各種創新和交易類型，包括獨特代幣（NFT）的鑄造、智能合約的使用以及開發人員可以夢想的一切。

Everything happening to Coinbase, Binance, OpenSea, and others is a reckoning of their own making. Many of these entities know the truth about Bitcoin and what it was intended to be, and they suppress that truth to profit from middleman activities. After all, as long as Bitcoin doesn’t scale, companies like Binance and OpenSea are required to facilitate off-chain trading. Handily, they can also list and promote the tokens they wish to their millions of customers, profiting from the price rise that often follows.

Coinbase、Binance、OpenSea 和其他公司發生的一切都是他們自己造成的。這些實體中的許多人都知道比特幣的真相及其意圖，並且他們壓制這一真相以從中間人活動中獲利。畢竟，只要比特幣無法擴容，像幣安和 OpenSea 這樣的公司就需要促成鏈下交易。他們還可以輕鬆地向數百萬客戶列出和推廣他們想要的代幣，從隨之而來的價格上漲中獲利。

Yet, all is not lost. The original Bitcoin protocol is alive and well, scaling to millions of transactions per second at fractions of a cent. These days, it’s known as the BSV blockchain, and all NFTs are being used innovatively and with a value-creating mindset. Items in the supply chain, in-game items, trading cards, real-world assets, and intellectual property (IP) rights all live on BSV as NFTs.

然而，一切並沒有失去。最初的比特幣協議仍然存在並且運作良好，可以以不到一美分的價格擴展到每秒數百萬筆交易。如今，它被稱為 BSV 區塊鏈，所有 NFT 都以創新方式並以創造價值的思維方式使用。供應鏈中的物品、遊戲內物品、交易卡、現實世界資產和智慧財產權 (IP) 都以 NFT 的形式存在於 BSV 上。

Much like blockchain technology and digital currencies, NFTs will emerge from the ashes, and the world will realize their utility

就像區塊鏈技術和數位貨幣一樣，NFT 將從灰燼中重生，世界將意識到它們的效用