原文：https://www.coindesk.com/regulators-are-slowly-starting-to-get-it-utility-tokens-are-real/
Michael J. Casey is the chairman of CoinDesk's advisory board and a senior advisor for blockchain research at MIT's Digital Currency Initiative.
The following article originally appeared in?CoinDesk Weekly, a custom-curated newsletter delivered every Sunday exclusively to our subscribers.
Michael J. Casey是CoinDesk咨詢委員會主席和麻省理工學院數字貨幣計劃區(qū)塊鏈研究高級顧問。
以下文章最初出現在??CoinDesk Weekly中，這是一個定制的時事通訊，每周日專門發(fā)給我們的訂閱者。
"I want to quash this false narrative that's been going around for the past two years that you can separate blockchain from crypto. You can't."
“我想要廢除過去兩年一直存在的錯誤敘述，你可以將區(qū)塊鏈與加密區(qū)分開來，實際上你是做不到的?！?/p>
No, that's not a bitcoin maximalist, a HODLer or a crypto-anarchist talking. It's a regulator.
And Sopnendu Mohanty, the chief fintech officer of the Monetary Authority of Singapore, wasn't preaching to the crypto-converted, either, when he issued this?reminder that native tokens are integral to a decentralized blockchain.
不，這不是比特幣極端主義者，HODLer或加密無政府主義者的談話，而是來自于監(jiān)管機構。
新加坡金融管理局的首席金融科技官Sopnendu Mohanty也沒有宣揚加密貨幣的轉換，當他發(fā)出這一提醒時，原生代幣是去中心化區(qū)塊鏈不可或缺的一部分。
Rather, he was addressing a room full of curious but wary central bankers and international development officials, all of whom were attending a G20 forum in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on technology and financial inclusion.
相反，他正在一個充滿好奇但謹慎的央行行長和國際發(fā)展官員的房間里講話，所有這些官員都參加了沙特阿拉伯利雅得關于技術和金融包容性的G20論壇。
It was refreshing to hear someone in the official sector take issue with the simplistic "blockchain without bitcoin" refrain that gets sold to corporate and government leaders who don't always realize that their problems might be better solved with a less cumbersome distributed database.
聽到官方部門的某些人對簡單的“無幣區(qū)塊鏈”的問題提出質疑，這種情況令人耳目一新，因為他們并不總是意識到他們的問題可能會通過一個不那么繁瑣的分布式數據庫來解決。
That wasn't only because it's important for people to understand how native digital tokens are an integral part of the incentive and security models upon which open, permissionless and censorship-resistant transaction-recording systems are built. It was also because Mohanty's intent was to help shape sensible crypto regulation.
這不僅是因為人們了解到原生數字代幣是構建激勵和安全模型的一個組成部分非常重要，以及這些模型構建了開放，無權限和審查制度的交易記錄系統(tǒng)，也是因為Mohanty的意圖是幫助塑造合理的加密貨幣規(guī)則。
He was urging regulators to adopt nuanced policies that recognize certain crypto-tokens belong to a new type of technology for improving economic coordination, one that can't be jammed into a decades-old securities law framework. And it's also encouraging to see evidence that he's not alone in thinking this way.
他敦促監(jiān)管機構采取細致入微的政策，承認某些加密代幣作為一種新型技術，可以改善經濟協同，即使這種技術無法直接融入數十年前的證券法框架。同樣令人鼓舞的是，看到有證??據證明他并不是唯一一個以這種方式思考的人。
Various regulatory authorities around the world are opening up to the idea that, when tokens have a clearly functional role within a blockchain network, it's better to manage them with existing consumer protection and anti-money-laundering laws than with burdensome securities regulation.
世界各地的各種監(jiān)管機構正在對這個觀點持開放態(tài)度，即當代幣在區(qū)塊鏈網絡中具有明顯的功能性作用時，最好是使用現有的消費者保護和反洗錢法來管理它們，而不是使用繁瑣的證券監(jiān)管。
To be sure, they're doing so somewhat nervously; many are understandably concerned about investors being duped by scammy ICOs in Wild West token markets.
Nonetheless, their gradual yet earnest attempts to define these concepts open the door to blockchain technology's more meaningful integration into the global economy.
可以肯定的是，他們在做這些的時候，感覺到緊張，很多人都擔心投資者會被狂野的西方令牌市場中的騙子ICO欺騙。
盡管如此，他們逐步并認真地嘗試去定義這些概念，以圖能使區(qū)塊鏈技術更有意義地融入全球經濟打開了大門。
Forward-thinking states
前瞻性的國家
Here, Singapore's central bank is leading the way. In a March speech,?MAS Managing Director Ravi Menon laid out a clear rationale for distinguishing "good" tokens from "the bad and the ugly."
在這方面，新加坡的中央銀行正在引領潮流。在3月份的演講中，MAS董事總經理拉維·梅農（Ravi Menon）提出了一個明確的理由，即將“好”的代幣與“不好的?”代幣區(qū)分開來。
The?Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority, or FINMA, has also been proactive. It?came up with a useful taxonomy?that divides tokens into three categories:?payment tokens?(bitcoin, litecoin and co.), utility?tokens?(ether and, in theory at least, various kinds of ERC-20 tokens) and?asset tokens, with only the latter being subject to securities laws.??
在瑞士金融市場監(jiān)督管理局，簡稱FINMA，也一直積極主動。它提出了一個有用的分類法，將令牌分為三類：支付型代幣（比特幣，萊特幣和合幣），實用性代幣（以太坊，理論上至少是各種ERC-20類型的代幣）和資產型代幣，只有后者受證券法管轄。?
Other developed-country jurisdictions are also wading in. Both?Malta?and the?U.K. dependency Gibraltar?have shown an open regulatory posture toward ICOs and token exchanges.?Meanwhile, Caribbean countries such as?Bermuda??are developing regulatory frameworks for tokens that would promote blockchain innovation while preserving their status as trusted domiciles for foreign financial institutions.
其他發(fā)達國家的司法管轄區(qū)也在悄悄進入。馬耳他和?英國的屬地直布羅陀，都對ICO和代幣交換表現出開放的監(jiān)管態(tài)勢。與此同時，百慕大等加勒比國家，正在制定令牌的監(jiān)管框架，以促進區(qū)塊鏈創(chuàng)新，同時保持其作為外國金融機構可信賴的住所的地位。
Governments are also taking action at the provincial level.?Wyoming's state legislature passed legislation defining utility tokens as a new asset class?and exempting them from securities regulations.
政府也在省級采取行動。懷俄明州立法機構通過立法將公用事業(yè)代幣定義為新的資產類別，并使其免于證券監(jiān)管。
Until last month, it appeared that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission was taking the exact opposite approach. In February, Chairman Jay Clayton, speaking before the Senate, said, "I believe every ICO I've seen is a security." The implication was clear: most, if not all, of the hundreds of tokens already sold in this manner should have?registered with the SEC and complied with related disclosure and compliance requirements.
直到上個月，美國證券交易委員會似乎采取了完全相反的做法。今年二月，主席杰伊克萊頓在參議院發(fā)言時說：“?我相信我所看到的每一個ICO都是一種安全保障?！?其含義很明確：以這種方式銷售的數百個代幣中的大多數（如果不是全部）應該在美國證券交易委員會注冊并遵守相關的披露和合規(guī)要求。
In stoking fears of a dragnet approach from the SEC against all tokens, this statement prompted ICO issuers to ring-fence themselves from the U.S. markets. It also gave a boost to purveyors of "security tokens," who don't pretend to be inventing anything more than a more efficient means of selling securities to investors.
由于擔心美國證券交易委員會對所有代幣采取拉網性的統(tǒng)一做法，這一聲明促使ICO發(fā)行人將自己與美國市場隔離開來。它還推動了“證券型代幣”的提供者，假裝沒有投資任何東西，除非能有一種更有效的方式向投資者出售證券型代幣。
But since then, the SEC has also softened its stance. Clayton later?told CNBC that bitcoin would not be classified as a security. And, then, in a?landmark speech last month,?William Hinman, the SEC's director of the Division of Corporate Finance, answered a question that had been nagging the ethereum community. Hinman said that although ether was a security at the time of the ethereum proto-ICO in 2014, it no longer met that definition because of how it now functions within the ethereum network.
但從那以后，美國證券交易委員會也軟化了自己的立場?？巳R頓后來告訴CNBC，比特幣不會被歸類為證券。然后，在上個月的一次具有里程碑意義的演講中，美國證券交易委員會企業(yè)融資部主任威廉·欣曼回答了一個一直困擾著以太坊社區(qū)的問題。Hinman說，盡管以太坊是2014年以原始ICO發(fā)行的證券，但由于它現在在以太坊網絡中的運作方式，它不再符合這一定義。
This was not as proactive as other jurisdictions' moves to explicitly carve out the concept of a utility token. Hinman was merely defining what ether was not. But by coming to that conclusion, he had recognized the unique qualities of this particular token: how ether is a kind of "crypto fuel," used to pay for the decentralized computation by which smart contracts are executed on the ethereum platform.
這并不像其他司法管轄區(qū)明確劃分實用型令牌概念那樣積極主動。欣曼只是定義了以太坊不是什么。但為得到那個結論，他已經認識到這個特殊標記的獨特品質：以太坊是如何一種“加密燃料”，用于支付在以太坊平臺上執(zhí)行智能合約的去中心化計算。
What's important is that regulators are doing their homework and starting to recognize there's at least potentially something different going on here from what they're used to seeing. There's a lot of learning still to come, but light bulbs are quietly going off in different corners of the regulatory world.
重要的是，監(jiān)管機構正在做他們的功課，并開始認識到，至少可能會從他們習以為常的經驗中，看到一些不同的東西。還有很多東西要學習，但是燈泡在監(jiān)管世界的不同角落里悄然熄滅。
Whether you're in the camp that welcomes regulatory clarity to foster public confidence in this technology or among those in the crypto community who see government engagement as anathema to a system of money originally designed to bypass the state, this emerging regulatory awareness represents a seminal moment.
無論您是在歡迎監(jiān)管明確的陣營中，還是為了培養(yǎng)公眾對這項技術的信心，還是加密社區(qū)中那些將政府參與視為最初旨在繞過國家的金錢系統(tǒng)的詛咒的人，這種新興的監(jiān)管意識代表了一種開創(chuàng)性的時刻。
The race is on
競賽開始了
Clearly, many countries taking these steps have their eyes on the potential economic gains generated by the freewheeling ICO market, one that has?raised $20 billion so far?and which, with $275 billion in (admittedly poorly measured)?market capitalization, has come to constitute a significant parallel capital market. There are tax windfalls to be had and there's the real prize of attracting innovation to their shores.
很明顯，采取這些措施的許多國家都把注意力集中在隨心所欲的ICO市場所產生的潛在經濟收益上，目前已經籌集了200億美元，其中市值為2750億美元（公認的衡量標準不佳）的市值已經形成了重要的平行資本市場。有稅收的意外收獲，并有吸引創(chuàng)新的獎勵。
They need to be careful, though, as this is an exceptionally fleet-footed form of capital. They risk encouraging global "regulatory arbitrage." When a technology is as geography-agnostic as this, its users will often choose their home base depending on where regulation is lightest, stoking competition among jurisdictions. Given the inordinate number of scammers in the ICO business, the danger is that the worst players gain too much freedom and, by extension, too much influence over how this industry is broadly perceived.
但是，他們需要小心，因為這是一種特殊的基礎資本形式。他們冒著鼓勵全球“監(jiān)管套利”的風險。當一項技術與地理無關時，其用戶通常會根據監(jiān)管最輕的地方選擇自己的基地，從而加劇司法管轄區(qū)之間的競爭。鑒于ICO業(yè)務中的詐騙者數量過多，危險在于最差的參與者獲得過多的自由，并且通過擴展，對這個行業(yè)的廣泛認知影響太大。
In times past, U.S. regulators could rise above such problems. The sheer amount of money raised in the U.S. left global actors with no option but to comply with their rules just to ensure access to it. But with foreign capital markets deeper in the age of globalization, globally distributed blockchain development teams are deciding that the U.S. just might not be worth it. We are already seeing ICO issuers deciding that they can comfortably raise all they need from Asian investors.
在過去，美國監(jiān)管機構可能會超越這些問題。在美國籌集的巨額資金讓全球參與者別無選擇，只能遵守他們的規(guī)則，以確保能參與進來。但隨著外國資本市場在全球化時代的深入，全球分布式區(qū)塊鏈開發(fā)團隊正在決定美國是否能如愿。我們已經看到ICO發(fā)行人，他們可以從亞洲投資者那里輕松獲得他們所需要的一切。
Where this is all pointing, I hope, is to a coordinated international effort to better harmonize the regulatory approach.
我希望，這一切都指向協調一致的國際努力，以更好地協調監(jiān)管方法。
Mohanty told me he sees six or so of the world's more important regulators coming to a broad agreement on utility tokens and on what distinguishes them from payment and security vehicles. There's a need, for example, to define pressing questions about what level of platform functionality, and when, a token must have to earn exempt utility status. And, beyond the securities laws exemptions, regulators should agree on strategies to apply existing consumer protection laws to ensure that ICO issuers are still held to account for the promises they make to people who put money into their token pre-sales.
Mohanty告訴我，他看到世界上六個左右的更重要的監(jiān)管機構就實用性代幣以及它們與支付和證券工具的區(qū)別達成了廣泛的協議。例如，需要定義關于什么級別的平臺功能的緊迫問題，以及何時，令牌必須獲得免除實用程序狀態(tài)。而且，除了證券法豁免之外，監(jiān)管機構應就應用現有消費者保護法的策略達成一致，以確保ICO發(fā)行人仍然要對他們對將錢投入其代幣預售的人所做的承諾負責。
Some have forcefully argued that carving out explicit legislative definitions of a utility token –?a laWyoming – overly constrains innovators to those definitions and creates contradictions across jurisdictions. Better to rely on existing laws than to add to the body of legislation, they say. But such concerns should not prevent regulators from creating clearly signaled guidelines to participants in the blockchain development community about how they will apply existing law to different scenarios.
有些人強烈主張的是雕刻出一個實用型代幣的明確的法律定義-?一拉懷俄明-過分限制創(chuàng)新者的定義和創(chuàng)建跨轄區(qū)的矛盾。他們說，最好依靠現有法律，而不是增加立法機構。但是，這些擔憂不應妨礙監(jiān)管機構為區(qū)塊鏈開發(fā)社區(qū)的參與者制定明確的指導方針，指導他們如何將現有法律應用于不同的情景。
There's a still a lot of work needed to improve and scale blockchain technology and to foster broad confidence among future buyers of crypto tokens. Best practices among issuers, exchanges and investors/buyers need to be developed. But encouraging the expansion of utility token models is a worthy goal, one that's much harder to achieve if the burdens of securities laws were to be imposed on all those who create them.
還需要做很多工作來改進和擴展區(qū)塊鏈技術，并培養(yǎng)未來加密代幣買家的廣泛信心。需要開發(fā)者，交易所和投資者/買家之間的最佳實踐。但是，鼓勵擴展實用型代幣模型是一個有價值的目標，如果將證券法的負擔強加給所有創(chuàng)造它們的人，那么這個目標就更難實現。
To understand this, one need look no further than the financial inclusion objectives of the?Riyadh-based conference that Mohanty spoke at. Organized by the Global Partnership for Financial Inclusion under the leadership of Argentina, which holds the G20's current presidency, the event explored, among other goals, how to encourage entrepreneurship in low-income, developing countries.
為了理解這一點，人們只需看看Mohanty所講的利雅得會議的金融包容性目標。該項目由阿根廷領導的全球金融包容性伙伴關系組織，該組織擔任G20現任主席，該活動除其他目標外，還探討了如何鼓勵低收入發(fā)展中國家的企業(yè)家精神。
If we want the whole world, include enterprising people in such countries, to have access to the powerful economic advantages of decentralized, peer-to-peer applications and business models, regulatory barriers to entry must be softened.
如果我們想要整個世界，包括雇傭這些國家的富有進取精神的人，獲得去中心化，點對點的應用程序和商業(yè)模式的強大經濟優(yōu)勢，必須軟化這些監(jiān)管壁壘以讓他們得以進入。
This is, in other words, a cause for humanity.
換句話說，這是人性使然。
我是一名前華為無線產品經理，現在All In區(qū)塊鏈，專攻項目測評領域，和您一起看透區(qū)塊鏈TOP1～TOP500項目，從技術、產品、市場、團隊、Token、社區(qū)等維度分析，看清項目價值和增長空間，不斷優(yōu)化投資策略，在區(qū)塊鏈行業(yè)共同成長。
個人微信：d78126014
